Less knowledge, more power: Uninformed can be vital to democracy, study finds

Dec 15, 2011
Princeton University-led researchers found that uninformed individuals -- those with no strong opinion or prior knowledge -- promote democratic consensus by diluting the power of a strongly opinionated minority that would otherwise dominate group decisions. Because uninformed individuals have no feelings on a situation's outcome, they side with and embolden the numerical majority. The researchers saw this dynamic play out with golden shiners, a strongly schooling fish. The researchers trained a large number of groups to swim toward a blue target, while smaller groups were trained to follow their natural predilection for a yellow target (right image). When placed together, the large trained group would follow the smaller group to the yellow target. When fish with no prior training (the uninformed individuals) were introduced, however, the fish increasingly swam toward the majority-preferred blue target (left image). Credit: (Image by Science/AAAS)

Contrary to the ideal of a completely engaged electorate, individuals who have the least interest in a specific outcome can actually be vital to achieving a democratic consensus. These individuals dilute the influence of powerful minority factions who would otherwise dominate everyone else, according to new research published in the journal Science.

A Princeton University-based research team reports Dec. 16 that this finding — based on group decision-making experiments on fish, as well as mathematical models and computer simulations — can ultimately provide insights into humans' political behavior.

The researchers report that in animal groups, uninformed individuals — as in those with no prior knowledge or strong feelings on a situation's outcome — tend to side with and embolden the numerical majority. Relating the results to human political activity, the study challenges the common notion that an outspoken minority can manipulate uncommitted voters.

"The classic view is that uninformed or uncommitted individuals may allow extreme views to proliferate. We found that might not be the case," said lead author Iain Couzin, a Princeton assistant professor of ecology and evolutionary biology. He and his co-authors found that even a small population of indifferent individuals act as a counterbalance to the minority — whose passion even can cause informed individuals in the majority to waver — and restore majority rule.

"We show that when the uninformed participate, the group can come to a majority decision even in the face of a powerful minority," Couzin said. "They prevent deadlock and fragmentation because the strength of an opinion no longer matters — it comes down to numbers. You can imagine this being a good or bad thing. Either way, a certain number of uninformed individuals keep that minority from dictating or complicating the behavior of the group."

Of course this effect has its limits, Couzin said. He and his co-authors also found that if the number of uninformed becomes too high, a group ceases to function coherently, with neither the majority nor the minority taking the lead. "Eventually, noise dominates because there just aren't enough informed individuals to guide the group," he said.

Parallels to humans

An important aspect of the findings, said Couzin, is that they are based on experiments on groups of fish, as well as mathematical models and computer simulations. Though the idea of uninformed populations benefiting the democratic process seems counterintuitive, the experimental results suggest that this dynamic is a naturally occurring decision-making process, he said.

The experiments involved golden shiners, a fish prone to associating the color yellow with a food reward, Couzin said. The researchers trained groups of golden shiners to swim toward a blue target, while smaller groups were trained to follow their natural predilection for a yellow target. When the two groups were placed together, the minority's stronger desire for the yellow target dominated the group's behavior. As fish with no prior training (the uninformed individuals) were introduced, however, the fish increasingly swam toward the majority-preferred blue target, the researchers report.

"We think of being informed as good and being uninformed as bad, but that's a human construct. Animal groups are rarely in a fractious state and we see a lot," said Couzin, who studies the behavior and communication behind animal movement, swarming and flocking.

The researchers constructed models of animal groups with a majority and a minority population, each with a differing preference to move in a certain direction. How strongly the respective groups felt about their preference could be increased or decreased. As the preference of the minority group became more intense, the preference of the majority became less likely to be realized until the minority won out every time. Credit: Image by Science/AAAS

"These experiments indicate there is an evolutionary function to being uninformed that perhaps is as active as being informed," he said. "Animals may be equally adaptable to simply going with the majority in certain circumstances because having that quick decision-making capability is beneficial for survival. We shouldn't think of it as a bad thing, but look at advantages animals exhibit to being uninformed in natural circumstances."

Donald Saari, a professor of mathematics and economics at the University of California-Irvine who studies voting systems, said he sees parallels to the Princeton-led work in markets and politics.

Highly informed economic forecasters and political activists frequently lose out to the masses of consumers and regular voters who base decisions on personal preferences and reasons more than on expertise, said Saari, who is familiar with the Science report but had no role in it.

For instance, he said, the arc from minority domination to pluralism to the potential degeneration into "noise," as described in the Princeton study, can be seen in the American electoral system.

A forceful minority can dominate in circumstances that attract the more politically inclined, such as midterm elections and primaries. In more popular elections, however, that influence wanes as less passionate people participate. Situations in which a candidate's personality or personal life takes precedent over policy positions in voters' minds could be an equivalent to the breakdown in direction Couzin and his co-authors found when there is a glut of uninformed individuals, Saari said.

"This study gives us a new interpretation of group decision making that really flies in the face of previous opinions. We usually assume that a highly opinionated and forceful group is going to sway everyone," Saari said.

"What we have we here is something very different," he said. "It doesn't say whether or not the consensus it good, it just provides a way of understanding when and how the consensus changes. If the numbers of the uninformed, or people who don't have a strong opinion, are large enough, that dilutes the effect of the highly opinionated or knowledgeable in the final outcome. Quite frankly, I think it's because the highly opinionated are not in the center and the uninformed, to a large extent, are."

Saari said that there might be an additional consideration or factor that uninformed individuals bring to the group process rather than mere devotion to the majority opinion.

The models showed that even the presence of one or two uninformed individuals caused an immediate change in the group's behavior, even in groups with the most adamant minority. This figure shows the effect of the uninformed on the four animal groups by strength of the minority opinion, with black being the least intense and red indicating the most. In the red group, the majority nonetheless took back control with less than 10 uninformed individuals present. Around 20 uninformed individuals, however, all four groups begin to experience "noise," which the researchers describe as a state where too many uninformed individuals result in a lack of leadership. Credit: Image by Science/AAAS

"These results raise a lot of questions for me and present another way of thinking about and coming up with explanations for what we observe in group dynamics," he said.

"I think the effect the uninformed have is much more than just number-counting plurality and that they're offering something else," Saari said. "Why are the fish with no 'opinion' more effective toward taking the group toward plurality than the fish that only had some opinion? What is that additional dynamic, what are the real contributions of the uninformed? I don't know what it is, but I do know it's worth investigating."

The power of the uninformed in simulations and reality

The researchers developed three models that initially revealed and described how uninformed individuals restore popular power. The modeling work was based on a computational tool developed in Couzin's lab that predicts and explains animal group behavior based on various forms of social interaction among group members. Couzin first reported the model in the journal Nature in 2005.

For the current work in Science, Couzin worked with, from Princeton, second author Christos Ioannou, a former postdoctoral fellow in Couzin's lab who is now a research fellow at the University of Bristol; postdoctoral researcher Colin Torney and doctoral student Andrew Hartnett, both in Couzin's lab; and professors Simon Levin, the Moffett Professor of Biology and co-author of the 2005 Nature paper, and Naomi Leonard, the Edwin S. Wilsey Professor of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering. The team also included Güven Demirel, a researcher at the Max Planck Institute for the Physics of Complex Systems; Thilo Gross, an engineering lecturer at the University of Bristol; and Larissa Conradt, a visiting researcher at the University of Cambridge.

In this project, Couzin used his model to first simulate animal groups of different sizes with a majority and a minority population, each with a differing preference to move in a certain direction. He added the factor of how strongly the respective groups felt about their preference, a variable he could increase or decrease.

As expected, the researchers report, if the majority's preference was just as strong or stronger than the minority's, the group moved in the direction the majority favored. But when the intensity of the minority's preference increased, the animals as a whole frequently caved to that group's desires. In the groups with the strongest minority preference, the animals always went with the minority.

Couzin then added a third group, the uninformed, that had no preference on the direction to move. The model showed that even the presence of one or two uninformed individuals caused an immediate change in the group's behavior. The uninformed individuals were ultimately most effective in the groups with the least committed minority and those with the smallest total number of members. But even in groups with the most adamant minority, the majority took back control with less than 10 uninformed individuals present.

"Consensus naturally emerges in these models once uninformed individuals are introduced," Couzin said. "There is a sharp transition from minority to majority control. At a certain threshold, only a few uninformed individuals can alter the entire outcome of group decisions."

Mathematical models — one created by Demirel and Gross, another by Torney — helped explain the mysterious pull of the uninformed individuals. These models were based on social processes in human groups, such as how conventions become established, or how people influence each other's opinions, Couzin said.

The calculations indicated that during the decision-making process, all individuals have a tendency to follow what they perceive as the predominant view, but opinionated individuals are more resistant to social pressure, Couzin explained. This reluctance to compromise manipulates the perception of what is popular, meaning that the strong convictions of the minority can make their view seem dominant. Uninformed individuals, having no strong opinion or preference, tend to inhibit this process because they respond quickly to numerical rather than semantic differences and curb the influence of forceful individuals.

The models were used to design the experiments with the golden shiners, which Ioannou, who was not aware of the hypothesis being tested, conducted over a three-month period. The majority group of fish trained to swim toward the blue target consisted of six fish; five fish made up the strongly "opinionated" minority group, which was driven by a natural attraction to the color yellow.

As in the simulations, the minority group won out when uninformed individuals were not present and the fish swam toward the yellow target in slightly more than 80 percent of the trials where only the minority and majority groups were present.

The untrained fish, however, which were introduced in groups of five or 10, consistently put the group on course toward the blue target, Couzin explained. When five were added, the whole group went toward the blue target half the time. In trials with 10 untrained fish present, the fish made their way to the blue target nearly 70 percent of the time.

"We saw that the counterweight to a powerful minority can come from the least expected population — the uninformed," Couzin said.

"It was extremely rewarding to see this counterintuitive prediction play out in reality with living organisms," he said. "Our work is a simplification of reality, but it allows the underlying mechanics of this type of decision making to be observed and understood."

Explore further: World population likely to peak by 2070

Related Stories

Recommended for you

World population likely to peak by 2070

Oct 23, 2014

World population will likely peak at around 9.4 billion around 2070 and then decline to around 9 billion by 2100, according to new population projections from IIASA researchers, published in a new book, World Population and ...

