# 1 in 100 adults in the US are in jail



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 28, 2008)

Excerpt from NYTimes.com http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/us/28 ... on.html?hp


By ADAM LIPTAK
Published: February 28, 2008


For the first time in the nation’s history, more than one in 100 American adults is behind bars, according to a new report.


Nationwide, the prison population grew by 25,000 last year, bringing it to almost 1.6 million. Another 723,000 people are in local jails. The number of American adults is about 230 million, meaning that one in every 99.1 adults is behind bars.

Incarceration rates are even higher for some groups. One in 36 Hispanic adults is behind bars, based on Justice Department figures for 2006. One in 15 black adults is, too, as is one in nine black men between the ages of 20 and 34.

The report, from the Pew Center on the States, also found that only one in 355 white women between the ages of 35 and 39 is behind bars, but that one in 100 black women is.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 28, 2008)

1 in 9 black men between the ages of 20 and 34?!

Is it possible that something isn't working properly in this country?


----------



## aeneas (Feb 28, 2008)

I heard that ALL Black Hispanic republican gay women between the ages of 18 and 124 are behind bars... That is what I'd call a Police State!


----------



## JonFairhurst (Feb 28, 2008)

Can you say "broken drug policies?"

And since when is Condolezza behind bars???


----------



## Moonchilde (Feb 28, 2008)

Time to start putting to death some of the lifers and pedophiles to make room.


----------



## JB78 (Feb 28, 2008)

Moonchilde @ Thu Feb 28 said:


> Time to start putting to death some of the lifers and pedophiles to make room.



Yeah, that's the ticket!

:roll:


----------



## Moonchilde (Feb 28, 2008)

Flattered that you agree! :mrgreen:


----------



## PolarBear (Feb 28, 2008)

Whilst death penalty might be a good sentence for some, I cannot give ANY human(s) the right to finish another humans live. Evident or not!

One other thing, actually the main reason of my post, to stay more on topic - my red light always keeps flashing when I see those selective numbers... between 35 and 39 - what would it change if I said between 34 and 40 or between 36 and 38? My red light tells me it would make those numbers quoted less strikingly. What about young hispanic women? You only get to read what they want you to read into it...

Just my 2 cents,
PolarBear


----------



## dannthr (Feb 28, 2008)

okay, but there's still 70+ million kids who are our hope for the future!


----------



## David A (Feb 28, 2008)

Why such negativity? Theres a world of things to talk about regarding synthesizers, gear, DAWs and RAM, that would be far more beneficial.


----------



## Moonchilde (Feb 28, 2008)

So then start up some new topics to talk about that stuff. This is off topic.

Anyway, seriously, the death penalty would really help in a situation like this. Especially for people who don't deserve to live. 

PolarBear - people don't have to do the killing. Just stick the guy in a snake pit, and give him a knife to survive. Fighting chance...


----------



## Scott Rogers (Feb 28, 2008)

..........


----------



## Moonchilde (Feb 28, 2008)

Oh man, you called Bill Cosby a black American and not an African American. You're in for it now!


----------



## Fernando Warez (Feb 28, 2008)

JonFairhurst @ Thu Feb 28 said:


> Can you say "broken drug policies?"



Hey the system is great. Criminals make millions out of illegal drugs, and then put honest folks out of business by starting legitimate business. I personally find it really reassuring to know there are some very rich criminals out there don't you? 




> And since when is Condolezza behind bars???



:lol:


----------



## Hans Adamson (Feb 28, 2008)

Scott Rogers @ Thu Feb 28 said:


> *Disclaimer:* What follows is an unapologetic position.


Isn't it great that the U.S. is a democracy and Obama is on the go... 8)

1000,000 individual contributors to his campaign today!!!


----------



## Scott Rogers (Feb 28, 2008)

..........


----------



## David A (Feb 28, 2008)

I second that....

In all honesty, I dont think America is READY for a black president. I fear for that man's life if he is elected, as there are some very nasty types who would do everything they can to end his career, or perhaps his life. 

These types regularly spew their venom through American TV networks like Fox...


----------



## Fernando Warez (Feb 28, 2008)

I hear Obama is supported by wall street bankers and the media shows that. So he's gonna be fine. 

Hey, fuck news is great.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 28, 2008)

In my opinion there are several mile-long chasms in your logic, Scott, starting with your straw man ranting against liberals. And the idea that aiding the poor has lead to black fathers leaving their families (because that caused them to lose all feeling of responsibility?) is at best absurd. So the solution would be to let people suffer guiltlessly (I mean to be guiltless about letting them suffer)? And anyone who disagrees with that crazy idea is suffering from intellectual dishonesty?! Come on.

To me the strangest thing is the reaction. One out of every hundred American adults is in jail! It's not just young black men either - they just have the highest percentage behind bars.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 28, 2008)

To me, Moonchilde's comments shouldn't even be allowed on this forum. I see no way to make it pretty - that's simply racism.


----------



## Hans Adamson (Feb 28, 2008)

Scott Rogers @ Thu Feb 28 said:


> Hans Adamson said:
> 
> 
> > Scott Rogers said:
> ...


Scott,
I tried not engage you in argumenting since you said you preferred not. There is nothing in your post I agree with. You made your statement and expressed a wish not to be challenged with arguments back and forth. I think that was wise and I respect it.

GO Obama GO!!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 28, 2008)

By the way, I really hope everyone knows what Scott is attacking. It was the "Great Society" series of policies that brought in the most important civil right changes we have in the US - things like the Voting Rights Act that allowed black people to vote unconditionally (without having to prove they were literate). There were all kinds of urban outreach programs, Medicare was part of it, food stamps, investment in education, and on and on - it was not simply hand-outs to people who didn't work.

It's important to understand that in order to see why even though Scott is very articulate, his ideas are *so* far in opposition to everything I believe. And it's not like this was somehow the opposite extreme to slavery, it was a very real attempt to improve the lot of people in our society.

Some of it worked, some of it didn't, but the idea that the incarceration rate among young blacks proves that helping people doesn't work is beyond bizarre.


----------



## Moonchilde (Feb 28, 2008)

Nick Batzdorf @ February 28th 2008 said:


> To me, Moonchilde's comments shouldn't even be allowed on this forum. I see no way to make it pretty - that's simply racism.



How is it racist? Its a jab at politically correctness and how over abundant it is in this nation. Its a problem here that we have any kind of group insulted by the slightest thing and then once they bitch enough, anything considered politically incorrect is frowned upon. And you just proved it by your reaction. What was so racist about what I wrote? Was it the context? The words black american? Are you calling me a racist because I wrote black american vs african american in contextual usage? What are you so offended by?

You know what. I want to be called a European-American, even though I've never set foot there. White is derogatory and I find it insulting! I also don't want science taught in schools because it undermines my faith and the faith my children believe in!

:roll:


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 28, 2008)

"Anyway, seriously, the death penalty would really help in a situation like this. Especially for people who don't deserve to live."

That's flat out racist; your comment about African American and black is just stupid and immature.


----------



## Moonchilde (Feb 28, 2008)

Nick Batzdorf @ February 28th 2008 said:


> "Anyway, seriously, the death penalty would really help in a situation like this. Especially for people who don't deserve to live."
> 
> That's flat out racist; your comment about African American and black is just stupid and immature.



Oh christ, grow some thicker skin.

Did my statement about the death penalty include blacks? READ! Its right in front of you. In fact, I specified who I think deserves it. Lifers who've committed crimes and have no chance of living a life in normal society and sick pedophiles who can never be "cured" of their "disease."

