Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Reply To Thread

What the hell happened to Texas?Follow

#1 Oct 17 2011 at 5:53 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
8,230 posts
CBC News wrote:
Texas conservatives reject Harper's crime plan
'Been there; done that; didn't work,' say Texas crime-fighters
By Terry Milewski, CBC News
Posted: Oct 17, 2011 6:11 PM ET

Conservatives in the United States' toughest crime-fighting jurisdiction — Texas — say the Harper government's crime strategy won't work.

"You will spend billions and billions and billions on locking people up," says Judge John Creuzot of the Dallas County Court. "And there will come a point in time where the public says, 'Enough!' And you'll wind up letting them out."

Adds Rep. Jerry Madden, a conservative Republican who heads the Texas House Committee on Corrections, "It's a very expensive thing to build new prisons and, if you build 'em, I guarantee you they will come. They'll be filled, OK? Because people will send them there.
The Texas Dept. of Criminal Justice Central Unit seal is painted on the cell block wall in Sugar Land, Texas. The 102-year-old jail is slated for development as Texas reducing its prison population.The Texas Dept. of Criminal Justice Central Unit seal is painted on the cell block wall in Sugar Land, Texas. The 102-year-old jail is slated for development as Texas reducing its prison population. Pat Sullivan/Associated Press

"But, if you don't build 'em, they will come up with very creative things to do that keep the community safe and yet still do the incarceration necessary."

These comments are in line with a coalition of experts in Washington, DC, who attacked the Harper government's omnibus crime package, Bill C-10, in a statement Monday.

"Republican governors and state legislators in such states of Texas, South Carolina, and Ohio are repealing mandatory minimum sentences, increasing opportunities for effective community supervision, and funding drug treatment because they know it will improve public safety and reduce taxpayer costs," said Tracy Velázquez, executive director of the Washington-based Justice Policy Institute.

"If passed, C-10 will take Canadian justice policies 180-degrees in the wrong direction, and Canadian citizens will bear the costs."
A state with a record

On a recent trip to Texas, an array of conservative voices told CBC News that Texas tried what Canada plans to do – and it failed.

As recently as 2004, Texas had the highest incarceration rate in the world, with fully one in 20 of its adult residents behind bars or on parole or probation. The Lone Star state still has the death penalty, with more than 300 prisoners on death row today. But for three decades, as crime rates fell all over the U.S., the rate in Texas fell at only half the national average.

That didn't change the policy — but its cost did.

Faced with a budget crisis in 2005, the Texas statehouse was handed an estimate of $2 billion to build new prisons for a predicted influx of new prisoners.

They told Rep. Madden to find a way out. He and his committee dug into the facts. Did all those new prisoners really need to go to jail? And did all of those already behind bars really need to be there?

'We can't ignore the fact that our "tough on crime" stance that puts a person in prison and assumes that their drug problem will somehow magically disappear while they're incarcerated and they'll never get out again and offend, is ridiculous!'—Dr. Teresa May-Williams, forensic psychologist

Madden's answer was, no. He found that Texas had diverted money from treatment and probation services to building prisons. But sending people to prison was costing 10 times as much as putting them on probation, on parole, or in treatment.

"I was kinda silly, what we were doing," says Madden. Then, he discovered that drug treatment wasn't just cheaper — it cut crime much more effectively than prison.

That was the moment, he says, when he knew: "My colleagues are gonna understand this. The public is gonna understand this…The public will be safer and we will spend less money!"

His colleagues agreed. Texas just said no to the new prisons.

Instead, over the next few years, it spent a fraction of the $2 billion those prisons would have cost — about $300 million — to beef up drug treatment programs, mental health centres, probation services and community supervision for prisoners out on parole.

It worked. Costs fell and crime fell, too. Now, word of the Canadian government's crime plan is filtering down to Texas and it's getting bad reviews.

Marc Levin, a lawyer with an anti-tax group called Right on Crime, argues that building more prisons is a waste of taxpayers' money.

"We've see a double-digit decline in the last few years in Texas, both in our prison incarceration rate and, most importantly in our crime rate," says Levin.

"And the way we've done it is by strengthening some of the alternatives to prison."

The statistics bear him out. According to the Texas Department of Corrections, the rate of incarceration fell 9 per cent between 2005 and 2010. In the same period, according to the FBI, the crime rate in Texas fell by 12.8 per cent.

By contrast, Levin says, the Canadian government has increased the prison budget sharply, even though crime in Canada is down to its lowest level since 1973.

In fact, federal spending on corrections in Canada has gone up from $1.6 billion in 2005-06, when Stephen Harper's Conservatives took power, to $2.98 billion in 2010-1011. That's an increase of 86 per cent. Soon, it will double.

Federal corrections budget: Canada

2005–06 $1.6 billion
2010–11 $2.98 billion
2012–13 $3.13 billion

The Harper government has already increased prison sentences by scrapping the two-for-one credit for time served waiting for trial. Bill C-10 would add new and longer sentences for drug offences, increase mandatory minimums and cut the use of conditional sentences such as house arrest.

In each case, Texas is doing the opposite.

So are several other states — egged on by a group of hardline conservatives who have joined the Right on Crime movement. These include Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, former Speaker Newt Gingrich, the tax-fighter Grover Norquist and the former Attorney General for President Ronald Reagan, Ed Meese.

That's not a list of liberals. Marc Levin says Canada is out of step with the best conservative thinking south of the border.

"We've seen in the United States, states and conservative leaders moving in a much different direction than the Conservative Party is saying in Canada," he says.

"I think the conservative thing to do is to be cost-effective and to hold offenders accountable. And, frankly, for many of them, they go to prison, they don't pay child support, they don't have to work in the private sector, they don't pay restitution — I don't believe that's holding people accountable."
Hugging criminals? In Texas?