Bullying in schools is still prevalent, national report says

Oct 23, 2014

Despite a dramatic increase in public awareness and anti-bullying legislation nationwide, the prevalence of bullying is still one of the most pressing issues facing our nation's youth, according to a report by researchers ...

Study examines effects of credentialing, personalization

Oct 23, 2014

Chris Gamrat, a doctoral student in learning, design and technology, recently had his study—completed alongside Heather Zimmerman, associate professor of education; Jaclyn Dudek, a doctoral student studying learning, design ...

Data indicate there is no immigration crisis

Oct 22, 2014

Is there an "immigration crisis" on the U.S.-Mexico border? Not according to an examination of historical immigration data, according to a new paper from Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy.

User comments : 163

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

that_guy
4.4 / 5 (14) Dec 15, 2011
Streeeeetch.

While the research here makes a good parallel, this situation really misses a lot of Human factors, whereas fish work very closely to a mathematical average.

Also, it discounts the fact that certain humans will listen to reason regardless of other opinions, and other humans will take an unreasonable ideological stance no matter what anyone else says. And these are the informed people.

Also, positive change is generally pushed by small groups, whereas the uninformed culture at large may go with negative choices.
ryggesogn2
2.2 / 5 (29) Dec 15, 2011
Didn't Lenin call them useful idiots?
Socialists need uniformed voters.
Nanobanano
3.6 / 5 (16) Dec 15, 2011
...which the researchers describe as a state where too many uninformed individuals result in a lack of leadership.


Describes our Congress perfectly!

Either way, a certain number of uninformed individuals keep that minority from dictating or complicating the behavior of the group


Sucks when the minority is right, doesn't it.

Being a Jew in Germany with all of the "uninformed" citizens must have been a nightmare, and cost so many their lives.

Didn't Lenin call them useful idiots?
Socialists need uniformed voters


So do capitalists.

I'm sure Rick Perry and Ron Paul consider YOU a useful idiot...
freethinking
1.7 / 5 (26) Dec 15, 2011
Nano, Nazi -- National Socialist so RYGG was right. Too bad more people weren't conservatives in germany at that time, there would have been no WW2.

As for Rick Perry and Ron Paul you need to note that the more conservative someone is, the less likely they are to start personal attacks, like calling someone an idiot.

As for this study I think it has some value. My observation is that only about 10% of people think about politics, and these 10% are split between those that want good and those that want evil. The other 90% tend to lean to the side who is in the power position. So whoever has the majority of the 10%, the majority of the 90% will follow.

Under Hitlers socialists 6-7% of the population determined the belief of most of the 90%
that_guy
4.7 / 5 (12) Dec 15, 2011
As for Rick Perry and Ron Paul you need to note that the more conservative someone is, the less likely they are to start personal attacks, like calling someone an idiot.


Rick Perry? Are you kidding? not making personal attacks? Have you seen his campaign history, or even his ads for this campaign?

While I agree that Ron Paul is a consistent and practice what you preach kind of guy, even if your whole anecdote were correct, which it isn't, wouldn't make it scientific evidence - Because it's an anecdote of one or two, possibly cherry-picked situations.

If it were so simple as conservative versus liberal, you would not have changing, relative versions of conservative and liberal. Times change, and the proper policies and government for those times change with it.

Also, anecdotally, if little or no government were the definitive answer, then somolia wouldn't be a shithole, and the swiss, nordic countries, luxem, etc wouldn't have beat us this decade...
Squirrel
2.8 / 5 (11) Dec 15, 2011
I read the Science paper before this. I thought it was rubbish--artificial models and hype language "democratic"--nothing of the sort. Just language play to get publicity and funds. They state "Our work is a simplification of reality, but it allows the underlying mechanics of this type of decision making to be observed and understood." Pure slight-of-mouth nonsense--the messiness of reality is where the science of collective decision making lies. Look at all the comments above--from contrived simplifications in computer models and "fish experiments" to generalizations about Hitler.
ryggesogn2
2 / 5 (24) Dec 15, 2011
'Uninformed' can mean 'don't care'.
Which can mean most people just want the govt to leave them alone, a conservative/liberatarian perspective.
Argiod
3.2 / 5 (9) Dec 15, 2011
Now, if only we can teach this to the people on Capitol Hill, we might have a shot at true Democracy in our Republic.
Argiod
3.2 / 5 (10) Dec 15, 2011
...As for this study I think it has some value. My observation is that only about 10% of people think about politics, and these 10% are split between those that want good and those that want evil. The other 90% tend to lean to the side who is in the power position. So whoever has the majority of the 10%, the majority of the 90% will follow.

Under Hitlers socialists 6-7% of the population determined the belief of most of the 90%


And, like Nazi Germany, the USA is a Democratic Republic; as were Facist Italy and Ancient Rome... go figure...
kochevnik
3.6 / 5 (12) Dec 15, 2011
Konstantinos Plevis, a former fascist terrorist whose book, Jews: The Whole Truth, praised Adolph Hitler and called for the extermination of Jews. Plevis was charged and found guilty of inciting racial hatred in 2007, but his sentence was overturned on appeal in 2009.

By that time, Makis Hammer Voridis had traded up in the world of Greek fascism, merging his Hellenic Front Party into the far-right LAOS party, an umbrella party for all sorts of neo-Nazi and far-right political organizations. LAOS was founded by another raving anti-Semite, Giorgos Karatzeferisnicknamed KaratzaFührer in Greece for alleging for alleging that the Holocaust and Auschwitz are Jewish myths.

It may come as a surprise that fascists are now considered technocrats to the mainstream media and Western banking interests. Then again, history shows that fascists have always been favored by the bankers. A notable example being Hitler.
Nanobanano
3.6 / 5 (12) Dec 15, 2011
And, like Nazi Germany, the USA is a Democratic Republic; as were Facist Italy and Ancient Rome... go figure...


USA really is not even a Democratic Republic.

Its a Republic or an Oligarchy.

We don't "actually" get to vote.

We "vote" for president, but the vote doesn't count. The shadow government called the electoral college picks the president.

We "vote" for senators and representatives, but the outcome is practically determined before the poles are even opened. The shadow government (and the "almighty dollar",) chooses who gets on the ballots.

And of course, the corporations have 99.9% control, with only a few outliers. But if an outlier says anything, they quickly get hushed and swept aside under the table. Neither FOX nor CNN nor anyone else will mention them anyway.
kochevnik
3.2 / 5 (11) Dec 15, 2011
And, like Nazi Germany, the USA is a Democratic Republic; as were Facist Italy and Ancient Rome... go figure...
Rome was stable for a long time as a republic. With the advent of christianity it became a democracy, and collapsed in merely three centuries. "Demos" means "mob rule."
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (21) Dec 15, 2011
It has been noted that Hitler's rise was aided by socialism.
Germany was already favorable towards socialism and Hitler, like Mussolini and FDR, added the nationalism to socialism.
Socialism is govt control of property. It doesn't matter how the govt is elected, or not elected.
People like koch take it as a given the state must control all property. To him, who runs the govt seems to be important.
In the USA, the conservatives do NOT believe the govt should control property. They support a state LIMITED to protecting individual property rights, and do not promote collective property rights.
And yes, TR, Wilson, Hoover, FDR, Nixon, Obama have all supported increased state control over individual property rights.
kochevnik
3 / 5 (10) Dec 15, 2011
It has been noted that Hitler's rise was aided by socialism.
Only by you, and you're just a paid astroturfing mouthpiece.
HealingMindN
2.8 / 5 (9) Dec 15, 2011
Switching between fish and humans, non-sentient and sentient beings, makes this a confusing article. I would prefer to be uninformed about this particular subject.

..Either way, a certain number of uninformed individuals keep that minority from dictating or complicating the behavior of the group...


Oh, is that what the social scientists and politicians call it. We "complicate" the behavior of the group by being informed. Therefore, they prefer fish or cattle or "sheeple" to make things simple for them.
lairdwilcox
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 16, 2011
This is a very good point. Stupid, uninformed people can prove very useful to elites who whish to remain in power and feel threatened by more thoughtful and informed people. Are wee seeing a new model for national politics here?

The comparison of American voters to fish is a novel idea. A more common comparison is to sheep but sheep will usually jump out of the way from danger while fish just react.
deepsand
3.3 / 5 (19) Dec 16, 2011
Fish - sheep - it's the same instinctive reaction.
edgeArchitect
2.6 / 5 (5) Dec 16, 2011
If I was fish I'd go eat all the yellow food first, and then sell my blue food to the other fishies. Or, make the fishies slave away for me by cleaning my fins, I'd call that jobs. I'd also steal their chicks and try to supress their natural instincts and habbits, just so I could do the same thing next time when Gods throw us some more food. I'd be the Illuminaty /@\ fish!
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (17) Dec 16, 2011
It has been noted that Hitler's rise was aided by socialism.
Only by you, and you're just a paid astroturfing mouthpiece.

Not by me, but the contemporary Austrian economist Hayek. He was there.
rawa1
3.2 / 5 (5) Dec 16, 2011
Uninformed can be vital to democracy
It can lead to the homogeneity of public voting, but just the lack of information is the true killer of democracy. Without access to information sources the people cannot decide in competent way. But the fishes aren't capable of rational decisions and their gregarious instincts cannot be considered as a competent judgement of situation at all.

Who is responsible for such strange antiliberal BS presented as a scientific research?
tadchem
2.3 / 5 (3) Dec 16, 2011
...and thus the NEA agenda has been revealed.
leonardofolsneslea
1 / 5 (2) Dec 16, 2011
To start: I don't why Princeton has begun this collection of idiot points! Usually, information is a _hard_ premise for being _able_ to take part in the political discourse! And shouldn't they be sensitive to the fact that these "informed" people who are the opinionated formed their opinions on a more or less heavy body of political _reading_! So if they want to do the "Hitler" statement on a guy, Hitler, who had no more education than lower high school and come about with this despicably cheap justification by some math of this kind or other! Hah-hah, I just note these names! They should leave Princeton, this must be most certain!!!
leonardofolsneslea
1 / 5 (3) Dec 16, 2011
It's too bad for these authors that they have never struggled for voting rights and the right to education! It's a petty that this argument is allowed whatsoever from such a renowned University! And they must be aware of the minorities' problems toward stature and political influence! This spew speaks for invitation to authors' own punishment! Can we inquire them of any (S)M tendencies?
COCO
1.4 / 5 (11) Dec 16, 2011
this would explain Obama and Bush - the warrior Presidents who both liberated Iraq.