I find your assumption that I was talking about strictly black people racist since you obviously think all black people are jailbird lifers and pedophiles.


----------



## rJames (Feb 28, 2008)

Scott Rogers @ Thu Feb 28 said:


> If you look at the background of every one of those 1 in 9 incarcerated black men, you will find common factors which are too prevalent to ignore. Nearly all of them came from dysfunctional communities and dysfunctional homes (a trend that began with "The Great Society" programs); broken families (in most cases having no father or strong male role model to speak of at all); alarming high school dropout rates..



Some people believe that these common factors had their roots in slavery. Although a plantation may very well have been a "functional community," slaves could not count on living in a nuclear family (of relatives). They had to depend on the community of slaves as "family". This may account in some small way for the "common factors" you mention and for the "group think" that you talk about with black leaders and Uncle Toms. 

Its not an excuse, it is a possible explanation. And I'm not so sure you could prove that black graduates of Harvard who got in with lower grades than some white kids will be a "cause" of inner city blight or cultural decline more than they will be part of a "cure" and impetus for cultural change.

While it is true that Bill Cosby and others are speaking up about lethal cultural cycles within the black community, I'm not so sure he is against all programs that might help to educate or to change the environment of those stuck within generational malaise.

"Liberal" cartoonists do not speak for all liberals any more than Ann Coulter speaks for all conservatives.

So, lets get back into the center where we all belong and admit that 1 in 9 young black men in jail is bad for all of us. And, as a society, we should look for a cure. (even IF the great society was a failure)


----------



## synthetic (Feb 28, 2008)

So "start killing people to make more room in the jails" is your solution? They tried this somewhere else in the 1940s and people kinda freaked. 

Most of the people in there are from drug crimes. That's the real problem we should be looking at.


----------



## Scott Rogers (Feb 28, 2008)

..........


----------



## Scott Rogers (Feb 28, 2008)

Hans Adamson said:


> I tried not engage you in argumenting since you said you preferred not. There is nothing in your post I agree with. You made your statement and expressed a wish not to be challenged with arguments back and forth. I think that was wise and I respect it.
> 
> GO Obama GO!!



Hans, I clearly said that if you disagree, then go ahead and make your argument. I was also trying to indicate that if you do make an argument, I'm not ignoring you out of disrespect, but that I am literally out my door and headed to the 101 this afternoon and I'm not going to be around much longer to reply to anything. Just say what you want to say, so long as it constitutes an actual argument. That, I can respect, and it'll be a lot more palatable than the hell on earth I am likely to encounter once I hit the highway.
______________________________


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 28, 2008)

"So, lets get back into the center where we all belong and admit that 1 in 9 young black men in jail is bad for all of us."

And 1 out of every 100 adults in general!


----------



## Moonchilde (Feb 28, 2008)

synthetic @ February 28th 2008 said:


> So "start killing people to make more room in the jails" is your solution? They tried this somewhere else in the 1940s and people kinda freaked.
> 
> Most of the people in there are from drug crimes. That's the real problem we should be looking at.



It was a joke and a sarcastic half truth. I really do believe some folks in prison really do deserve the death penalty, but the making room for more people was a just the joke part of it.

I know most people serving jail time are in for minor drug offenses. I find that ridiculous and a waste of tax money. Most of them are for mariujuana charges, and that little issue could be completely avoided if they just treated it like alcohol and let people smoke up all they want.

Maybe next time I'll put up my neon blinking sarcasm lights when I make light of a situation.


----------



## José Herring (Feb 28, 2008)

Having a 6 year old kid I've done some research on pedophiles. A) They can't be rehabbed under the current system. Which quite frankly prisons are just universities for criminal behavior. And, B) They're mostly white. So....Kill 'em. :twisted: j/k

In all seriousness though this is a big problem. I looked at the numbers and incarceration rates have been increasing while crime rates are decreasing. This is the bandaid solution of the conservative thinking. The conservative "tough on crime" reasoning goes like this: 1) Put more funding into police and jails 2) take away funding from schools and education 3) Rigorously enforce the death penalty.

Now our future is in jeapardy. There's no way we can continue to feed and house a huge prison population so we're faced with two alternatives 1) Genocide or 2) release the now hardened criminals back into society.

And, believe me brothers I'm no doom and gloom type of guy but it's going to be bad. I've seen numerous documentaries on how prisoners are treated in America and these guys are now starting to become uber violent. Just hang out in neighborhoods in New York and LA where there are jails and psych wards for the insane and you'll see some pretty alarming type behavior the likes of crazy this country hasn't ever seen. These school shootings are unfortunately a sign of these times.



But there's hope....

Jose


----------



## David A (Feb 28, 2008)

Scott Rogers @ Thu Feb 28 said:


> David A @ Thu Feb 28 said:
> 
> 
> > In all honesty, I dont think America is READY for a black president. I fear for that man's life if he is elected, as there are some very nasty types who would do everything they can to end his career, or perhaps his life.
> ...



Go ahead and roll your eyes Scott. This IS a matter of concern-look at what happened to Martin Luther King...who were the kind of people who had him assassinated? Those very same types who hang confederate flags on their walls and drive their pick up tricks to go lynch them some 'boys'. And most likely these people would be from states like Alabama, Tennessee, Georgia, and Missisippi. (This is a factual observation from a Brit outside America). Thankfully not all Americans think like hillbillies.

Why was it such a big deal Obama did so well in Virginia? Because its a state riddled with racial prejudice. Perhaps America is getting somewhere with having him as president...but I really hope its not screwed up by a conspiracy from higher ups in government (as how Bush was re-elected) or that some hillbilly attempts to kill someone who could perhaps be one of the greatest presidents of our time.


----------



## Moonchilde (Feb 28, 2008)

josejherring @ February 28th 2008 said:


> They're mostly white. So....Kill 'em. :twisted: j/k



*gasp* ! My god! What are you saying?!  I laughed, and it is the truth. They mostly are white. Strangely enough, the sex offender list in my area is much larger in the wealthy part of my city than the less fortunate.



josejherring @ February 28th 2008 said:


> Now our future is in jeapardy. There's no way we can continue to feed and house a huge prison population so we're faced with two alternatives 1) Genocide or 2) release the now hardened criminals back into society.



I totally disagree with this. There is no need for genocide. The population that does happen to deserve the death penalty doesn't amount to a very significant portion of the prison population. What we need to do is re-evaluate and fix our drug policies and the consequences of possessing illegal substances. I stated before, if the government would only legalize marijuana and treat it like alcohol, our prison population would take a swan dive.

I want to note, that I don't use any form of drug, smoke, or drink alcohol - so my stance isn't coming from a drug user who wants his drugs legalized. I merely think if people want to smoke up and destroy their bodies in the privacy of their own home or a hosts' house, they should be able to as long as it doesn't harm other people.


----------



## José Herring (Feb 28, 2008)

Moonchilde @ Thu Feb 28 said:


> I totally disagree with this. There is no need for genocide. The population that does happen to deserve the death penalty doesn't amount to a very significant portion of the prison population. What we need to do is re-evaluate and fix our drug policies and the consequences of possessing illegal substances. I stated before, if the government would only legalize marijuana and treat it like alcohol, our prison population would take a swan dive.
> 
> I want to note, that I don't use any form of drug, smoke, or drink alcohol - so my stance isn't coming from a drug user who wants his drugs legalized. I merely think if people want to smoke up and destroy their bodies in the privacy of their own home or a hosts' house, they should be able to as long as it doesn't harm other people.



