Right Wing Terrorists Arrested In Kidnaping Plot Of Governor Whitmer

[Dragoon]

7 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

My position is in a national crisis we should all band together as Americans and your not wearing a mask says you’re OK with killing your neighbor.  

That’s ridiculous — the mask comment...it’d be fair if you said “youre ok with having a .5% chance of killing your neighbor.”

 

My position is my bill of rights trumps your feelings and desires. 

[Capco]

1 minute ago, Dragoon said:

That’s ridiculous — the mask comment...it’d be fair if you said “youre ok with having a .5% chance of killing your neighbor.”

 

My position is my bill of rights trumps your feelings and desires. 

 

People's lives are now just feelings and desires?  And a position you hold trumps them?

 

You are something else.  

[oldmanfan]

4 minutes ago, Dragoon said:

That’s ridiculous — the mask comment...it’d be fair if you said “youre ok with having a .5% chance of killing your neighbor.”

 

My position is my bill of rights trumps your feelings and desires. 

Because you say so?  Right.

 

Wearing a mask does not violate any of your first amendment rights any more than wearing other articles of clothing to enter a place of business.  Want proof?  Go downtown right now wherever you live, take off all your clothes and walk around, and when the police come for you tell them the first amendment says you don’t have to wear them.  Text me back from your cell.

Edited October 9, 2020 by oldmanfan

[snafu]

8 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

The EC in its current form has a number of bad side effects. 

 

For starters, the popular vote is irrelevant, which means that minority rule of the executive is a possibility (like today).  Low population states have a higher number of electors per capita than populous states do.  US citizens living in US territories and possessions do not have a say since they do not have Electors.  There is a near-exclusive focus on swing states since they are so determinative, and this leads to poorer voter turnout in the rest of the states. 

 

The number of Electors is based upon the number of congressional districts, plus 2 Senators.  If you're talking about Senators throwing off that number, there are probably an equal number of conservative "small population" states such that they'd cancel each other out (like Rhode Island vs. Wyoming).  The counterpoint to your swing-state focus is that no candidate would bother to campaign or visit non-populated areas when the most eyes and ears are concentrated in cities.  Talk about disenfranchisement.

 

 

8 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

Let's also not forget how the 3/5th Compromise allowed Southern states to disenfranchise their black slave populations while simultaneously allowing them to increase their representation in the federal via apportionment (i.e. the number of congressional seats awarded to each state, and in turn the number of Electors).  In addition, recall that women did not have the right to vote in 1789.  In a popular voting scheme, a state could vastly increase its say in presidential elections if they granted women or slaves the right to vote.  Therefore, the EC did not incentivize increasing the franchise whereas a popular voting system would have.  

 

Is the 3/5th compromise still an issue today?  Everyone's vote is counted 1:1.

 

 

8 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

Altogether, that makes arbitrary areas of land have more say than actual people.  Does that sound more like freedom or tyranny to you?  Is majority rule more akin to freedom or to tyranny?  Is higher voter turnout more akin to freedom or to tyranny?  Is the disenfranchisement of certain groups more akin to freedom or to tyranny?

 

Arbitrary areas of land?  People vote.  People who live in our country and who's lives are just as affected by federal legislation no matter where they live. There's a census every ten years.  Federal budget dollars go to where the people are.  Congress controls the purse strings.  NYC has 13 Congressional seats. Don't worry too much about the residents of the City getting shut out.  Ask most any Western New Yorker what they think about that.

 

 

8 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

I think the best way forward with regards to the EC in the current political climate is not abolishment, but alteration.  The winner-take-all system for awarding Electors should not be an option; instead, Electors should be distributed proportionally based on the results of the votes within the states.  That would also dramatically open up the door for 3rd party candidates as well while maintaining the notion that the US is a federal republic.  

 

Way back when, @Nanker and I had a discussion about the EC.  I was assigned the "con" side.  Arguing against the EC was difficult for me and my only proposal to tweak it was similar to what you're saying.  Count the popular vote for President for EACH Congressional district -- not county by county like they do now -- and assign the elector to go vote as the district voted.  Assign the two Senator-electors to vote for the statewide winner.