COCO
1.9 / 5 (9) Dec 16, 2011
this indeed explains so much - the elections of two neocon puppet presidents in a row - the death of invesitigative journalism and the existance of wastes of skin like Newt inter alia
leonardofolsneslea
1 / 5 (4) Dec 16, 2011
And the general US American anger that day in Sept. 9., 2001!
kaasinees
1.4 / 5 (9) Dec 16, 2011
wikipedia.org/wiki/Barak
Barak (English pronunciation: /bræk/ or /brk/[1]; Hebrew: , Tiberian: Brq, "Lightning; Shine"), Al-Burq (Arabic: al-Burq "lightning") the son of Abinoam from Kedesh in Naphtali, was a military general in the Book of Judges in the Bible. He was the commander of the army of Deborah, the prophetess and heroine of the Hebrew Bible. Barak and Deborah are credited with defeating the Canaanite armies led by Sisera, who for twenty years had oppressed the Israelites.


wikipedia.org/wiki/Bamah
The high places (Hebrew bamot plural , from singular bamah Hebrew: ) denote a place of worship of the ancient Israelites. It also became used as a general term referring to any place used for idolatrous worship.[1][2] Adonai was worshiped on the high places by Isaac.[3] In Modern Hebrew, the word means "stage; platform".[4]


Coincidence? Or a jew worshipper with a fake name? :)

thedailyswarm.com/swarm/dmx-barack-obama/
solartek
3.4 / 5 (5) Dec 16, 2011
This site blows, period. Just look at the comments.
deepsand
3.4 / 5 (22) Dec 16, 2011
This site blows, period. Just look at the comments.

Yep; and, it's getting worse by the day.

Clearly there is here a dreadful lack of effective moderation on the part of site administration.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (20) Dec 16, 2011
This site blows, just look at the articles.
And they get worse every day.
Leading up to the climate circus in RSA, there were more dire studies of catastrophe.
Now, with the chance Obama's socialism may be voted out, we now see more studies asserting socialism makes you happy or the people are too stupid to understand how good socialism is for them.
Just watch.
kochevnik
3.8 / 5 (10) Dec 17, 2011
It has been noted that Hitler's rise was aided by socialism.
Only by you, and you're just a paid astroturfing mouthpiece.
Not by me, but the contemporary Austrian economist Hayek. He was there.
We've already defeated you on this subject. You're all out of ammo already?
Orwellwasright
3 / 5 (4) Dec 17, 2011
Please remember: IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH. Doubleplus good!!
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (18) Dec 18, 2011
It has been noted that Hitler's rise was aided by socialism.
Only by you, and you're just a paid astroturfing mouthpiece.
Not by me, but the contemporary Austrian economist Hayek. He was there.
We've already defeated you on this subject. You're all out of ammo already?

Only in your dreams.
"It was in Bismarcks Germany, after all, that there had been born the modern welfare statenational health insurance, government pension plans, regulations of industry and the workplaceand a philosophy that the national good took precedence over the interests of the mere individual."
"In this political environment Germans came to take it for granted that the paternalistic state was meant to care for them from cradle to grave, a phrase that was coined in Imperial Germany."
http://www.thefre...ciation/
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (18) Dec 18, 2011
"Two generations of Germans accepted that they needed to be disciplined by and obedient to the enlightened political leadership that guided the affairs of state for their presumed benefit. Beliefs in the right to private property and freedom of exchange were undermined as the regulatory and redistributive state increasingly managed the economic activities of the society for the greater national interest of the German fatherland. By 1933, when Hitler came to power, the German people not only accepted the idea of the führer principle, Hayek argued, but many now wanted it and believed they needed it. Notions about individual freedom and responsibility had been destroyed by the philosophy of collectivism and the ideologies of nationalism and socialism."

http://www.thefre...ciation/
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (18) Dec 18, 2011
"But Hayeks main point was that this tragic history was not unique or special to the German people. The institutional changes that accompanied the implementation of socialist and interventionist welfare-state policies potentially carried within them the seeds of political tyranny and economic servitude in any country that might follow a similar path."
"Fulfillment of the governments plans and policies requires the leaders to have the power to use any means necessary to get the job done. Thus those with the least conscience or fewest moral scruples are likely to rise highest in the hierarchy of control. The bureaucracies of the planned and regulated society attract those who are most likely to enjoy the use and abuse of power over others."
http://www.thefre...ciation/
FrankHerbert
2.9 / 5 (106) Dec 18, 2011
Marjon claims all his adversaries oppose private property.

Does anyone here actually oppose private property? I know I don't.
kochevnik
3.9 / 5 (7) Dec 18, 2011
And K, NAZIs were and are socialists.
Adolf Hitler's membership card for the German Workers' Party. http://upload.wik...mber.png
Hitler wanted to create his own party, but was ordered by his superiors in the Reichswehr to infiltrate an existing one instead. http://en.wikiped...99_Party
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (19) Dec 18, 2011
"Tightening that gap, he imagines, will get Americans outside his core constituency to feel like theyre part of something bigger than themselves. And sure enough, they will be. Its called big government.

Read more: http://dailycalle...gtwDyf7i
"
koch, what's your point? There are many socialist parties. Hayek dedicated The Road to Serfdom to socialists of all parties.
Sounds exactly like what Hitler and Mussolini did to gain power.

"Nazism drew heavily on Italian Fascism: nationalism (including collectivism and populism based on nationalist values)"
"...and the studies of socialism that fit the Nazi Party ideologues and agendas"
From your source above.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (19) Dec 18, 2011
koch, are you trying to say the NAZIs did not practice your style of socialism?
How can you deny the NAZIs did not practice socialism?
And you do know FDR admired Mussolini's socialism?
"On May 7, 1933, just two months after the inauguration of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the New York Times reporter Anne OHare McCormick wrote that the atmosphere in Washington was strangely reminiscent of Rome in the first weeks after the march of the Blackshirts, of Moscow at the beginning of the Five-Year Plan.America today literally asks for orders. The Roosevelt administration, she added, envisages a federation of industry, labor and government after the fashion of the corporative State as it exists in Italy."
http://reason.com...oosevelt
ryggesogn2
1.9 / 5 (18) Dec 18, 2011
"The dream of a planned society infected both right and left. Ernst Jünger, an influential right-wing militarist in Germany, reported his reaction to the Soviet Union: I told myself: granted, they have no constitution, but they do have a plan. This may be an excellent thing. As early as 1912, FDR himself praised the Prussian-German model: They passed beyond the liberty of the individual to do as he pleased with his own property and found it necessary to check this liberty for the benefit of the freedom of the whole people, he said in an address to the Peoples Forum of Troy, New York."
http://reason.com...oosevelt
Reminiscent of Thomas Friedman's praise and envy of China's 'ordered' economy
leonardofolsneslea
2 / 5 (4) Dec 18, 2011
One is forgetting the public debt to France in this discussion and the fact that the German people experienced that their money became valueless! In addition, there may be possible facilitation to Hitler's political agenda by USA itself, so to secure World Domination for this or that time, all matters concerned!
kochevnik
3.7 / 5 (15) Dec 18, 2011
koch, what's your point? There are many socialist parties. Hayek dedicated The Road to Serfdom to socialists of all parties.
WTF would Hitler form a second socialist party? Especially when he's a NAZI fascist? I proved he wanted to form his own party but was forced by the powers to infiltrate the socialist party. Because it was the PARTY in POWER. Why would Hitler take over a party that wasn't in power, ryggesogn2? That's what libertarians do. Look where it got you: spamming boards with dry, disparate self-contradictory factoids.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (20) Dec 18, 2011
Hitler wanted power just like every socialist.
That is the nature of the socialist. He, knows what is best for everyone and must seize power any way he can to force his utopian solution.
So koch offers no evidence showing Hitler was not a socialist and that the Germans were socialists prior to the rise of the NAZIs, just as Hayek states.
After all, the socialists in the USA had to infiltrate the democrat party to impose their socialist agenda.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (19) Dec 18, 2011
koch, do you suggest socialists are one big happy family?
If so, why did Stalin have Trotsky murdered?
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (19) Dec 18, 2011
"Socialism, like the old policy from which it emanates,
confounds Government and society."
"The modern politicians, particularly
those of the Socialist school, found their different theories upon one common hypothesis; and surely a more
strange, a more presumptuous notion, could never have
entered a human brain.
They divide mankind into two parts. Men in general,
except one, form the first; the politician himself forms the
second, which is by far the most important."
"It is so true, that the Socialists look upon mankind as
a subject for social experiments that if, by chance, they are not quite certain of the success of these experiments,
they will request a portion of mankind, as a subject to
experiment upon."
http://mises.org/...elaw.pdf
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (18) Dec 18, 2011
Marjon claims all his adversaries oppose private property.

Does anyone here actually oppose private property? I know I don't.

But you do support govt control over that 'private' property. Which begs the question how 'private' is that property?
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (20) Dec 18, 2011
"It is the aim of Socialism to transfer the means of production from private ownership to the ownership of organized society, to the State."
"Limitation of the rights of owners as well as formal transference is a means of socialization. If the State takes the power of disposal from the owner piecemeal, by extending its influence over production; if its power to determine what direction production shall take and what kind of production there shall be, is increased, then the owner is left at last with nothing except the empty name of ownership, and property has passed into the hands of the State."
http://mises.org/...ch2.aspx
Does Frankie support limiting the rights of the owners of that private property?
deepsand
3.3 / 5 (24) Dec 18, 2011
Do you support UNLIMITED rights to the owner of private property?

Think long and very carefully before answering.
ryggesogn2
1.9 / 5 (18) Dec 19, 2011
Do you support UNLIMITED rights to the owner of private property?

Think long and very carefully before answering.

Unlimited rights to do what?
We all should have the right to do with our property what we will, as long as that act does not violate the property rights of anyone else.
deepsand
3.4 / 5 (23) Dec 19, 2011
ONLY so long as the "PROPERTY rights" of others are not violated?

Taken at face value, that means that you would allow that one should be allowed to exercise ones "property" rights to any and all detrimental consequences to others with the one cited exception.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (19) Dec 19, 2011
What is the 'one cited exception'?

Define 'detrimental consequences to others'.
deepsand
3.5 / 5 (22) Dec 19, 2011
What is the 'one cited exception'?

That set forth by you re. violation of "property rights."