Not sure about the legalization of drugs, but for the most part I agree with you. When I lived in New York I saw a lot of things. What I noticed is that minorities push dope on the streets, they're easy targets for cops to pick up. Whites in New York pushed dope on the job or in their apartments. They don't get caught much. I knew more white dope pushers than nonwhite yet most of the jail population are nonwhite in for drug charges.

I lived in Hells Kitchen New York. It was a Puerto Rican and Irish neighborhood made famous in the 1950's by Westside Story and On the Water Front. There where a lot of drugs in the neighborhood. A lot of pushers and addicts. What I could see first hand was that drug enforcement was not administered fairly.

In that neighborhood if you where a white male pushing dope you got off with a warning. If you where a white women on dope you got house arrest especially if you had a kid. If you where a white women pushing dope no jail. If you where black or Puerto Rican male caught for possession, you served a nickel (5 years). Surprisingly few minority women engaged in that activity. Maybe they were too busy taking care of their 5 kids who's father was in jail. :lol: 

At any rate I concluded that drug enforcement was unfair. Personally I find that prosecuting drug charges on a small scale doesn't deter people from using drugs or selling them. Going after drugs in that way is a waist of time.


----------



## Moonchilde (Feb 28, 2008)

People are going to do what they want to do no matter the consequences. Look at drugs. People know they'll get time, and they do it anyway. Nothing deters them from it. Jail time I think is a poor form of punishment. It doesn't deter crime, obviously as we can see from the huge prison population.

I honestly think punishment needs to be harsher to deter people. Don't ask me what, because I don't know. I also think there needs to be personalized punishments, because not all crimes are caused for ill reasons. Some people have to steal to survive in certain parts of the world. Can you really fault them for their crime? Man needs to eat.


----------



## PolarBear (Feb 28, 2008)

Moonchilde @ Thu Feb 28 said:


> Nick Batzdorf @ February 28th 2008 said:
> 
> 
> > "Anyway, seriously, the death penalty would really help in a situation like this. Especially for people who don't deserve to live."
> ...



No. Actually a bold *NO!* This is excatly what I talked about: As long as everybody would do the right thing, this may work PERHAPS. But you're dealing already with at least 1 person who didn't do the "right" thing. And you're dealing with this person's life! Humans proved countless times to be very inhuman. Some states, some judges, some darkgrey or lightgrey people would think of you or any of your family as a "pedo" or another lifefrom which they regard further living inappropriate for. Death penalty for her or him? Evident or not - NO and NEVER for NOBODY! Evidence is just a matter of degree and viewpoint, nobody can control its abuse. No possible control - no death sentence - it's as simple as that.

PolarBear


----------



## Dave Connor (Feb 28, 2008)

At least perhaps we can all agree that this is a bad indicator and it's a problem that needs a solution at the root. The statistics of certain races being more prevalent need not be a 'racial' issue in the social sense but considered the same way diseases are more prevalent among certain races. What's the problem, affliction or cause of the statistical facts? It's not a matter of judging people or prejudice. It's a problem that is being dealt with badly i.e. only the symtoms are being addressed (by incarceration) instead of a preventative approach.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 28, 2008)

"I honestly think punishment needs to be harsher to deter people"

That's the argument people always make for the death penalty, but tests have proven that it's the likelihood of getting caught that acts as an inducement not to commit the crime. As a matter of fact, the drop in the crime rate is most likely because of the increased police presence in key areas, not because they're incarcerating more people.


----------



## nikolas (Feb 28, 2008)

Could it be that the lack of education is at fault maybe? 

You could make the othjer 99/100 police(wo)men and deal with it this way... :D


----------



## Ashermusic (Feb 29, 2008)

David A @ Thu Feb 28 said:


> Scott Rogers @ Thu Feb 28 said:
> 
> 
> > David A @ Thu Feb 28 said:
> ...



I am not sure it means anything at all but it is interesting that in recent history the attempted assassinations were of Republicans, Ford and Reagan rather than Clinton or Carter.

My guess is that Obama would not be in significantly greater danger than Hillary or McCain. There is always some wingnut who focuses on a president and there are myriad justifications in their minds for it.


----------



## Ashermusic (Feb 29, 2008)

Nick Batzdorf @ Thu Feb 28 said:


> "I honestly think punishment needs to be harsher to deter people"
> 
> That's the argument people always make for the death penalty, but tests have proven that it's the likelihood of getting caught that acts as an inducement not to commit the crime. As a matter of fact, the drop in the crime rate is most likely because of the increased police presence in key areas, not because they're incarcerating more people.



Dennis Prager, who I disagree with 75% of the time, nonetheless says it all for me here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1954159/posts


----------



## JB78 (Feb 29, 2008)

Ashermusic @ Fri Feb 29 said:


> Dennis Prager, who I disagree with 75% of the time, nonetheless says it all for me here:
> http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1954159/posts




If someone murdered my daughter or wife I would certainly want to go "old testament" on them, but that's also the reason why I'm not the one who gets to determine the punishment should the offender get caught. 

I don't think ANYONE has the right to take another persons life regardless of what they've done. 
When coupling this opinion with the fact that alot of people have been and will get sentenced to death while being innocent, is more than enough for me to be TOTALLY against the death penalty.


I find it kind of ironic that the first readers comment on the page is written by someone who's obviously a christian:

"To: goldstategop
I support the death penalty too!
DEATH, capital punishment does DETER others. For the small exception that it doesn’t deter, so be it!


2 posted on 01/15/2008 11:12:52 AM PST by nmh (*Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)*"

Shouldn't christians be more forgiving, what about "turning the other cheek" and "thou shalt not kill"? 


No offense to anyone who's religious though, I have many friends of different religions, but not any blood thirsty ones :wink: 


Best regards
Jon


----------



## PolarBear (Feb 29, 2008)

Asher, how do you control abuse of death penalty? And it will be there! Small scale and large scale. As also the day will come any DNA could be faked. I don't give a murderer the right to take out the light of someone else, therefore I can't give any judge or jury the right to take out the murderer. Planning to kill someone just with general absolution from the current laws or regime doesn't make it less a murder. From their sight it is even murder on purpose.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 29, 2008)

"Dennis Prager, who I disagree with 75% of the time, nonetheless says it all for me here:"

I disagree with Dennis Prager 100% of the time, especially here. He's also an arrogant jerk, which goes along with the job description: talk show host whose job is to provoke. Few people can make me mad as quickly as he can.

Now, my wife, who is otherwise as liberal as I am, is in favor of the death penalty; she feels it's justified when someone kills a child, for example.

I'm totally opposed to it for all the reasons you've heard before, including the ones Jon and PB have articulated. It has no place in civilized society; to me it's just sick. But the main reason for me is emotional: at the end of the day it makes me feel worse, not better.

I find it totally disgusting.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 29, 2008)

And it's ridiculous that Moonchilde's insensitive "humor" has turned this thread into a discussion about the death penalty.


----------



## Moonchilde (Feb 29, 2008)

PolarBear @ February 29th 2008 said:


> Asher, how do you control abuse of death penalty? And it will be there! Small scale and large scale. As also the day will come any DNA could be faked. I don't give a murderer the right to take out the light of someone else, therefore I can't give any judge or jury the right to take out the murderer. Planning to kill someone just with general absolution from the current laws or regime doesn't make it less a murder. From their sight it is even murder on purpose.