 

 

 

 

 

[Orlando Buffalo]

7 hours ago, Niagara Bill said:

You have never been more wrong than you are right now...a milestone even for you. I am not liberal, never have been, never will be. Spent my life in business.

I do support civility, honestly, leadership, traditions, institutions, rule of law and the Bills.

I could not support a nut who is now in the Whitehouse who lied to the public, failed to lead, blames everyone else, yells fire every friggen day and hates minorities and disrespects women. 

And before you say it, I do live in Canada and have never voted Liberal.

Bill you might not be Canadian liberal but you are certainly one for America. I would be interested in what Canadian parties you vote for normally  As for your comparison of Trump to Hitler, I work with a 65 year old who grew up in Communist Poland and still has plenty of family there, what they saw in Minneapolis and Seattle in regards to cops not stopping the rioting and looting reminds them of the Kristallnacht and it is the liberals who sound like Hitler 

[oldmanfan]

My daughter and I argue about the EC all the time.  I think it is a valid way to go; she does not.  My concern is that every vote be counted and that Electoral Colleges accurately reflect the will of the voters.

[Capco]

4 minutes ago, snafu said:

Way back when, @Nanker and I had a discussion about the EC.  I was assigned the "con" side.  Arguing against the EC was difficult for me and my only proposal to tweak it was similar to what you're saying.  Count the popular vote for President for EACH Congressional district -- not county by county like they do now -- and assign the elector to go vote as the district voted.  Assign the two Senator-electors to vote for the statewide winner.

 

Would you be open to such a change personally, or was that just for the sake of argument?

[Dragoon]

7 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

People's lives are now just feelings and desires?  And a position you hold trumps them?

 

Yes, my bill of rights are inalienable. 

[Capco]

2 minutes ago, Dragoon said:

Yes, my bill of rights are inalienable. 

 

Please cite what article, section, or clause within the first ten amendments of the Constitution that you are referring to that allows your feelings and desires to trump the lives of your fellow citizens.

Edited October 9, 2020 by Capco

[snafu]

1 minute ago, Capco said:

 

Would you be open to such a change personally, or was that just for the sake of argument?

 

No, I love my idea -- though I don't think it is strictly my idea (I think Maine and Nebraska split their EC votes).

 

Ask me about Court packing...

 

 

[Dragoon]

7 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Because you say so?  Right.

 

Wearing a mask does not violate any of your first amendment rights any more than wearing other articles of clothing to enter a place of business.  Want proof?  Go downtown right now wherever you live, take off all your clothes and walk around, and when the police come for you tell them the first amendment says you don’t have to wear them.  Text me back from your cell.

You’re doing two things common of somebody losing an argument.

1. You change your opponents argument hoping they’ll chase it like a dog after a car. My argument was the restriction on Americans to peacefully assemble. You morphed that into my being anti mask. Cool. 
2. Nonsensical hyperbole — “you can’t walk around balls-out, that proves I’m right!” That’s just horribly done. 

[Capco]

Just now, snafu said:

Ask me about Court packing...

 

Actually I'd love to hear some thoughts on this if you feel like sharing them buddy.  

[Dragoon]

2 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

Please cite what article, section, or clause within the first ten amendments of the Constitution that you are referring to that allows your feelings and desires to trump the lives of your fellow citizens.

Horrible post. I’m not referring to my feelings. I’m referring to my right, and your right to peacefully assemble. Any American who doesn’t champion that is a horrible American. 

[New Improved DC Tom]

30 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

My position is in a national crisis we should all band together as Americans and your not wearing a mask says you’re OK with killing your neighbor.  

 

Do you realize that the criminal penalty for unknowingly risking infecting someone with a disease with a 1% fatality rate (COVID) is less than the criminal penalty for knowingly and intentionally infecting someone with a universally fatal disease (AIDS)?

 

That's how ignorant and inconsistent your position is.