Define 'detrimental consequences to others'.

Not going to engage in debating the meaning of that which is plain on its face.

You made a categorical claim, subject to a single and narrowly defined condition. Now, defend it.
ryggesogn2
1.9 / 5 (18) Dec 19, 2011
You made a categorical claim, subject to a single and narrowly defined condition.

No I did not.

ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (19) Dec 19, 2011
"Carried through consistently, the right of property would entitle the proprietor to claim all the advantages which the good's employment may generate on the one hand and would burden him with all the disadvantages resulting from its employment on the other hand."
"But there were loopholes left which the legislators were slow to fill. In some cases this tardiness was intentional because the imperfections agreed with the plans of the authorities. When in the past in many countries the owners of factories and railroads were not held liable for the damages which the conduct of their enterprises inflicted on the property and health of neighbors, patrons, employees, and other people through smoke, soot, noise, water pollution, and accidents caused by defective or inappropriate equipment, the idea was that one should not undermine the progress of industrialization and the development of transportation facilities. "
http://mises.org/...sec6.asp
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (19) Dec 19, 2011
"How did America reach the point where aspiring entrepreneurs, seeking to improve their lot by improving other peoples choices, must approach government on bended knee to beg it to confer upon them a right the right to compete? "
http://www.washin...ory.html
deepsand
3.5 / 5 (24) Dec 20, 2011
No I did not.


Does that mean that you now repudiate this statement of yours?

We all should have the right to do with our property what we will, as long as that act does not violate the property rights of anyone else.


Your claim; yours to defend.

Furthermore, I'll ask that you define what constitutes a "violation of the property rights of anyone else;" and, how you would settle disputes re. conflicting property rights of different parties.

ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (19) Dec 20, 2011
I'll ask that you define what constitutes a "violation of the property rights of anyone else;"

This is plain on its face.
deepsand
3.5 / 5 (24) Dec 20, 2011
No it is not, as what constitutes a "property right" remains undefined.

And, what about the question re. settling disputes re. conflicting property rights of different parties?

So far all you've got are naked assertions.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (20) Dec 20, 2011
No it is not, as what constitutes a "property right" remains undefined.

Not to me and millions of others.
deepsand
3.4 / 5 (23) Dec 21, 2011
Well, in that case, I summarily declare that your vague "property rights" are subordinate to any and all other rights, and that my "property rights" trump yours.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (19) Dec 21, 2011
Well, in that case, I summarily declare that your vague "property rights" are subordinate to any and all other rights, and that my "property rights" trump yours.

Try and make it so, please.
FrankHerbert
2.9 / 5 (108) Dec 21, 2011
Well, in that case, I summarily declare that your vague "property rights" are subordinate to any and all other rights, and that my "property rights" trump yours.

Try and make it so, please.


Marjon has a history of making extremely vague, castle doctrine laden threats. This is his version of "go ahead, make my day". The "please" indicates that he actually wants the opportunity to legally kill someone.

He's treated me with such language when I rhetorically said under no government what would stop someone from stealing his belongings. He wants to live in a Mad Max fantasy world because he wants to murder people.

However I think we are safe. The old man is in his 80's and likely couldn't hit the broad side of a barn without wetting himself.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (20) Dec 21, 2011
The issue was private property rights but no one wants to engage in any discussion.
I ask sandy to define his terms but he refuses. Ergo he does not want to have a discussion.
Frankie, like a typical 'progressive' wants to engage is personal attacks instead of trying to defend his socialist views.
Maybe that is sandy's problem, too. Defending the indefensible.
FrankHerbert
2.9 / 5 (109) Dec 21, 2011
Frankie, like a typical 'progressive' wants to engage is personal attacks instead of trying to defend his socialist views.


Like how everyone that disagrees with you is a "'progressive'" or a socialist? Those aren't personal attacks that you engage in instead of discussing the issues?

You wouldn't be emulating the enemy would you?

"The Paranoid Style in American Politics"
http://karws.gso....yle.html
It is hard to resist the conclusion that this enemy is on many counts the projection of the self; both the ideal and the unacceptable aspects of the self are attributed to him.... Secret organizations set up to combat secret organizations give the same flattery....
The John Birch Society emulates Communist cells and quasi-secret operation through front groups and preaches a ruthless prosecution of the ideological war along lines very similar to those it finds in the Communist enemy.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (19) Dec 21, 2011
'Progressive' describes your political philosophy does it not, Frankie?
Why would you believe this is a personal attack?
FrankHerbert
2.9 / 5 (107) Dec 21, 2011
Your tricks are tired old man. It's obvious you use a different definition of progressive than self described progressives. You put it in single quotes to denote sarcasm at the term.

"'Progressives'" would accurately be translated as "Progressives, yeah right."

You use it as a derisive label against people that don't even espouse progressive ideas. There are bona fide conservatives here you have derided as 'progressives'.

To get back to the original point which you tried to change, I'll quote you:
Frankie, like a typical 'progressive' wants to engage is personal attacks instead of trying to defend his socialist views.

It's clear you are the one who would rather engage in personal attacks instead of trying to defend your morally dead ideology. Your defense of your ideology consists almost entirely of deriding those who even slightly disagree with you as "'progressives'" while throwing a von Mises quote in or two.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (20) Dec 21, 2011
You put it in single quotes to denote sarcasm at the term.


That is because they are not making progress toward liberty and prosperity, only tyranny and poverty.

Private property is the only moral system.
Each human being has an unalienable and inherent right to his life, which is his property. That is an axiom which extends to physical and intellectual property rights.
Force must be used to protect those rights from 'progressives'.
'Progressives'/statists/socialists all believe the people serve them, not what the US Declaration of Independence states: "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..."
FrankHerbert
2.9 / 5 (106) Dec 21, 2011
Life = property lmao. What a sad world you've lived in all these years.

I know Jefferson directly plagiarized Locke's "life, liberty and property" but not even Jefferson had the gall to substitute property for life, happiness yes but not life.

'Progressives'/statists/socialists

You are a conspiracist. When you start stringing labels together with slashes it doesn't really help your cause. I won't even bother to quote Hofstadter, you make it too easy.
Noumenon
2.9 / 5 (102) Dec 21, 2011
Less knowledge, more power: Uninformed can be vital to democracy, study finds


The political left already knew this for some time. This is obvious given their desire to bus-in voters, and their opposition to basic rational measures, like requiring voter photo-i.d.

If just one of the following conditions were put into effect, there would never be another liberal elected to office in this country;

- If voting age was raised to 30.

- If people on welfare lost their right to vote.

- If a literacy test was required to vote.
rawa1
1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 21, 2011
Didn't Lenin call them useful idiots? Socialists need uniformed voters. The political left already knew this for some time.
LOL, every authoritarian regime (Hitler) will use this Machiavellianism as well. The uninformed voters are always welcomed by any regime. This problem has nothing to do with orientation of political scene, rather with its polarization. Because the result is not a democracy, but the illusion of democracy - this is the fundamental mistake of this study.

Actually the only situations, where the free access to informations is harmful for the human society are the situations, which are harmful for human society as such (arms race and intelligence services, for example). You can identify these situations easily just by using of the above rule. If the censorship is advantageous for some group of people, then you can be sure, the existence of this group of people isn't advantageous for the human civilization as such. Because the information wants to spread freely.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (19) Dec 21, 2011
So Frankie, if you don't own yourself, who does?

'Progressives'/statists/socialists are all the same to me. They all support govt control of private property.
Communists/Fascists/Socialists/'progressives' all have the same objective, state control over the individual. They may disagree amongst themselves how that should be accomplished, but it doesn't really matter to their individual victims.
freethinking
1.7 / 5 (17) Dec 21, 2011
Rygg, why do many suppose many progressives hate to be labeled as progressives? You and I both label myself ourselves as conservative, and if called a conservative don't feel insulted.

Merry Christmas.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (18) Dec 21, 2011
Thanks free.
Why did the 'progressive' FDR feel the need to call himself 'liberal'?
Then, when democrats were embarrassed of the 'l' word, they recycled 'progressive'.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (18) Dec 21, 2011
How typical of 'liberals':
"Hackers post cops personal data to avenge Occupy movement"
http://www.washin...-online/

The lesson is 'progressives' are out to destroy their opponents.
SH and Frankie have engaged is such tactics here.
Conservatives must not be afraid to attack and to stand firm on principles.
FrankHerbert
2.9 / 5 (104) Dec 21, 2011
Rygg, why do many suppose many progressives hate to be labeled as progressives? You and I both label myself ourselves as conservative, and if called a conservative don't feel insulted.


We'll you're either progressive or regressive right? So you're regressive?

I'm progressive, not 'progressive'. I'm also a liberal. I'm not a communist. Marjon's behavior mirrors that of communists much more than anyone else that posts here.

"The Paranoid Style in American Politics"
http://karws.gso....yle.html
It is hard to resist the conclusion that this enemy is on many counts the projection of the self...
The Ku Klux Klan imitated Catholicism to the point of donning priestly vestments...
The John Birch Society emulates Communist cells and quasi-secret operation through front groups, and preaches a ruthless prosecution of the ideological war along lines very similar to those it finds in the Communist enemy.
FrankHerbert
2.9 / 5 (104) Dec 21, 2011
The political left already knew this for some time. This is obvious given their desire to bus-in voters, and their opposition to basic rational measures, like requiring voter photo-i.d.

If just one of the following conditions were put into effect, there would never be another liberal elected to office in this country;

- If voting age was raised to 30.

- If people on welfare lost their right to vote.

- If a literacy test was required to vote.


Well looks like my axiom of "if you are not progressive, you are regressive" is panning out quite nicely.

That is quite the regressive post. Noumenon wants to repeal the Voting Rights Act. I'm in disbelief.

http://en.wikiped...ghts_Act
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is a landmark piece of national legislation in the United States that outlawed discriminatory voting practices that had been responsible for the widespread disenfranchisement of African Americans in the U.S.
deepsand
3.6 / 5 (20) Dec 22, 2011
Try and make it so, please.

A puerile retort.

Private property is the only moral system.

That's about as morally bankrupt as can be.
deepsand
3.6 / 5 (20) Dec 22, 2011
The political left already knew this for some time.

As do the Republicans and their Fat Cats.

This is obvious given their desire to bus-in voters, and their opposition to basic rational measures, like requiring voter photo-i.d.