That would be a problem with the justice system. Obviously, it would need to be fixed and any good program involving justice needs genuine people behind it, just like anything else.

The thing is, its insulting the the public that they have to foot the bill to keep some scumbag murdering bastard alive, locked away in a prison for life. What is the purpose of that? What is the purpose to feed, cloth, bathe, and care for someone who forfeited his life when he took another for pleasure? Those resources could go to people who really need it.

Its alarming we take such good care of prisoners when we can't even take care of people who really do need help, like people who can't get jobs and don't have the money to relocate.

There are obviously different degrees of crimes, not every scenario should get the death penalty, and in most cases people end up serving time instead. Its not like the death penalty gets handed out left and right. Just look at the hundreds given the death penalty vs the MILLIONS serving time in jail. Opponents against it seem to make it out that the death penalty gets served all the time.

Arguments against the death penalty often bring up innocents who may be framed or wrongly accused. This isn't a problem with the death penalty, but rather a problem with the system and those working in it. Also, how often does this really happen? Do we have real world numbers?

I just feel that like everything else, there is a time and place for it.


----------



## Moonchilde (Feb 29, 2008)

Nick Batzdorf @ February 29th 2008 said:


> And it's ridiculous that Moonchilde's insensitive "humor" has turned this thread into a discussion about the death penalty.



And I find your condescending attitude towards nearly everyone who disagrees with you and the way you present yourself in 90% of off topic threads as an arrogant and know it all jerk ridiculous. Hey, why don't you go point out that racist remark that doesn't exist again.

Sorry I offended you by bringing up the death penalty. Didn't intend to bruise your thin skin.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 29, 2008)

It's not condescending, I'm just better than anyone who disagrees with me.


----------



## Scott Rogers (Feb 29, 2008)

..........


----------



## PolarBear (Feb 29, 2008)

Moonchilde @ Fri Feb 29 said:


> That would be a problem with the justice system. Obviously, it would need to be fixed and any good program involving justice needs genuine people behind it, just like anything else.


It is a problem with every "system". While I can agree, that death penalty is a quite mighty penalty, I fear and see its abuse. I know it will not be genuine people who'd eagerly await the second to "legally" kill a guy, to their pleasure. And I completely fail to see how you can make a difference between murder and murder here.




Moonchilde @ Fri Feb 29 said:


> The thing is, its insulting the the public that they have to foot the bill to keep some scumbag murdering bastard alive, locked away in a prison for life. What is the purpose of that? What is the purpose to feed, cloth, bathe, and care for someone who forfeited his life when he took another for pleasure? Those resources could go to people who really need it.


We should pay equally for both and let not get them into these situations in the first place. We had and have opportunities they did not have. We're also guilty, but in another way. We proclaim humanity to murderers but don't even practice it to the innocent. We = ourselves and who we get to vote to be delegates of our viewpoint.




Moonchilde @ Fri Feb 29 said:


> Arguments against the death penalty often bring up innocents who may be framed or wrongly accused. This isn't a problem with the death penalty, but rather a problem with the system and those working in it. Also, how often does this really happen? Do we have real world numbers?


It's even such a minor problem the US sent troops to Irak about the death penalties being performed there. US seemed quite pleasured to stop the freak show and to have intervened in state matters. They just have no in-house task force. You do view it too much from the standpoint that everything is alright now. Even if it was - it once took less than a decade to turn a democracy into a machinery of death penalties. Legally and with the (silent) support of the majority. Once again: *No!* I don't wanna have any jerk being the cause for the death of another jerk. In no case at no time in no country in the world. Life sentence is enough and revocable.

PolarBear


----------



## choc0thrax (Feb 29, 2008)

I`ll bet you there`s more laws these days which = more people in prison.


----------



## Ashermusic (Feb 29, 2008)

[quote:c6f63f4793="PolarBear @ Fri Feb 29, 2008 9:10 am"]Asher, how do you control abuse of death penalty? And it will be there! Small scale and large scale. As also the day will come any DNA could be faked. I don't give a murderer the right to take out the light of someone else, therefore I can't give any judge or jury the right to take out the murderer. Planning to kill someone just with general absolution from the current laws or regime doesn't make it less a murder. From their sight iò3Û   q è3Û   q é3Û   q ê3Û   q ë3Û   q ì3Û   q í3Û   q î3Û   q ï3Û   q ð3Û   q ñ3Û   q ò3Ü   q ó3Ü   q ô3Ü   q õ3Ü   q ö3Ü   q ÷3Ü   q ø3Ü   q ù3Ü   q ú3Ý   q û3Ý   q ü3Ý   q ý3Ý   q þ3Ý   q ÿ3Ý   q¡ 3Ý   q¡3Ý   q¡3Ý


----------



## Ashermusic (Feb 29, 2008)

[[/quote]

I am NOT impressionable...no force on this earth can influence my opinion in the slightest...
[/quote]

That statement does not speak well of you. A person who is THAT closed to the opinions of others has no prospect of personal growth and change and will never be intellectually any more than he presently is.


----------



## David A (Feb 29, 2008)

I say this merely as an intellectual who cannot be influenced IN THE SLIGHTEST by the negative views of groups with vested interests-WHOEVER they may be. I am the last person to 'follow the leader' and 'flock with the other sheep' I am a lone wolf...this allows me to make neutral judgements on pretty much everything......

But GENERALLY, I DO keep an open mind. Take it all in, swirl it all around and THEN...form my own opinions. But just don't expect me to be the first one brainwashed by ANYBODY!--I'm not perfect...but I'm extremely self aware. We all have to be.


----------



## Ashermusic (Feb 29, 2008)

David A @ Fri Feb 29 said:


> I say this merely as an intellectual who cannot be influenced IN THE SLIGHTEST by the negative views of groups with vested interests-WHOEVER they may be. I am the last person to 'follow the leader' and 'flock with the other sheep' I am a lone wolf...this allows me to make neutral judgements on pretty much everything......
> 
> But GENERALLY, I DO keep an open mind. Take it all in, swirl it all around and THEN...form my own opinions. But just don't expect me to be the first one brainwashed by ANYBODY!--I'm not perfect...but I'm extremely self aware. We all have to be.



I see, thanks for the clarification and I hereby rescind my negative comment about you, not that it impressed you


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 29, 2008)

Those without the capital get the punishment.


----------



## Scott Rogers (Feb 29, 2008)

..........


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 29, 2008)

"I wonder how your wife can tolerate living with someone whose thinking is not nearly as well reasoned as hers "

Hard to fathom, isn't it. I actually wonder how she can tolerate living with me for many more reasons than that!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 29, 2008)

Scott, if someone posted that all conservatives are reckless cowboy morons who don't care about anybody and can't think past the end of a bumper sticker - Anne Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, etc. - what would your reaction be?

Oh wait - I do say stuff like that. Okay, you win.

But the point is that your stereotype of liberals is pretty far off the mark. I tend to be pretty liberal, but I somehow don't think my reactions to the major issues of our day are totally knee-jerk, uninformed, delusional, or unreasonable. You probably disagree, but not because I fit into your stereotype.


----------



## Ashermusic (Feb 29, 2008)

Nick Batzdorf @ Fri Feb 29 said:


> Scott, if someone posted that all conservatives are reckless cowboy morons who don't care about anybody and can't think past the end of a bumper sticker - Anne Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, etc. - what would your reaction be?
> 
> Oh wait - I do say stuff like that. Okay, you win.
> 
> But the point is that your stereotype of liberals is pretty far off the mark. I tend to be pretty liberal, but I somehow don't think my reactions to the major issues of our day are totally knee-jerk, uninformed, delusional, or unreasonable. You probably disagree, but not because I fit into your stereotype.