[snafu]

9 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

Actually I'd love to hear some thoughts on this if you feel like sharing them buddy.  

 

Simple.  Note that I don't support this at all, but if it will be then this is how I'd want it.

Make up to 20 or so Justices.  Make sure that they're as left/right/center balanced as possible (how we get there I don't know).  Then for each case, randomly select 13 to sit and decide the matter.  The numbers 20 and 13 are arbitrary.  These can be higher or lower so that the panel is balanced.

 

 

[Capco]

Just now, Dragoon said:

Horrible post. I’m not referring to my feelings. I’m referring to my right, and your right to peacefully assemble. Any American who doesn’t champion that is a horrible American. 

 

So the first amendment right to peaceful assembly gives you the right to not follow health and safety guidelines that can take away the unalienable right to life for other Americans?  You can still peacefully assemble while wearing a mask dude.  

 

And I know exactly what you said.  The point I'm trying to make is that this perceived right you have isn't a right at all but rather just your own feelings and desires.  I'm not sure why I expected you to see the point I was trying to make though.  

3 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

Simple.  Note that I don't support this at all, but if it will be then this is how I'd want it.

Make up to 20 or so Justices.  Make sure that they're as left/right/center balanced as possible (how we get there I don't know).  Then for each case, randomly select 13 to sit and decide the matter.  The numbers 20 and 13 are arbitrary.  These can be higher or lower so that the panel is balanced.

 

That's an interesting idea but you're right that there's still questions to be answered about that approach.  Good food for thought though.

[Dragoon]

Just now, Capco said:

 

So the first amendment right to peaceful assembly gives you the right to not follow health and safety guidelines that can take away the unalienable right to life for other Americans?  You can still peacefully assemble while wearing a mask dude.  

 

And I know exactly what you said.  The point I'm trying to make is that this perceived right you have isn't a right at all but rather just your own feelings and desires.  I'm not sure why I expected you to see the point I was trying to make though.  

Um, I’ll address your last point first. My bill of rights is not my feelings. Again, they’re inalienable rights. 
 

For your first paragraph I am not anti-mask. I’m against the government awarding itself powers. When I waltz into Home Depot I mask up because it’s their rule. When I roll out I take the thing off because it is not the governments right to tell me what to wear, and it’s my civic duty to pushback against unconstitutional power grabs. 
 

if you’re high risk, stay inside, man. I’m a very healthy dude in my late 30’s. I’m very athletic. If I get it, I’ll be fine. And I will be in charge of what I do, what I wear, and where I go. it’s awful that’s a controversial statement these days. That’s something Americans, left or right, would have once applauded. Sheesh. 

[Kemp]

Barry County, Michigan Sheriff Dar Leaf thinks the men who were arrested for trying to kidnap Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer might have only wanted to make a citizen’s arrest of her, which, of course, is totally different from actually kidnapping her.

🎥@AaronParseghian https://t.co/WYw2kUDhHN

[Capco]

3 minutes ago, Dragoon said:

Um, I’ll address your last point first. My bill of rights is not my feelings. Again, they’re inalienable rights. 
 

For your first paragraph I am not anti-mask. I’m against the government awarding itself powers. When I waltz into Home Depot I mask up because it’s their rule. When I roll out I take the thing off because it is not the governments right to tell me what to wear, and it’s my civic duty to pushback against unconstitutional power grabs. 
 

if you’re high risk, stay inside, man. I’m a very healthy dude in my late 30’s. I’m very athletic. If I get it, I’ll be fine. And I will be in charge of what I do, what I wear, and where I go. it’s awful that’s a controversial statement these days. That’s something Americans, left or right, would have once applauded. Sheesh. 

 

I'll just say that there are much better ways to check the government's overreach than opposing government health and safety guidelines in the middle of a once-in-a-century pandemic just because it's coming from the government's mouth.  There is something to be said for banding together when the going gets tough and loosening up when times are good.  

[snafu]

1 minute ago, Capco said:

once-in-a-century pandemic

 

So far...