Facts on the ground show that voter fraud is virtually non-existent. The incident rate of voter fraud is below the likelihood of being struck by lightning.
Noumenon
2.9 / 5 (99) Dec 22, 2011
This is obvious given their desire to bus-in voters, and their opposition to basic rational measures, like requiring voter photo-i.d.

Facts on the ground show that voter fraud is virtually non-existent. The incident rate of voter fraud is below the likelihood of being struck by lightning.


The statistics of voter fraud are like that of any other fraud in society, ...unlikely in general. That is a meaningless retort using liberal mush headed logic.

You still have to respect the act of voting such that you take measures to prevent possible fraud. Recall the hanging-chads in Florida?

We require photo-id in many aspects of society, so it becomes curious why IN THIS CASE the left DON'T WANT a photo-ID. It is actually easier to obtain a photo-id than it is to register and vote.

The left leaning organization, Acorn, was recently busted on this. The idea that voter fraud is a non-problem and does not need to be addressed, is pure non-sense.
Noumenon
2.9 / 5 (99) Dec 22, 2011
Well looks like my axiom of "if you are not progressive, you are regressive" is panning out quite nicely.


The term "progressive" represents a specific left leaning political ideology, and has otherwise no relation to the everyday common use. The term was chosen to give impression to the uninformed and naive, that "our side is for progress". It's just a stupid political ploy to insinuate that, "if you don't agree, you are against progress". Propaganda for dolts.
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (14) Dec 22, 2011
I'm progressive, not 'progressive'. I'm also a liberal. I'm not a communist.

"Stupid is as stupid does."
What 'progressives' and 'liberals' do and support is the same as the socialist does and supports.

Sandy, add some rationale to your assertion the private property is immoral. That somehow you don't own yourself.

"These 3000 voter registration forms were all dropped off at once by the one group on the deadline to turn in voter registration forms.
* Almost all of the registrations were for the Democratic Party, a statistical improbability at best.
* Today, these same 3000 newly registered voters as a group had papers dropped off at the Yuma Recorders office requesting to be signed up for the permanent early voters list which means the ballots will be mailed early, with no accountability."
http://michellema...t-again/
And in 'liberal' Chicago, dead people vote.
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (16) Dec 22, 2011
Well looks like my axiom of "if you are not progressive, you are regressive" is panning out quite nicely.


Does Frankie believe all homosexual males are happy? They call themselves 'gay' after all.
Noumenon
3 / 5 (98) Dec 22, 2011
That is quite the regressive post. Noumenon wants to repeal the Voting Rights Act. I'm in disbelief.


I'm simply characterizing the leftist voter base. I never mentioned blacks in my post.

No matter what measures society takes to ensure the integrity of some important institution, there will always be those who become "disenfranchised" as a result, and the political game of accusing the system of being discriminatory begins. It's a shame that racism is used in politics this way.
Noumenon
3 / 5 (98) Dec 22, 2011
,... cont @ FrankHubris

If you were for "progress", wouldn't you want voters to be informed about both sides of the political issues, basic history, government, etc, before they cast a vote? No, you wouldn't, because they are more likely to vote democrat by default of ignorance.

You don't think that people on welfare should recuse themselves from voting given the obvious conflict of interest. No, you wouldn't because liberal politicians get elected by giving things to people. The a$$ being lead by the carrot.

You don't think that one should have a decade of life experience before being able to vote? No, you don't, because naivete is vital to liberalism's political survival.
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (14) Dec 22, 2011
The fish study above has no morality reference. No right or wrong.
Would a majority support murdering millions of people in concentration camps if a vocal minority spoke out?
Or if a vocal minority spoke out on ending a tyrannical govt?

I notice that socialists seem to think of 'the people' as flocks, herds or schools of fish. Animals flock or school to protect the flock or the herd by sacrificing a few individuals. Non-voluntary sacrifice by socialists seems to quite acceptable to them..
Anti-socialists value the individual and make use of the group to protect and nurture individuals.
Noumenon
3 / 5 (98) Dec 22, 2011
You're angry someone called you out on some horribly racist BS you said. The most recent example would be your reinstatement of poll tests via the repeal of the Voting Rights Act. You, admittedly, did not say you wanted to repeal the Voting Rights Act, but hey, that's a must if you want poll tests.

You're a pitiful racist that is mad you got called out on it. - FrankHerbert


Again, I never said anything about blacks, YOU DID.

You and your idiotic leftist ilk, implied that blacks can't pass the voting test, not people who want educated votes.

Whenever someone wants to increase standards of some test whether it be in public schools or for the recent firemen test,... the TRUE RACISTS, come out of the wood work, and imply this is discriminatory against blacks and other minorities,... as if these people are intrinsically incapable of higher standards.

This is another reason I hate liberals, they're unserious about everything, and use racism as a political weapon. Sickening people
FrankHerbert
2.9 / 5 (102) Dec 22, 2011
You and your idiotic leftist ilk, implied that blacks can't pass the voting test, not people who want educated votes.


Keep denying history, or are you REALLY that ignorant? Come on, I'm giving you credit by not claiming you are to stupid to realize what you implicated.

Whenever someone wants to increase standards of some test whether it be in public schools or for the recent firemen test,... the TRUE RACISTS, come out of the wood work, and imply this is discriminatory against blacks and other minorities


LMAO so poll tests are just another standardized test and not systemic racism? You are being so intellectually dishonest here. YOU KNOW BETTER.

That fact that you are trying to turn that around on me to make me sound racist (f**king absurd) should be a clue to people as to my honesty with regards to our PMs.

You are obviously smart, have studied history, and know the purpose of poll tests. YOU PROPOSED IT. Reap the consequences @sshole.

Racist.
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (14) Dec 22, 2011
Everyone in the USA has to have some type of ID or can easily get govt ID.
Why are 'liberals' opposed to voters showing ID to vote?

A picture ID is required in Mexico to vote. Is Mexico racist?
FrankHerbert
2.9 / 5 (103) Dec 22, 2011
I didn't say ID was racist. It's unnecessary as voter fraud is virtually non-existent. However, I'm not really surprised Marjon is demanding people "produce their papers". Emulate the enemy and all that jazz (Hofstadter, 1964).

A far more pressing problem are GOP flyers sent to poor urban areas telling them the wrong day to vote, or that they'll be arrested at the polls if they have any outstanding legal problems. That's racist. It's also GOP policy.

Does Mexico have poll tests Marjon? Do you understand the history of poll tests Marjon? I know Noumnenon does, which is why he is a bona fide racist. So are you a racist or just ignorant? Or... maybe, just maybe, you don't support poll tests?
Noumenon
2.9 / 5 (100) Dec 22, 2011
LMAO so poll tests are just another standardized test and not systemic racism?


How is standardized tests in general, racists, if not for the implication that blacks are intrinsically inferior? The people making the political charge are the racists because inferiority is implicit in their charge.

To lower the bar, or not raise the bar, because of supposed "discrimination", IS ITSELF RACIST, because it presumes blacks are inferior!!

Those, like me who want to see only intellectually invested people vote, given its importance. This means everyone. The tests would be the same for everyone, so tell me how that is discriminatory in your mind.
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (14) Dec 22, 2011
repeal the Voting Rights Act, but hey, that's a must if you want poll tests.

Why does the federal govt care if it enforces its laws?
The federal govt fails to enforce immigration laws and actively prevent states from enforcing such laws.
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (14) Dec 22, 2011
It's unnecessary as voter fraud is virtually non-existent.

Not in 'liberal' districts. That is the only way 'liberals' can win.
N is taking about standardized tests: GRE, SAT, etc.

AZ imposed a voter ID law. Why were the 'liberals' so opposed? The excuse 'it was not needed' was not used and if you choose to use that reason to oppose laws, there are thousands of laws that are not needed.
FrankHerbert
2.9 / 5 (104) Dec 22, 2011
I never said standardized tests are racist. YOU, Noumenon, are trying to conflate poll tests with standardized tests because they both contain the word test. Makes it easy, doesn't it?

Poll tests are racist. You don't get to dispute this. It's settled history. Poll tests are part of the Jim Crow laws. Are you going to claim the Jim Crow laws were not racist?

Blacks were still elected to local offices in the 1880s, but the establishment Democrats were passing laws to make voter registration and electoral rules more restrictive, with the result that political participation by most blacks and many poor whites began to decrease. Between 1890 and 1910, ten of the eleven former Confederate states, starting with Mississippi, passed new constitutions or amendments that effectively disfranchised most blacks and tens of thousands of poor whites through a combination of poll taxes, LITERACY AND COMPREHENSION TESTS, and residency and record-keeping requirements.

Wikipedia on Jim Crow laws
FrankHerbert
2.9 / 5 (102) Dec 22, 2011
Also before you latch on to the fact that Democrats (yes Democrats) instituted these laws in a sad attempt to change the subject, the Democrats generations later also repealed these laws. This action by the Democrats cost them a great many voters which then switched to the GOP and are part of it to this day.

The South is Solid whether it is Democratic or Republican. Realigned elections can really change the landscape.

http://en.wikiped...id_south
Beginning in about 1948, the national Democratic Party's support of the civil rights movement significantly reduced Southern support for the Democratic Party and allowed the Republican Party to make gains in the South by way of its "Southern strategy". Today, the South is considered a stronghold of the Republican Party at all levels above the local level, and even there Republicans have made generally increasing inroads.


Noumenon
2.9 / 5 (100) Dec 22, 2011
This is not a historical argument, as I never said I was against the historical enactment of such laws. I speaking now, in order to characterize the democrat voters that is all.

YOU are the first one who used the term "racist" toward me because I mentioned voter literacy test.

This means, YOU are implying that blacks are less capable of passing those tests. YOU mentioned blacks, NOT I.

ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (15) Dec 22, 2011
"Today, these same 3000 newly registered voters as a group had papers dropped off at the Yuma Recorders office requesting to be signed up for the permanent early voters list which means the ballots will be mailed early, with no accountability.

The Yuma Recorders office is checking the voter registration forms and have found that already more than 65% of them are invalid due to the registrant not being a citizen, wrong/invalid address, false signature, etc. Mi Familia Vota is a wholly-owned SEIU sub-organization. It is just as non-partisan as ACORN was before documented fraudulent behaviors finally killed it."
http://biggovernm...of-seiu/
"Dems Plead Guilty to Felony Charges in Voter Fraud Scandal in Troy, New York"
http://foxnewsins...ew-york/
Voter fraud does not exist?
FrankHerbert
2.9 / 5 (103) Dec 22, 2011
Okay, so if you say you want to institute a holocaust "against poor people" and I point out that is racist because predominantly minorities would be sent to such camps that would mean I'm racist, right?