Indeed, you are the poster child


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 29, 2008)

"Could it be that the lack of education is at fault maybe?"

No doubt, fellow Niklas, but complicated problems never have simple answers. People in Nazi Germany tended to be very well educated, yet look what happened.

I like your other idea about having everyone become a policeman, though.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 29, 2008)

"Geez, the U.S. is the most racially and culturally diverse nation on the planet. Black Americans fare far better here than anyone else of African descent in any other country, including Africa, and including your country. A shame, really, that people like you seem to not notice that. Again, we're back to that undercurrent of anti-American bigotry which courses through your veins. Are you really not paying attention? For cryin' out loud, Oprah Winfrey could buy London with the change underneath her sofa cushions. "

If 1 in 9 black men between ages 20 and 34 is behind bars, somehow I think there's a disparity between that Oprah Winfrey vision and the reality of da hood. Yeah things are better than they were before the civil rights movement, but there's still a long way to go.


----------



## Scott Rogers (Feb 29, 2008)

..........


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 29, 2008)

Except I have to repeat the question: why is such a disproportionate number of black men in the primes of their lives making the wrong choices? You can't point at Oprah Winfrey as the norm, nor can you point at any entertainment or sports figure. Those people are blatant exceptions.

Obviously the right choices are much harder for them to make than for you and me, but eight of the nine young black men isn't in jail; it's that one we're talking about. And just saying you feel sorry for crime victims doesn't get to any answers. I feel sorry for the victims too, of course - when there are victims.

But I also feel sorry for the criminals, although in a different, more generic way (in other words there are undoubtedly a lot of perfectly despicable people in jail too). Babies are born as blank slates; something that happens during the first 20 years of their lives is going wrong.

And this predates the Great Society. Attempts to help aren't responsible for this.


----------



## José Herring (Feb 29, 2008)

Scott Rogers @ Fri Feb 29 said:


> Nick Batzdorf said:
> 
> 
> > "Geez, the U.S. is the most racially and culturally diverse nation on the planet. Black Americans fare far better here than anyone else of African descent in any other country, including Africa, and including your country. A shame, really, that people like you seem to not notice that. Again, we're back to that undercurrent of anti-American bigotry which courses through your veins. Are you really not paying attention? For cryin' out loud, Oprah Winfrey could buy London with the change underneath her sofa cushions. "
> ...



Granted that is one view point Scott, but I seriously doubt if you believe that it's a completed view point.

Yes there are remarkable individuals that can overcome their environment and become extremely successful in spite of all odds. But quit frankly to compare Oprah Winfrey to your average citizen is like comparing Martin Luther King to your average preacher. Some people have it within them to be extraordinary. Some do not. 

Plus I always hate that the topic of crime always verges on racial tones. In truth the percentage of criminally minded minorities to whites is about the same. Laws are not absolute. They are set up along the lines of moral codes. Most of the moral codes that America lives by were setup by white people. So things that white people consider "bad" then become against the law. Imo this stacks a system against anybody who might disagree. So tax evasion becomes less of a crime than robbing somebodies property. Though the amount of people "cheating" uncle Sam is far more damaging overall than somebody missing their stereo. Dealing crack is more of a crime than driving drunk. Though drunk driving is far more dangerous to society than even crack. Just as in 1850 stealing a man's cattle was more of a hangin' crime than slavery or wiping out whole populations of Indians. Though certainly stealing cattle is far less harmful than treating people like cattle.

So it's all too easy to say that, "Oh, those people are breaking the law and should be punished". It's harder to look at who invented the laws and who gets punished severely while others do things just as harmful or more harmful to society but get punished less because their crime is considered more socially acceptable.

That's the problem with conservative thinking in America. It takes one viewpoint and holds it steady as "the right viewpoint" without examining all sides of an issue. To a conservative there's "right" and there's "wrong". Without examining degrees of right and wrong we'll never have any real justice in American. So the American justice system is only bent on a craven need for revenge. Listening to republicans speak I'm always reminded of the mafia's "you wack us, and we'll wack you harder" type mentality. 

Punishment unfortunately doesn't deter crime. I wish it did, but it doesn't.

By the way the statistic is improving. In the '90's it was 1 in 4 back men between those ages in prison. 

Jose


----------



## JonFairhurst (Feb 29, 2008)

Suffering (for others) is the cornerstone of right-wing philosophy.

Personally, I doubt that any lack of success of African Americans as a group is due to not enough suffering.

It seems to me that people who feel self-empowered are the most successful. What is the message of slavery, Jim Crow, lynchings and institutional racism if not "you are powerless."

Regardless of race, the people I know who feel defeated tend to be less ambitious than those who feel empowered. People who succeed believe that they can succeed. Why would anybody invest time, money and energy, if they felt that it will all be taken away through no fault of their own?

This isn't as simple a situation as needing bigger sticks and sweeter carrots. People need to instinctively know that they will get a fair shake and have an opportunity for success. 

That's why the messages of "hope" and "opportunity" from Barack Obama and Bill Clinton before him resonate so strongly. 

The message of "more suffering" is a tougher sell. But it does tend to inspire those who fester with resentment and harbor a deep rooted desire for revenge.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 29, 2008)

Jose, I agree with that too. It would be good to know how what the offenses are that are landing all those people in jail.

"In the '90's it was 1 in 4 back men between those ages in prison."

What!? What?! Do you have a link? That's shocking if it's true.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 29, 2008)

http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/top ... tegory=510

"Since 1976, more than 100 people have been wrongfully convicted anò3ù   q¬Ó3ù   q¬Ô3ù   q¬Õ3ù   q¬Ö3ù   q¬×3ù   q¬Ø3ù   q¬Ù3ù   q¬Ú3ù   q¬Û3ù   q¬Ü3ù   q¬Ý3ù   q¬Þ3ù   q¬ß3ù   q¬à3ù   q¬á3ù   q¬â3ù   q¬ã3ù   q¬ä3ù   q¬å3ù   q¬æ3ù   q¬ç3ù   q¬è3ù   q¬é3ù   q¬ê3ù   q¬ë3ù   q¬ì3ù   q¬í3ù   q¬î3ù   q¬ï3ù   q¬ð3ù   q¬ñ3ù   q¬ò3ù   q¬ó3ù   q¬ô3ù   q¬õ3ù   q¬ö3ù   q¬÷3ù   q¬ø3ù   q¬ù3ù   q¬ú3ù   q¬û3ù   q¬ü3ù   q¬ý3ù   q¬þ3ú   q¬ÿ3ú   q­ 3ú   q­3ú   q­3ú   q­3ú   q­3ú   q­3ú   q­3ú   q­3ú   q­3ú


----------



## Moonchilde (Feb 29, 2008)

Nick Batzdorf @ February 29th 2008 said:


> Jose, I agree with that too. It would be good to know how what the offenses are that are landing all those people in jail.



Drug offenses mostly.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 29, 2008)

Do you have a link?

What I wonder is whether people are just doing crack, or whether they're stealing, etc. to get it.

By the way, this is an interesting perspective under which to view the California "Three Strikes" law. What a half-baked idea.


----------



## aeneas (Feb 29, 2008)

_"For cryin' out loud, Oprah Winfrey could buy London with the change underneath her sofa cushions."_
Unfortunately for some people, fortunately for others - best things are not for sale. London, for instance.

