431–440 of 483 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Murdering someone is clearly worse than lying about a kid whistling at you.
In the context of the events, that lie was a guaranteed death sentence. Saying which is "worse" isn't relevant imo since it was the trigger.
I looked a bit at what Charles Koch has been saying recently, and this doesn't look like a change of opinion; it looks like a change of tactics. He's de-emphasizing the partisan tug-o-war stuff, which looks less promising now than it did during (for example) the early days of the Tea Party, and focusing on the less fought-over parts. It's a reasonable approach if he wants to get things done, but not the about-face th…
>In July 2015 Charles Koch and his brother were praised by President Obama and Anthony Van Jones for their bipartisan efforts to reform the criminal justice system.[67][68] For roughly a decade Koch has been advocating for several reforms within the prison system, including the reduction of recidivist criminals, easing the employment process for rehabilitated persons, and the defense of private property from asset fo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apples and oranges here, the US is not a developing nation. The single largest contributor to the decrease in global poverty you cite is a communist country.
A communist nation that realized that the communist way of state ownership and central planning doesn't work and implemented private ownership and a market-based, capitalistic approach to their economy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_economic_reform
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree about the negligence, but additionally it's dishonest to talk about libertarian free market policies (for or against) without acknowledging the central bank and its current mission of grossly inflating the currency supply to force most everybody to work continuously. If the middle and lower classes could benefit from increasing productivity with reduced consumer prices, and were allowed to build wealth by sav…
Can you say a little more or link some resources giving a solid link between central banking, inflation, and forcing people to work continuously? It's an interesting premise and I, like others, dislike the notion that I'll have to work on a treadmill for most of my life. But I don't see the 1-3% inflation rate as more than a sort of incentive to invest in equities (which I also resent), rather than a means of keeping…
If you bought a block of gold in, say, 1990, and use the BLS inflation rate it claims you've made substantial real returns over the last 30 years which seems extremely fishy for owning a pet rock. If you calculate what % of the M2 money supply it entitles you to on the other hand its value is about the same. Slightly less, if my figures are right. Seems much more reasonable, the economy should be gaining value faster than a block of metal.
Basically the sort of people who say complain about central banks and inflation are usually the sort of people who can't understand why everyone is so excited about the inflation rate. The issue is availability of assets which are what is needed to retire or live with a sense of financial security (it is 2020, productivity is off the charts - by the numbers people shouldn't need to work full time to live comfortably). M2 deflator instead of inflation also explains circumstantial stuff like why there was a large unhappy population who voted in Trump, or why the population seems to be a bit tense about money despite apparent real growth.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The web of deceit surrounding the Republican Party at this point is undeniable unless you have chosen to abandon reality entirely at the point it chafes your opinion.
Oh yes, with Hillary deleting something like 40,000 emails when she became aware of an impeding investigation, and the Democratic Party aligned media, and Deep State, barely covering and investigating it, respectively, and the same thing happening with Hunter's scandalous laptop, it is only the Republican party that is surrounded by deceit.
I think you're going to be surprised and dismayed at what happens now that the shoe is on the other foot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh yes, with Hillary deleting something like 40,000 emails when she became aware of an impeding investigation, and the Democratic Party aligned media, and Deep State, barely covering and investigating it, respectively, and the same thing happening with Hunter's scandalous laptop, it is only the Republican party that is surrounded by deceit.
Isn't it interesting that Trump had control of the reins of power for four years but was never able to actually prosecute Hillary for anything? This should be your clue that there wasn't any "there" there. I think you're going to be surprised and dismayed at what happens now that the shoe is on the other foot.
The people who think one party is virtuous, and the other is the embodiment of corruption, are the problem, regardless of which side they are on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe for the last 30 years or so (after the late Antonin Scalia) 'conservative' judge is almost synonymous with originalist. I think you may be falling victim to correlation is not causation? IE there are no liberal originalists by definition (above). If I'm wrong, could you give me an example of a liberal originalist? I would be very happy to be wrong about this. The correlation here is that conservative presid…
Originalism is fine in theory when coupled with judicial restraint. However, in practice, it has become justification for big-C Conservative justices to actively impose their views, overriding the democratic legislative process. http://www.dorfonlaw.org/2017/08/how-determinate-is-original... We're not going to settle this in the comment section of HN, but I happen to agree with this opinion: As the Warren and early B…
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/marriage
So I turn it on you - I'm not an expert so help me understand - how is Obergefell v. Hodges not legislation from the bench when it changes the meaning of these laws unilaterally?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How can one be an originalist and ignore half of the sentence, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,"? A law requiring a trigger lock does not infringe on the forming of militia or maintaining the security of a free State. Conservative judges, including Scalia, generally don't claim that all arms regulation is unconstitutional, they don't claim everyone has a right to own RPGs. I…
Because grammatically (then or now), that part of the sentence doesn't limit the independent clause--"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." If the first amendment said, "A well read electorate, being necessary to a free state, the right the people to free speech, shall not be infringed," would you say it only covered political speech? Practically, I don't see how it makes any differe…
I would say the intent is much narrower than the actual text so while "a well read electorate" would call for more than just political speech, such a First Amendment would be allow more laws to restrict speech without being unconstitutional.
People in the armed forces don't own the weapons they use now. Today, the National Guard is basically the "Militia." Even if you think militia needs to include organizations not directed by governors, weapons can be owned by smaller political entities (towns, counties, etc.) or NGOs. In any case, weapons for a militia can be stored in an armory, not in every member's home or on their person all the time.
Yet again, even if some of the weapons were stored in the home, there's nothing unconstitutional about laws requiring trigger locks or other safety measures for their storage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. They whipped the mob into a frenzy with lies and bullshit so they could use its power to get what they wanted. Then they lost control of it. It is the loss of control they regret, not whipping it up in the first place.
I would love to see a poll where this comment gets presented without context and people have to decide what group it is describing.
I get that you want to come off as an enlightened centrist here but you’re gonna have to be specific. What’s the liberal Koch brothers and what’s the liberal Tea Party?