That's your logic here.

Historically the holocaust was pretty racist. So if we instituted one now it wouldn't be because it'd be based on economics and not race?

I called you a racist because you clearly are one. You've sent me PMs with racial slurs in them and now you are calling for the institution of poll tests.

Poll tests ARE racist. I am NOT racist for stating a fact.

You are however DISHONEST and RACIST for trying to conflate a historically settled argument with whatever banal crap comes into your head.

Poll tests are racist and Noumenon supports their re-institution; therefore he is a racist. I am not a racist for pointing out YOUR support of racist laws.

What's that about those who don't learn history are doomed to repeat it? You are following that path willingly. Racist.
Noumenon
2.9 / 5 (100) Dec 22, 2011
I called you a racist because you clearly are one. You've sent me PMs with racial slurs in them and now you are calling for the institution of poll tests.


Outright lie, from a pathetic internet troll.

This tells me everything I need to know about your character. How old are you? This is how an adult acts?

As I said in the other thread, I will provide the moderators my password, so they can read all of my PM correspondence, and then ban the slanderer (FrankHerbert). That is an easy way of settling this.
FrankHerbert
2.9 / 5 (104) Dec 22, 2011
Also, Noumenon was the first to mention "blacks". <--- That is actually the first instance of "blacks" that appears in any of my posts in this topic that is not a direct quote of Noumenon.

I said poll tests are racist. I didn't say blacks couldn't pass poll tests. To quote Pirouette: Noumeneon "IS MISQUOTING ME WHY DON'T YOU LEARN SOME COMPREHENSION YOU FARTHEAD."

Historically poll tests were racist. The burden of proof is upon you to describe how the poll tests you support would not be racist.

Good luck, racist.

This tells me everything I need to know about your character. How old are you? And you lie like a child?

As I said in the other thread, I will provide the moderators my password, so they can read all of my PM correspondence, and then ban the slanderer.


You know they won't as I've asked them to do the same with regards to you. This is about as honest as "If I'm lying, God strike me down now!"

It's not going to happen. You sent me racist PMs.

You are a racist.
Noumenon
2.9 / 5 (99) Dec 22, 2011
Well, I will send them a link to the thread, and we'll try again. How about that.

You obviously have a reading comprehension issue.
FrankHerbert
2.9 / 5 (103) Dec 22, 2011
[Noumenon mode]
I know if we had a holocaust against poor dumb people we wouldn't ever have to worry about a Democrat elected again.
[/Noumenon]

Hey that's racist buddy.

[Noumenon]
HAHAHA @SSHOLE! YOU'RE RACIST BECAUSE YOU THINK BLACK PEOPLE WOULD BE WEEDED OUT IN A HOLOCAUST! I NEVER SAID THAT!
[/Noumenon]

Replace "poll test" with "holocaust" and ANYONE tell me if you can repeat Noumenon's argument with a straight face. Marjon maybe. Anyone else?

Well, I will send them a link to the thread, and we'll try again. How about that.


And you know they won't give a damn. They didn't when I complained about you. What an empty, dishonest threat.
Noumenon
3 / 5 (100) Dec 22, 2011
The logical contortions that you must go through are rather disturbing.

I don't understand what your saying with the holocaust thing; Are you saying blacks are poor and dumb? An analogy is not required here guy.

I made clear above what the test would be ; "informed about both sides of the political issues, basic history, government". i.e. things related to voting.

I don't have a racist bone in my body, and that's the truth. I do hate liars though.
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (15) Dec 22, 2011
South is a stronghold for Republicans?
Is that why the AL legislature has a Republican majority for the first time in over 100 years?
FrankHerbert
2.9 / 5 (104) Dec 22, 2011
I made clear above what the test would be ; "informed about both sides of the political issues, basic history, government". i.e. things related to voting.


LMAO so who decides this? The Texas school board?

So what would stop "Is the US a Christian nation?" from being on one of these tests?

How about banal information about conservative economists?

Basic history... which you seem to have a poor understanding of.

What history questions would you ask?

I don't understand what your saying with the holocaust thing; Are you saying blacks are poor and dumb? An analogy is not required here guy.

No, but obviously hundreds of years of systemic racism from @ssholes like you have made it quite difficult for these people to succeed in a system that is designed to prevent them from succeeding. Poll tests are part of such a system.

I don't have a racist bone in my body, and that's the truth. I do hate liars though.

You are a racist and a liar. Self-loath much?
Noumenon
2.9 / 5 (100) Dec 22, 2011
Don't worry frank, it was just a thought experiment, to design a means of preventing another liberal from ever being elected again. Seems it wouldn't be that hard, just three simple steps. Heck I would even make the test optional for blacks if that would sooth you. Same results.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (17) Dec 22, 2011
If anyone can't pass a basic reading test, what does that say about the quality of their 'free' govt education by 'liberal', union teachers?
FrankHerbert
2.9 / 5 (104) Dec 22, 2011
Don't worry frank, it was just a thought experiment, to design a means of preventing another liberal from ever being elected again. Seems it wouldn't be that hard, just three simple steps. Heck I would even make the test optional for blacks if that would sooth you. Same results.


Racism is the answer to liberalism you say? Nice...

Heck I would even make the test optional for blacks if that would sooth you.


You mentioned "blacks" not me. Anyone can press control-f and search for the term "blacks" in this topic if they are doubtful.
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (16) Dec 22, 2011
'Progressive' TR, socialist:
"I stand for the adequate control, the real control, of all big business, and especially of all monopolistic big business where it proves unwise or impossible to break up the monopoly. "
http://teachingam...ent=1199
Noumenon
3 / 5 (98) Dec 22, 2011
Don't worry frank, it was just a thought experiment, to design a means of preventing another liberal from ever being elected again. Seems it wouldn't be that hard, just three simple steps. Heck I would even make the test optional for blacks if that would sooth you. Same results.


Racism is the answer to liberalism you say? Nice...

Heck I would even make the test optional for blacks if that would sooth you.


You mentioned "blacks" not me. Anyone can press control-f and search for the term "blacks" in this topic if they are doubtful.


Except sear for "African Americans". You were the one making the racism charge, dingus.
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (15) Dec 22, 2011
Frankie:


Does anyone here actually oppose private property? I know I don't.

I'm progressive, not 'progressive'. I'm also a liberal. I'm not a communist.

Which is true Frankie? According the 'progressive' Teddy Roosevelt, 'progressives' stand for govt control of private property.
Or, what you are really saying is the if there were NO private property, there would be nothing for the govt to control as it is private property that creates the real wealth, not the govt.?
deepsand
3.6 / 5 (20) Dec 22, 2011
Sandy, add some rationale to your assertion the private property is immoral. That somehow you don't own yourself.

Given that you have failed to substantiate your assertion re. the supremacy of "property rights," I am under no obligation to do more.
deepsand
3.6 / 5 (20) Dec 22, 2011
The issue was private property rights but no one wants to engage in any discussion.
I ask sandy to define his terms but he refuses. Ergo he does not want to have a discussion.

You are not going to get a free pass here.

Either defend your position or STFU.
deepsand
3.6 / 5 (20) Dec 22, 2011
The statistics of voter fraud are like that of any other fraud in society, ...unlikely in general. That is a meaningless retort using liberal mush headed logic.

A meaningless retort using mush headed "conservative logic."

Produce statistics showing that voter fraud is problematic or resign.

You still have to respect the act of voting such that you take measures to prevent possible fraud.

You do not have to take onerous steps to defend against a virtually non-existent problem.

You're just parroting Koch Bros. clap-trap.

They and their ilk are ON THE RECORD as stating that such steps should be undertaken for the express purpose of suppressing the vote of those who typically do not support Republicans.
deepsand
3.6 / 5 (20) Dec 22, 2011
Everyone in the USA has to have some type of ID or can easily get govt ID.

Categorically FALSE.
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (14) Dec 22, 2011
Sandy, add some rationale to your assertion the private property is immoral. That somehow you don't own yourself.

Given that you have failed to substantiate your assertion re. the supremacy of "property rights," I am under no obligation to do more.

I have substantiated the morality of private property rights. Do you own yourself? If you don't, who does? If someone owns you, is owning people moral?

What is false, easily acquiring a legal ID or everyone must have some form of ID?
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (14) Dec 22, 2011
Produce statistics showing that voter fraud is problematic or resign.

So Sandy acknowledges the existence of voter fraud but does not believe such criminal activity is problem. Then why do so many 'liberals' engage in voter fraud if it is a waste of time and effort?
And Frankie claims voter fraud does not exist.

the supremacy of "property rights,"

What does this mean?
Supremacy of property rights to NOT having property rights? So Sandy believes no individual has a right to own any property, including his person and his labor?
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (14) Dec 22, 2011
Data which supports the supremacy of property rights.:

Countries that score >=90:
New Zealand, Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Hong Kong, Iceland, Luxembourg, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland, Netherlands.
Countries that score 10:
Bolivia, Cuba, DR Congo, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, R. Congo, Sierra Leone, Turkmenistan
http://www.herita.../explore
deepsand
3.6 / 5 (20) Dec 22, 2011
I have substantiated the morality of private property rights. Do you own yourself? If you don't, who does? If someone owns you, is owning people moral?
That's another steaming pile.

You've done no more than make a naked claim, that of "property rights" superseding all.

What is false, easily acquiring a legal ID or everyone must have some form of ID?

Both. Your claims; yours to substantiate.
deepsand
3.5 / 5 (21) Dec 22, 2011
So Sandy acknowledges the existence of voter fraud but does not believe such criminal activity is problem.

Deliberately misrepresentative and evasive.

Then why do so many 'liberals' engage in voter fraud ...

Another naked claim.

So Sandy believes no individual has a right to own any property, including his person and his labor?

Another deliberate misrepresentation.