_"And no, I don't expect you to get any of this. What I know about the human psyche is that when people become emotionally committed to an idea, anything conflicting with that idea causes cognitive dissonance, and the mind leaps and spins and conjures until the tension can be assuaged. This sort of rigidity and lack of intellectual curiosity is another impediment to free thinking."_
1. This image: _"the mind leaps and spins and conjures until the tension can be assuaged"_ 
looks like opposite to this one: _"rigidity and lack of intellectual curiosity_ [and] _impediment to free thinking."_
2. It seems that you have _"become emotionally committed to an idea"_ (namely this idea: _"I don't expect you to get any of this"_), 
so that _"anything conflicting with that idea causes cognitive dissonance"_. (_"and the mind leaps and spins and..."_ etc.)


----------



## JonFairhurst (Feb 29, 2008)

Scott Rogers @ Fri Feb 29 said:


> JonFairhurst said:
> 
> 
> > Suffering (for others) is the cornerstone of right-wing philosophy.
> ...



Let's look at the top ten conservative policies (not necessarily in oder of preference...)
1) Rejection of any and all social services - including for the sick, infirm and elderly.
2) Mandatory prison sentences (for the poor anyway. Such limits don't apply to people named 'Scooter".)
3) Support of the death penalty.
4) Enthusiasm for war.
5) Love of tortu... Alternate interrogation techniques.
6) The desire to criminalize abortion, even in the case that it threatens the life of the mother. 
7) An immigration policy that would boot all illegal immigrants out of the country and never, ever let them back in again. (Unlike for "Scooter" and the phone companies, amnesty is unthinkable!)
8 ) Tax policies that favor the wealthy, investors and the corporations, thereby placing the tax burden on those who can least afford it. It's not like the Neo Cons reduced spending - just taxes for the wealthy.
9) Environmental policies that reduce costs for polluters at the expense of the health for those nearby, potentially leading to suffering from cancer and death.
10) Trade policies that move our manufacturing jobs overseas.

I rest my case.


----------



## José Herring (Feb 29, 2008)

Nick Batzdorf @ Fri Feb 29 said:


> Jose, I agree with that too. It would be good to know how what the offenses are that are landing all those people in jail.
> 
> "In the '90's it was 1 in 4 back men between those ages in prison."
> 
> What!? What?! Do you have a link? That's shocking if it's true.



That was a statistic that was spouted by Mayor Kotch back in the day when he was running for office in the last '80's. I have no idea if it was correct. It was alarming though if it is.

But I did find a study on Prison stats in the 90's. I've highlited below some interesting facts that support our position:

_2. African American men in prison:
-29% of African American men will serve time in prison
(Compared to 16% of Hispanic males and 4% of White males)xxiii
-At yearend 2001 10% of the African American male population between ages
25-29 was in prison (Compared to 2.9% of Hispanic males and 1.2% of White
males).xxiv
-The rate of imprisonment of Black males in the United States today is higher
than in South Africa at the height of Apartheid.xxv
3. Portrayal in the media:
-Youth of color fare far worse than their white counterparts in the media’s
association of youth and violence. A study of Time and Newsweek stories found
that the term “young black males” became synonymous with the word “criminal”
in coverage. A study on TV news showed that white youth were more likely to be
featured in stories on health or education than black youth.xxvi
-African Americans are underrepresented in reporting as victims, and over
represented in the news as perpetrators. Articles about White homicide victims
tend to be longer, and more frequent than the articles that cover African American
victims.xxvii
*4. Disparate enforcement of drug laws:
-Five times as many whites use drugs as blacks. Yet blacks comprise the great
majority of drug offenders sent to prison.xxviii
-African Americans represent 13% of drug users, 38% of arrestees for drug use,
and 59% of those convicted for drug use.
-Latinos represent 10% of drug users, but 22.5% of sentenced drug offenders.
In 2000, increasing number of drug offenses accounted for 27% of the total
growth among black inmates, 15% among Hispanic, 14% among white.xxix
-In California and New York prisons, two thirds of drug treatment spots went to
white prisoners.*_

Here's the link to the full study:

http://www.bpf.org/html/current_projects/transformative_justice/pdfs/StatsAboutPrisindcomplex.pdf (http://www.bpf.org/html/current_project ... omplex.pdf)


Yep. Republicans gotta go.


----------



## aeneas (Feb 29, 2008)

I already knew that the statistics game can prove anything and nothing, but that is a bit too much:

_"The rate of imprisonment of Black males in the United States today is higher
than in South Africa at the height of Apartheid."_

That is a malicious statement, IMO. It applies a racist presumption where there is nothing more than numbers resulted from counting facts. That comparison says nothing about the reasons those individuals were imprisoned for, nothing about the charges, nothing about the juridical accuracy of the trials that have lead to their condemnation. How about then comparing the blacks/whites inmates proportion in California to the Israeli/Palestinians inmates proportion in Israel? It's not only that such statistics and comparisons don't say anything about anything, but they are beyond stupidity, and I can even suspect them of malevolence.


----------



## José Herring (Feb 29, 2008)

I think statistics speak pretty clearly. If you're incapable of seeing that then you're incapable of having any kind of intelligent discourse on the matter.

Good night Aeneas.


----------



## aeneas (Feb 29, 2008)

josejherring @ Sat 01 Mar said:


> I think statistics speak pretty clearly.


If statistics do 'speak', then that 'speaking' is far from 'clear'. Statistics count facts and then output numbers about those facts. That's the clean side of statistics. Interpreting those numbers is monkey business. It's astrology, numerology, you name it. If those numbers do 'speak clearly' to you, then I am sorry for your delusional view on numbers.



> If you're incapable of seeing that they you're incapable of having any kind of intelligent discourse on the matter.


That is an abusive conjecture. If I am unable to see/hear statistics 'speaking clearly', that only means that I'm sane - that I am taking numbers and facts at face-value. 
If, to you, the capacity of seeing/hearing those statistics 'speaking clearly' implies a capacity of having an 'intelligent' discourse, then we have different takes on 'intelligence'. Your three responses to my point are unambiguous about your personal take on 'intelligent discourse'. 



> Good night Aeneas.


If it is night to you, then good night to you. Here is something to dream about: my post about that racist innuendo is logically rock-solid, until is disproved with rational arguments - and your reaction to it was far from a rational argument, it was only the reaction of someone to whom statistics do 'speak clearly'. Sweet dreams.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 29, 2008)

Jose, that's an eye-opening link (the one to the stats). Just shocking. Spectacularly shocking.


----------



## Moonchilde (Mar 1, 2008)

Nick Batzdorf @ February 29th 2008 said:


> Do you have a link?
> 
> What I wonder is whether people are just doing crack, or whether they're stealing, etc. to get it.
> 
> By the way, this is an interesting perspective under which to view the California "Three Strikes" law. What a half-baked idea.



http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/dcf/duc.htm

Its about even with property offenses, but the Federal stat pulls it ahead of the rest by roughly 10%. Interesting to note the high marijuana usage stats vs the rest of the stuff. No data on what substance was the cause for incarceration.


----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 1, 2008)

JonFairhurst @ Fri Feb 29 said:


> Scott Rogers @ Fri Feb 29 said:
> 
> 
> > JonFairhurst said:
> ...



And a poor case you have made. I am NOT a conservative but I do not believe in demonizing those who I disagree with, so your tactic of using hyperbole and emotionally charged words bothers me so I will attempt to speak on their behalf.