You'd best go back to sophist's school, as you're piss poor at it.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (15) Dec 22, 2011
"The latest voter-fraud convictions in Troy, N.Y., must be very inconvenient to the public-affairs propagandists over at the DNC and the NAACP, as well as liberal media outlets like the New York Times. It just ruins their constant refrain that there is no voter fraud in the United States. "
"one of the Democratic operatives who pled guilty, Anthony DeFiglio, told New York State police investigators that faking absentee ballots was a commonplace and accepted practice in political circles, all intended to swing an election. And whose votes do they steal? DeFiglio was very plain about that: The people who are targeted live in low-income housing, and there is a sense that they are a lot less likely to ask any questions.
http://www.nation...pakovsky
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (15) Dec 22, 2011
"That is exactly what former Alabama congressman Artur Davis said recently when he admitted that he was wrong to oppose voter-ID requirements. Davis says the most aggressive voter suppression is the wholesale manufacture of ballots, at the polls and absentee, in parts of the Black Belt of Alabama, which is an area of very poor black communities. These are the very areas where the NAACP claims voter fraud does not happen. The NAACP opposes all reasonable measures to safeguard the voting process for its own constituents, even going to the extent of defending vote stealers, as the NAACP did in Greene County, Ala., in the mid-1990s. Small wonder one of its local officials was recently sentenced to five years in prison for voter fraud in Tunica County, Mississippi."
http://www.nation...pakovsky
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (17) Dec 22, 2011
"former Alabama Democratic Rep. Artur Davis told The Daily Caller that anti-fraud measures are needed to protect African-Americans from corrupt political bosses many of them African-Americans themselves who run Democratic Party machines in the South."
http://dailycalle...d-video/
"As of August 10th, 2011, 113 individuals are now known to have been convicted for voter fraud
committed in 2008. We believe this is the highest number of voter fraud convictions obtained in any
state for a single election cycle since 1936. In fact, according to a 2006 Justice Department report, there
have been more convictions for voter fraud in Minnesota from just the 2008 election than the DOJ was
able to prosecute over a five year span, nationwide."
http://www.electi...ions.pdf
This was the only way MN could elect a bad comedian, fraud.
deepsand
3.6 / 5 (20) Dec 22, 2011
Trotting out a litany of Koch Bros. puppets and carefully winnowed factoids just won't cut it.

If you're truly incensed about election fraud, you should be livid re. the SCOTUS having fraudulently handed the Presidency to Dubbya, the consequences of which generations to come, both at home and abroad, will continue to pay for.

ryggesogn2
2.6 / 5 (15) Dec 22, 2011
Sandy, that is the best you can do?
'Liberalism' must be a mental disorder.
deepsand
3.6 / 5 (20) Dec 23, 2011
No, I can do much better; but, it's good enough for doing battle with the lightly armed. :D
ryggesogn2
1.9 / 5 (14) Dec 23, 2011
No, I can do much better; but, it's good enough for doing battle with the lightly armed. :D

This site is based upon science. In science, one must provide data to support their theory.
You have provided none, therefore your statements and theories are specious.

But what can anyone expect from someone suffering from Koch/Bush derangement syndrome.
ryggesogn2
1.9 / 5 (14) Dec 23, 2011
"Kochs new royalty-free thermal cracking process, by producing higher yields of refined gasoline from crude oil and reducing down time, helped smaller companies to better compete with their larger, more entrenched, and better-capitalized rivals. The latter lost no time in attacking Koch, filing no less than 44 lawsuits against Winkler-Koch and all its customers in a contemptible campaign to force the company out of business. That Winkler-Koch won every lawsuit but one (and that verdict was later overturned when it was discovered that the judge had been bribed) is evidence enough that the full-frontal legal assault on the upstart Koch was inspired by no higher motives than envy and greed. We must suppose that, as a result of the campaign to sue him out of the refining business, Fred Koch must have begun to understand that the modern American business sector was not nearly as free-market as it was cracked up to be."
http://thenewamer...an-again
ryggesogn2
1.9 / 5 (14) Dec 23, 2011
"One of the wealthiest men in America, Koch (pronounced coke) gives away half his income each year. I believe in being very charitable, and since I got so much benefit from MIT, I thought it was important for me to repay the favor."
"Fred C. Koch, MIT class of 22, founded the firm in 1925. Fred tried hard to teach his children good values; he often said he didnt want his four sons to grow up to become country club bums."
"At 10, David did yard work, worked on the family farm, and shined shoes for 20 cents an hour. Later, he worked in the familys manufacturing factory for $1.15 an hour. Once he got a 10-cent raise. Boy, I was on top of the world, says Koch who never got an allowance.

My father wanted us to feel the sting of not having money. He thought we would appreciate it more if we had to earn it."
http://spectrum.m...of-life/
Another reason for the 'progressives' to hate the Koch's. They don't fit their profile.
deepsand
3.5 / 5 (19) Dec 23, 2011
This site is based upon science. In science, one must provide data to support their theory.


You have provided none, therefore your statements and theories are specious
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (16) Dec 23, 2011
This site is based upon science. In science, one must provide data to support their theory.


You have provided none, therefore your statements and theories are specious

So YOU say.
deepsand
3.5 / 5 (19) Dec 24, 2011
As I said, good enough for dealing with the only lightly armed.
Ethelred
3.5 / 5 (13) Dec 24, 2011
This is another reason I hate liberals, they're unserious about everything, and use racism as a political weapon. Sickening people


I wish to apologize to anyone that saw my recent post where I said Noumenen was often full of shit but it wasn't batshit. After seeing this thread and more on the other I find I was completely wrong.

Noumenen is completely bathshit insane and tells the usual RightWingNutRetainerClip lies about anyone less Radical than he is. Neither Marjon, Noumenen, nor NotEverGoingToThinkAtAll are even remotely conservative.

They are BatShit insane lying Radicals that are as out of touch with reality as those many lunatic Russians that yearn for the return of Stalinism. Communists and the Radical Wrong have one thing very much in common. Their political and economic ideas are based on Aliens not actual human beings.

I am disgusted with the lot of you.

Ethelred
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (16) Dec 24, 2011
Ethel lives up to 'liberal' standards.
Callippo
2.3 / 5 (3) Dec 24, 2011
If the unknowing and censorship of information is the basis of democracy, then the North Korea regime represents a rock steady democracy... We can just ask, who ordered and payed such a research?
deepsand
3.5 / 5 (19) Dec 24, 2011
Ethel lives up to 'liberal' standards.

And Marjon continues to confirm Red's appraisal by continuing to resort to subjective stereotypical rejoinders in lieu of anything materially relevant and substantive.

Wouldn't you feel better hanging out with Potty Mouth than here?

ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (19) Dec 25, 2011
And Sandy follows the example of Ethel with nothing relative or substantive.
Which is the typical response to an indefensible, irrational 'liberal' position.
Like the 'occupiers', the 'liberals' here prefer to waste words trying to shout down, to attack their opposition instead of engaging in any substantive discussion.
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (17) Dec 25, 2011
Data:
"Contrary to what many partisans of former Vice President Al Gore have charged, the United States Supreme Court did not award an election to Mr. Bush that otherwise would have been won by Mr. Gore. A close examination of the ballots found that Mr. Bush would have retained a slender margin over Mr. Gore if the Florida court's order to recount more than 43,000 ballots had not been reversed by the United States Supreme Court. "
http://www.nytime...OTE.html
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (17) Dec 25, 2011
"More than 113,000 voters cast ballots for two or more presidential candidates. Of those, 75,000 chose Mr. Gore and a minor candidate; 29,000 chose Mr. Bush and a minor candidate. Because there was no clear indication of what the voters intended, those numbers were not included in the consortium's final tabulations. "
What does this say about the intelligence of FL 'liberal' voters? They are not smart enough to know to only vote for one candidate and if they make a mistake, to get a new ballot, or, in other words, follow directions.
Noumenon
2.9 / 5 (101) Dec 25, 2011
I wish to apologize to anyone that saw my recent post where I said Noumenen was often full of shit but it wasn't batshit. [...]...I was completely wrong. - Ehelred


Like wise, I was wrong for saying Ethelred is honest, as obviously he is a hypocrite.

But the KKK is a even more racist organization and is coddled these days by Right Wingers and in the past by Dixiecrats. - Ethelred


And these days the Republicans have taken over that sort of position. The KKK is now Republican. - Ethelred


I live in Anaheim California, the land of Disney and RightWingNuts - Ethelred


http://www.physor...red.html

Then there were all those people that got convicted for corruption. Mostly by Republicans. - Ethelred


Thundering Fascist RightWingNuts hire lawyers to beat employees into submission. - Ethelred


http://www.physor...oor.html
Noumenon
3 / 5 (100) Dec 25, 2011
This is another reason I hate liberals, they're unserious about everything, and use racism as a political weapon. Sickening people - Noumenon


I wish to apologize to anyone that saw my recent post where I said Noumenen was often full of shit but it wasn't batshit. After seeing this thread and more on the other I find I was completely wrong. - Ethelred

Noumenen is completely bathshit insane and tells the usual RightWingNutRetainerClip lies,... - Ethelred


"the usual RightWingNutRetainerClip lies",.. and you're scolding me for generalizing about liberals??!! Remarkable. You're wearing hypocritical coloured lenses, and are not even aware of it.

I admit that I should not have generalized that way. I should have said SOME liberals use racism. I know that many liberals are honest and care about the future of the country, even though I can't agree with their ideology.
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (16) Dec 25, 2011
I know that many liberals are honest and care about the future of the country,

How can they care when their policies are destroying the country?
Are these 'liberals' honestly trying to destroy the USA or are they honestly too ignorant to understand what they do are destructive?
Either way they must be vigorously opposed.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (16) Dec 25, 2011
"America has a culture problem, and I think the cause of that problem is Big Government. Entitlement programs have taken away the sense of personal responsibility that Americans used to have. Now, Americans dont worry about the future because they think that the government has their backs. Americans have lost the ability to govern themselves."
"The Founders formed a limited government to protect these rights.

Then came Franklin Delano Roosevelt. FDR promoted class warfare and his New Deal established entitlement programs, such as Social Security, that changed the face of America.

Read more: http://dailycalle...ha7VZdnZ
Noumenon
3 / 5 (99) Dec 25, 2011
It's just a matter of perspective. When they sincerely believe in government redistribution of wealth and government imposed "fairness", they are being honest in their ignorance of cause and effect.

But yes, many are dishonest and will never admit their entire mindset has failed in Europe, and everywhere it was attempted, and may still tank this country yet. Some others just continue to blame the "rich" and wall street,... and I believe they really think this.