1. They do not reject the services, they disagree about whether they should be funded by government as they believe it will be done cheaper and more efficiently privately and that the government has no constitutional right to do it.

4. & 5 They do not have "enthusiasm" for war, nor do they "love" torture. They believe that sometimes they are necessary, and they have a narrower definition of what is torture.

6. They believe that the rights of the unborn child are as important as the mother's.

7. They believe that those who enter the country illegally should not be afforded the same rights as those who enter legally. Therefore, they should go back in line and start that process with no head start. It is not only conservatives who necessarily believe this according to most polls, btw.

8. They believe that the money given back to those you mention gets put back into the economy and creates jobs and wealth.

10. Every living president at the time it was passed , Republican and Democrat, supported NAFTA, even Carter.

Once again, I disagree strongly with most of what they believe but you do both your beliefs and yourself a disservice when you write a hyperbolic, emotionally deck- stacked, intellectually dishonest argument like this.

It is the partisan approach to "truth" and I despise it equally coming from the left like Michel Moore or the right like Ann Coulter. Stretching and/or exaggerating the "truth" for a "good" cause is no more admirable than stretching the truth for a "bad' one.

Hold yourself to a higher standard.


----------



## JonFairhurst (Mar 1, 2008)

Jay,

You may feel that I have made a "hyperbolic, emotionally deck- stacked, intellectually dishonest argument", but it is honestly the way I feel.

I know people who, when children fail, blame it on the parents for not beating them enough. And these people are without exception, conservatives. Their worldview is of the "strong father figure" and that "ideal" father beats the crap out of the kids when they don't obey or try hard enough.

Haven't we heard conservatives lament that parents and teachers are threatened by law if they use corporal punishment? Who but a conservative says of a rogue nation that "we should nuke them"? Who supports long mandatory sentences? Who supports the death penalty? Who supports holding prisoners in Guantanamo indefinitely without trial? Who condones torture? Conservatives.

My personal belief that conservatives have a worldview based on punishment and the suffering of others did not come from a vacuum. 

Bush tried to dupe us with the term "compassionate conservative." There is a reason that term is no longer used. It doesn't pass the smell test.


----------



## rJames (Mar 1, 2008)

Ashermusic @ Sat Mar 01 said:


> Once again, I disagree strongly with most of what they believe but you do both your beliefs and yourself a disservice when you write a hyperbolic, emotionally deck- stacked, intellectually dishonest argument like this.
> 
> It is the partisan approach to "truth" and I despise it equally coming from the left like Michel Moore or the right like Ann Coulter. Stretching and/or exaggerating the "truth" for a "good" cause is no more admirable than stretching the truth for a "bad' one.
> 
> Hold yourself to a higher standard.



Jay is right on!

Unfortunatly, most of America has forgotton how to be objective. The pundits are well trained in the art of debate. And then the unthinking populous parrots the extreme or misleading dogma in everyday conversations.

You hear it every day and all through this thread. (not everything said or quoted here)

And the real sad part is that if you care about your strongly held beliefs, you HAVE to participate in this kind of extreme or misleading debate style or your message will be lost.


----------



## Scott Rogers (Mar 1, 2008)

..........


----------



## Scott Rogers (Mar 1, 2008)

..........


----------



## Scott Rogers (Mar 1, 2008)

..........


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Mar 1, 2008)

While I just chuckled at Jon's post the first time, Jay prompted me to read it again more closely, and it turns out that there's more truth in it than the esteemed Mr. Jay would like to believe. Obviously we're talking in generalities, but...



> And a poor case you have made. I am NOT a conservative but I do not believe in demonizing those who I disagree with, so your tactic of using hyperbole and emotionally charged words bothers me so I will attempt to speak on their behalf.



I don't demonize all conservatives (except when being partly facetious), but I have consistently found their politics to be a) downright mean, or at least unnecessarily muscular - regardless of how their aggressive outlook is masked or justified; b) overly simplistic (not that liberals aren't capable of that too); or c) unrealistic. Or in the case of many conservative Jews I've met, they believe that Israel can do no wrong and then mold all their other beliefs in an attempt to bring that into line. 



> 1. They do not reject the services, they disagree about whether they should be funded by government as they believe it will be done cheaper and more efficiently privately and that the government has no constitutional right to do it.




There are a lot of conservative people who are very well meaning, often very religious and charitable. So there are compassionate conservatives. But not everyone is like them; the idea that you can cut services and expect them to be made up privately is where the unrealistic part comes in.

As with everything in politics, there are no absolutes - it's never a question of privatizing or socializing everything. But conservatives want the line to be way too far in the wrong direction.

Oh, and I should add that they put way too much faith in laissez-faire economics. "The market" has many blind spots that they consistently fail to see. Plus a money-rules-all society isn't one I want to live in.

Also, a lot of the "small government" talk is simply justification for wanting to pay lower taxes. The idea that you're going to help people by doing nothing for them and enabling them to toughen up can't possibly be sincere. Sorry, I don't buy it.



> 4. & 5 They do not have "enthusiasm" for war, nor do they "love" torture. They believe that sometimes they are necessary, and they have a narrower definition of what is torture.



No, I think enthusiasm is exactly the right word. Exactly.

Loving torture, well, no, but where's the appropriate outrage?



> 7. They believe that those who enter the country illegally should not be afforded the same rights as those who enter legally. Therefore, they should go back in line and start that process with no head start. It is not only conservatives who necessarily believe this according to most polls, btw.



I'm not sure about that analysis at all, but hyping up non-issues is an exclusively Republican phenomenon. Immigration is this year's gay marriage.



> 8. They believe that the money given back to those you mention gets put back into the economy and creates jobs and wealth.



They put military Keynsianism above investment in our society while shifting the tax burden away from the haves, and the opinions and actions of conservatives in our government are universally pro-business rather than being equally pro-consumer and pro-business as they should be.

Again, I don't believe that all conservatives are evil - although I certainly don't rule out the possibility when you're talking about our current administration - but I do believe that their political machinery is totally sinister.


----------



## aeneas (Mar 1, 2008)

Scott Rogers @ Sat 01 Mar said:


> I am simply communicating directly and unapologetically. My state of mind lies far outside your circle of competence. Don't presume otherwise. It is a simple fact that I will not tolerate lectures about my country from ill-informed foreigners - especially of the socialist sort - and since I'm already wasting too much time here I try and curtail that by cutting through more immediately. I have seen time and time again that pussyfooting around with wishy-washy hyper-diplomacy simply doesn't work.
> 
> And don't fool yourself about not harboring animosity/envy towards America. I mentioned the fact that U.S. taxpayers have given 30 billion dollars over the last few years to save lives in Africa (on top of so much monetary and human aid we've given there for a very long time), and you just could not bring yourself to accept it as a good thing with no sense of ancient false guilt attached. You have to spin it around into a negative by dredging up 150 year old history and insult people now living who had nothing to do with all that. And are you really unaware of _your_ country's involvement in the slave trade? And who was behind apartheid by the way? Deal with your own history and quit focusing outwards. Face it, the U.S., all by itself, gave more aid to Africa recently (and historically) than the rest of the world _combined_. Like it or not, we did better than everyone else. But yes, yes, I know, the number one rule around here is that you can spit on the U.S. all you want, but recognizing that maybe, just maybe, our positives far outweigh our negatives? Perish the thought!
> 
> ...


Good points. I see one slight problem: how does the "live and let die" policy align with the 30 billion dollars give-away to Africa? I mean: 



Scott Rogers said:


> Wow! WTF? Someone needs to educate himself.