"Whats happened is that weve allowed the vast majority of that cash to be concentrated in the hands of just a few people, and theyre not circulating that cash. Theyre sitting on the money,... Thats not theirs, thats a national resource, thats ours. We all have this we all benefit from this or we all suffer as a result of not having it." - Michael Moore.
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (14) Dec 25, 2011
Of course Michael Moron has donated all his wealth to the poor, or to the US govt?
Noumenon
3 / 5 (100) Dec 25, 2011
I doubt it. He is a anti-capitalist capitalist. He is probably not a good example. I see Obama being naive about the real world, and wishing to impose "fairness" onto free individuals, and sincerely believing his is doing good.

deepsand
3.4 / 5 (20) Dec 25, 2011
And Sandy follows the example of Ethel with nothing relative or substantive.
Which is the typical response to an indefensible, irrational 'liberal' position.
Like the 'occupiers', the 'liberals' here prefer to waste words trying to shout down, to attack their opposition instead of engaging in any substantive discussion.

This from a master sophist?

Try looking in the mirror.
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (14) Dec 25, 2011
"Democratic reaction to the news that Waste Connections, a $3.6-billion company and major Sacramento-area employer, is headed to Houston to seek a friendlier business climate tells other businesses all they need to know about the attitudes of those who run California's government."
"Steinberg claims to have worked on improving the state's business climate, but from what we see in Sacramento, Steinberg and the party he helps lead have been pushing hard mainly for additional regulations and much higher taxes. The California Democratic Party's attitude long has been that businesses are basically trying to rip off the public, and the source of all wealth and advancement can be found in the public sector, When businesses leave. Steinberg and Co. show little sympathy."
http://www.ocregi...ess.html
deepsand
3.5 / 5 (19) Dec 25, 2011
"Contrary to what many partisans of former Vice President Al Gore have charged, the United States Supreme Court did not award an election to Mr. Bush that otherwise would have been won by Mr. Gore. A close examination of the ballots found that Mr. Bush would have retained a slender margin over Mr. Gore if the Florida court's order to recount more than 43,000 ballots had not been reversed by the United States Supreme Court. "

Evades the issue re. the SCOTUS over-reaching its authority by usurping a matter reserved onto the States.

Seems that "conservatives" have no problem with "judicial activism" or "Implied Powers" when it serves their purposes.

Hypocrites.
camshaft
Dec 25, 2011
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
deepsand
3.5 / 5 (19) Dec 25, 2011
Well, Potty Mouth, if you bothered to study and understand the US Constitution, you would know that the Federal government, including the Judiciary, has LIMITED POWERS, a point harped on by so called "Conservatives" and "Strict Constructionists" whenever a Federal Court issues a ruling that is not to their liking.
Ethelred
3.3 / 5 (12) Dec 26, 2011
you're scolding me for generalizing about liberals??!! Remarkable. You're wearing hypocritical coloured lenses, and are not even aware of it
Remarkable that you don't see who I was talking about. I am NOT talking about actual conservatives, nor did I even come close to slandering everyone that disagrees with me as you did.

YOU are a RightWingNut at the very least. The apology doesn't change much as you have often acted as if everything left of Ronald Reagan is at least a Commie dupe. Which is the sort of crap that earns people the appellation RightWingNut and the remark I was replying to was exactly the sort that people that comes from Marjon, and AntiThinker. If you think they are conservatives you are sadly mistaken. They have earned the term RightWingNutRetainerClip. Indeed I invented it especially for them.

If you insist on acting like you are Beyond the Fringe of the Right Wing I am going to treat you as a member of those Right Wingers that are Beyond the Fringe.

Ethelred
Ethelred
3.1 / 5 (12) Dec 26, 2011
I was quite specific about who I was referring to. There was no hypocrisy in any of that stuff you quoted. It is not my fault that you can no longer comprehend the difference between a general remark like you made and very specific ones as those were.

If you don't like my pointing out that you are a RightWingNutRetainerClip
STOP BEING ONE.

Then there were all those people that got convicted for corruption. Mostly by Republicans. - Ethelred
Go ahead show where that was false. Show how a completely true statement is hypocritical.

And these days the Republicans have taken over that sort of position. The KKK is now Republican. - Ethelred
Same for that one. I does NOT say Republicans are the KKK. It says, correctly, the KKK members are now in the Republican Party.

All of those statement were both correct and non hypocritical. If you don't like them perhaps you should change the way you think.

Ethelred
Callippo
2 / 5 (4) Dec 26, 2011
You are like little kids. The republicans and democrats are two dual approaches to society organization, similar to duality of energy and matter, waves and particles, transverse and longitudinal waves, etc. None of them is better than the another, they both have their strengths and weakness. It's true, the deterministic approach of contemporary science inclines to the conservative ideas, but the whole science is itself based on mandatory fees and liberal plurality of ideas.

The people should simply learn, the careful balance of existing approaches is what determines the optimal path for future evolution of society, not the fight for idealistic extremes of them. It just requires higher level of understanding of neighboring reality.
Callippo
2.3 / 5 (3) Dec 26, 2011
I'm not so stupid and I do realize, the competition of ideas is intrinsic aspect of the above duality - something like the competition of living species. But if we already know about evolutionary advantage of compromises, why to fight mutually while seeking the arguments for each of extreme ideas separately? Such fight sometimes leads to compromises when the opponents get exhausted - but more often it makes the whole discussion unstable, because the proponents of different ideas tend to quench in their extreme stances even more.

If we know about it already, why not to compete in finding of the optimal compromise between extremes instead? It's positive approach, not the just plain confrontation, which is principally based on the destruction of the opponent. Such approach would just require to adopt the philosophy of equilibrium as an introductory paradigm. The extreme stances aren't important here, their equilibrium is.
Callippo
1 / 5 (3) Dec 26, 2011
This systematically balanced approach can even have it's good physical meaning, because in observable reality all objects are actually gauge bosons, mediating forces between another bosons in recursive way. When the density of environment increases, new and new generations of gauge bosons (which are playing the role of intersubjectivelly advantageous compromises) emerge gradually. Each level of solution serves here as an ideal compromise of all neighbouring ideas.

http://www.aether...roup.gif

Actually, on the same approach the theory of Lie gauge groups in physics is based. This approach is widely used in context of heterotic string theory or E8 theory of Lissy Garrett. The knowledge of physics can therefore learn us about optimal way of seeking of compromises in social questions (and vice-versa, instead). You should just understand, what their math actually means and how it works, well, physically.
Callippo
1 / 5 (3) Dec 26, 2011
We can even understand the way, in which such a gauge bosons emerge, because it's not any mystery. Every wave mediating the force between pair of subjects makes the space-time undulating and deformed in the same way, like the water surface. The space-time deformed slows down the another waves, which are spreading through this place, so it behaves like less or more dense place here, i.e. like the massive particle, i.e. like the boson.

In context of sociology this synergy means, every advantageous compromise becomes a new independent paradigm which lives it's own life in similar way, like the string theory (a compromise of QM and GR) or money (a compromise of mass and energy exchange) or internet protocols (a HTML based web above the TCP and IP socket layers) etc. Now we experience the establishing of political parties, the main purpose of which is to exploit the synergy of conservative and liberal approaches for solution of social questions in knowledgeable way.
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (14) Dec 26, 2011
Seems that "conservatives" have no problem with "judicial activism" or "Implied Powers" when it serves their purposes.

'Liberals' have set the example.
If you don't like it, change the Constitution, but 'liberals' need 'liberal' courts to impose the agenda they can't get approved by voters.

None of them is better than the another,

One system accepts the axiom that individual human beings have unalienable, inherent right to life, liberty, property and opportunity. That govt is instituted by humans to protect these rights.
The other system does not.
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (13) Dec 26, 2011
"The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States unless and until the state legislature chooses a statewide election as the means to implement its power to appoint members of the Electoral College. "
The recount mechanisms implemented in response to the decisions of the Florida Supreme Court do not satisfy the minimum requirement for non-arbitrary treatment of voters necessary to secure the fundamental right. Floridas basic command for the count of legally cast votes is to consider the intent of the voter. Gore v. Harris, ___ So. 2d, at ___ (slip op., at 39). This is unobjectionable as an abstract proposition and a starting principle. The problem inheres in the absence of specific standards to ensure its equal application. The formulation of uniform rules to determine intent based on these recurring circumstances is practicable and, we conclude, necessary."
http://www.law.co...ZPC.html
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (12) Dec 26, 2011
"A monitor in Miami-Dade County testified at trial that he observed that three members of the county canvassing board applied different standards in defining a legal vote."
"And testimony at trial also revealed that at least one county changed its evaluative standards during the counting process."
"When a court orders a statewide remedy, there must be at least some assurance that the rudimentary requirements of equal treatment and fundamental fairness are satisfied."
" The judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion."
http://www.law.co...ZPC.html
"In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. " US Constitution.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (12) Dec 26, 2011
The other system:
"The areas deputy health chief said: Why did they have to hire so many people to have babies for them? Did they think they had the right to bear children just because they were rich?

Read more: http://www.dailym...hefF9xfH
"
China and other socialist states do not acknowledge an individual right to life, liberty, property and opportunity.
deepsand
3.6 / 5 (17) Dec 26, 2011
'Liberals' have set the example.
If you don't like it, change the Constitution, but 'liberals' need 'liberal' courts to impose the agenda they can't get approved by voters.

Continues to evade the fact that so-called "Strict Constructionists" are quite willing and eager to employ "Implied Powers" when it suits them.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (11) Dec 26, 2011
What implied power? The SCOTUS has original jurisdiction, as STATED, not implied, in the Constitution.
It was the FL 'supreme' court that attempted to enforce an arbitrary standard demanding individuals must somehow divine the intent of voters too stupid to follow instructions.
And, of course, a recount funded by 'liberal' newspapers did confirm the original certification that Bush won a majority in FL.
deepsand
3.6 / 5 (17) Dec 26, 2011
The Federal Judiciary has LIMITED POWERS, just as do the Executive and Legislative branches. If you argue otherwise, then you also argue that all of the railings against "judicial activism" are without merit; and, that the 10th Amendment is toothless.
deepsand
3.5 / 5 (16) Dec 26, 2011
The Federal Judiciary has LIMITED POWERS, just as do the Executive and Legislative branches. If you argue otherwise, then you also argue that all of the railings against "judicial activism" are without merit; and, that the 10th Amendment is toothless.