----------



## JB78 (Mar 1, 2008)

Scott Rogers @ Sat Mar 01 said:


> I wonder if people like you ever actually think things through, or if they just hold certain positions because they think they sound good on the surface. You proclaim free healthcare and free college education to be a fundamental human right - something that the government (re: hardworking taxpayer) should provide for everyone. Well, what about free food, free clothing, and a free house? Those are daily fundamentals of living, are they not? The same arguments for free healthcare and free diplomas could just as easily apply to those even more basic necessities.



Free healthcare and free college education works fine here in Sweden, I don't see why it wouldn't work in the states if you'd want it? 
Sure it's got some issues like you might have to wait in the emergency room for a couple of hours if you have broken your arm and they need to prioritize someone with something more serious than that. 
That's a small price to pay IMO to feel safe that getting sick or in a serious accident won't in itself totally destroy your economic situation. 

Here's what it says on wiki regarding health care in Sweden: 
"Healthcare in Sweden is developed. Sweden ranks in the top five countries with respect to low infant mortality. 
It also ranks high in life expectancy and in safe drinking water. World-class hospitals in Sweden include Lund University, Karolinska University Hospital, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Linköping University Hospital and Uppsala University Hospital."

So as you can see above it's not affecting the quality of the care given just because it's "free".


Best regards
Jon


----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 1, 2008)

I just know too many conservatives who do not fit the profile of Jon's mischaracterizations. When Republicans do this to Democrats, they are outraged.

I just wish that my fellow Democrats would be equally outraged at falsehoods that come from the left as they are from the right. The proof of one's integrity is one's willingness to criticize his/her own.


----------



## JonFairhurst (Mar 1, 2008)

Let me clarify my position. I do not believe that conservatives are necessarily cruel people. I have many conservative friends, and they do not treat me cruelly. They do, however, support many cruel policies.

Conservatives believe that their policies are right and good. They, like anybody, want to be good people. They believe that they are good people.

But the fact is, conservatives gravitate to policies that will "teach people a lesson" (a nice way to say "cause those who misbehave to suffer".) The death penalty, minimum sentencing and torture are but a few examples. No one would accuse conservatives of being the champions of human rights around the world. Property rights, yes. Human rights, no.

Conservatives accuse liberals of being "bleeding hearts." And, yes, liberals can be too soft, too ready to forgive and compassionate to a fault.

And what is the opposite of a bleeding heart, but a hard heart. And what is the opposite of liberal, but conservative.

Conservatives support the policies of a hard heart, yet find it ever so difficult to admit it.


----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 1, 2008)

JonFairhurst @ Sat Mar 01 said:


> Let me clarify my position. I do not believe that conservatives are necessarily cruel people. I have many conservative friends, and they do not treat me cruelly. They do, however, support many cruel policies.
> 
> Conservatives believe that their policies are right and good. They, like anybody, want to be good people. They believe that they are good people.
> 
> ...



The difference,in general, is:

My conservative friends think liberals are wrong, misguided.

My liberal friends think conservatives are evil or at best, selfish.

Whatever the merits of their positions on issues, the conservative's attitude is more fair and open-minded. Anyone remember when to be liberal meant just that?

I will give a tip of the hat to Obama on this. He is not one to judge opponent's motives rather than their actions so much.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Mar 1, 2008)

"Whatever the merits of their positions on issues, the conservative's attitude is more fair and open-minded."

You're making the assumption that both sides are equal and that the differences are just a matter of opinion. What if most conservatives are indeed selfish?


----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 1, 2008)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sat Mar 01 said:


> "Whatever the merits of their positions on issues, the conservative's attitude is more fair and open-minded."
> 
> You're making the assumption that both sides are equal and that the differences are just a matter of opinion. What if most conservatives are indeed selfish?



What if most liberals are also selfish and materialistic and trying to make peace with it by supporting causes that make them look more noble in their own eyes? It cuts both ways.

People of good will can simply see things differently. That USED to be what liberals believed. Sadly, by and large it is no longer.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Mar 1, 2008)

I disagree, for all the reasons I posted above about Jon's list. Sure people can be well-intentioned, but not all issues have multiple sides that are equally valid. Abortion does, for example, or capital punishment, or what if anything to do about illegal immigration, or whether Affirmative Action is the right way to provide equal opportunity, or whether we should have stricter gun control. But whether it's right or effective to invade countries that are no threat to us and uncap 1500-year-old religious conflicts has an objective answer: no; it always did. Similarly, being against gay marriage for other people is an indefensible position, because it's a civil rights issue. And waterboarding is objectively wrong, for heaven's sake.

We liberals are still as tolerant as we always were, or at least I am. And I for one always consider opposing opinions about complicated issues. But being liberal never included tolerance for things that are intolerable, i.e. objectively wrong or cruel. There's nothing good about that.

And your idea about most liberals compensating for being selfish and materialistic is about as valid as my saying most centrists are afraid to take a stand for what's right and just don't want to make a commitment so they can appear to be nice guys while everybody else is unreasonable.

That's not how it works.


----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 1, 2008)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sat Mar 01 said:


> I disagree, for all the reasons I posted above about Jon's list. Sure people can be well-intentioned, but not all issues have multiple sides that are equally valid. Abortion does, for example, or capital punishment, or what if anything to do about illegal immigration, or whether Affirmative Action is the right way to provide equal opportunity, or whether we should have stricter gun control. But whether it's right or effective to invade countries that are no threat to us and uncap 1500-year-old religious conflicts has an objective answer: no; it always did. Similarly, being against gay marriage for other people is an indefensible position, because it's a civil rights issue. And waterboarding is objectively wrong, for heaven's sake.
> 
> We liberals are still as tolerant as we always were, or at least I am. And I for one always consider opposing opinions about complicated issues. But being liberal never included tolerance for things that are intolerable, i.e. objectively wrong or cruel. There's nothing good about that.
> 
> ...



2 final points and them i am done..

Your position on gay marriage i.e. is not "objectively" correct, it is your opinion, and saying that it is so does not make it so. Now if a Conservative advocates treating gays extra-legally because they are a couple, that is objectively wrong in my opinion.

My other point is that there is no more altruism assignable to liberals than conservatives, they are all equally subject to being selfish.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Mar 1, 2008)

My opinion about gay marriage is objectively correct because the only arguments against it are that people don't like the idea of gay people getting married. But it's none of their business what other people do, so they're wrong. Period. Your saying it is not so does not make it not so (if that's what you're saying, and I don't think you are).

If you want to use a different word, well, I consider that silly - that's opinion, not fact - but either way there is no possible objective argument to declare it not someone's right.

And sure liberals can be equally selfish. I already said there are many conservative people who are very generous and compassionate. What does that have to do with anything we're talking about? Again, their politics still belie that, because they fail to realize that not everyone is as generous as they are.

Okay, now I'm done before you, since you now agree with me and have no answers to my clearly superior discourse.


----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 1, 2008)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sat Mar 01 said:


> Okay, now I'm done before you, since you now agree with me and have no answers to my clearly superior discourse.



I suggest you see a shrink right away. Tell him or her that you have been given a preliminary diagnosis of delusions of adequacy


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Mar 2, 2008)




----------



## Ashermusic (Mar 2, 2008)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sun Mar 02 said:


>



Right guy, wrong movie.

But of course you knew that, swine editor


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Mar 2, 2008)

Keep that up and you will soon be a bell MAN.


----------