What Levin means by accountability is what happens at Judge John Creuzot's drug court in Dallas.

Thieves, drug addicts and drunk drivers must file into Creuzot's courtroom each week as a condition of their sentences. They're on probation with the threat of prison hanging over them. They must prove they are keeping up with their drug treatment.

Judge Creuzot cajoles, threatens and lectures them to stick with the program - but he also rewards them when they succeed. If they graduate from treatment, clean and sober, he holds an awards ceremony in his courtroom. Then, he gives them a big, back-slapping Texas hug.

"Congratulations, bro!" he says as he wraps his arms around a hulking ex-addict. "Proud of ya!" he says as he hugs another and places a medal around her neck.

Hugs? From a judge in the state that gave us chain gangs?

It's not your father's Texas. But Judge Creuzot isn't all hugs. He renders a blunt verdict when he is asked what's wrong with the Harper government's plan to get criminals off Canadian streets.

"Nothing, if you don't mind spending a lot of money locking people up and seeing your crime rate go up! Nothing wrong with it at all!"

Creuzot says prison just doesn't work as well as the less expensive methods he uses — because, one way or another, drugs and alcohol lie at the root of 80 per cent of crimes.

"What we've learned," he says, "is that if you deal with those underlying issues with the proper assessments up front, doing that before you make a sentencing decision … and you fund programs that will deal with that on a long-term basis, that you avoid sending thousands of people to prison."

Prison trustees work to dismantle cubicle walls in a dormitory at the Central Unit prison in Sugar Land, Texas in August, as the facility made famous in Leadbelly's blues classic 'Midnight Special' closed its doors. Prison trustees work to dismantle cubicle walls in a dormitory at the Central Unit prison in Sugar Land, Texas in August, as the facility made famous in Leadbelly's blues classic 'Midnight Special' closed its doors. Pat Sullivan/Associated Press But isn't all the treatment expensive?

"It's less expensive!" Creuzot snaps. "We had a university do a cost-benefit analysis. And every dollar we spend is worth $9 and 34 cents in avoided criminal justice costs."

Other studies in Texas agree that treatment and probation services cost about one tenth of what it costs to build and run prisons. Besides that, offenders emerge much less likely to commit fresh crimes than those with similar records who go to prison.
Getting results

At Phoenix House, a drug treatment centre in Wilmer, just south of Dallas, Dr. Teresa May-Williams is a forensic psychologist, paid to assess the risk of letting offenders out on parole or in treatment. She's found that prison is even riskier.

"We can't ignore the fact that our ‘tough on crime' stance that puts a person in prison and assumes that their drug problem will somehow magically disappear while they're incarcerated and they'll never get out again and offend, is ridiculous!" she says.

Dr. May-Williams says most offenders with drug or alcohol problems quickly resume their criminal lifestyle when they get out of prison.

"The data showed that 60 per cent of those individuals will be out and committing a new crime in, on average, about 11 months."

That's four times the rate of those who go through her six-month program instead.

"A big focus of it is getting their drug problem under control," she says, "and then beginning to work on education, job training, getting them employed, getting them focused on becoming a tax payer rather than a tax user. The recidivism rate for probation, the same kind of offender, is somewhere around 15-16 per cent."
A 'hopeless' case

Equally striking is that even the hardest cases can respond to court-ordered treatment.

Kathryn Griffin, by her own account, was a "hopeless" case.

Loquacious, loud and candid, Griffin had six felonies on her record — for drug possession and prostitution — so she was facing 35 years to life in jail when she came to court in Dallas, yet again.

"I'm a person who had a $30,000 a month cocaine habit for 22 years!" she says. But, "I am totally clean and sober today."

And she's stayed clean for eight years — because, she says, she was a "guinea pig" in what was, back then, a new experiment: drug court.

The judge gave her a choice: get clean in drug treatment or flunk out — and die in prison.

She made it. Now, she has a job counselling street prostitutes, pays taxes and tells anyone who will listen that Texas, too, has changed its ways.

"What I like about this state and our government is they are willing to listen, look, study, learn and see results."

Left, right and middle-of-the-road Texans are recommending that Canada do the same — and the Conservatives most of all.


http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/10/17/pol-vp-milewski-texas-crime.html



Is this all some liberal media lie?

Edited, Oct 17th 2011 5:56pm by Olorinus
____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.

clicky
#2 Oct 17 2011 at 5:56 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
15,461 posts
Everything is a liberal conspiracy. Except Glenn Beck and Michelle Bachman's eyes.
____________________________
gbaji wrote:
It'll be close, but Romney has the momentum.
#3 Oct 17 2011 at 6:57 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
8,230 posts
I spoilered it to help with the tl;dr crowd... seriously though - I can't believe I'm seeing Texas peeps criticize a Canadian PM on their "tough on crime" agenda...
____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.

clicky
#4 Oct 17 2011 at 9:54 PM Rating: Excellent
It's a pretty terrible bill.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#5 Oct 18 2011 at 12:40 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
8,230 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
It's a pretty terrible bill.


yeah, agreed. I just didn't realize HOW FAR our country has gone to the right.
____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.

clicky
#6 Oct 18 2011 at 3:40 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,003 posts
How far the country's gone to the right? Are you fucking kidding me?
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#7 Oct 18 2011 at 6:40 AM Rating: Good
******
21,524 posts
Olorinus wrote:
yeah, agreed. I just didn't realize HOW FAR our country has gone to the right.


Are you saying that because it's shocking to see Texas legislators head in the other direction? Are you saying that it's difficult to see such a rebound in thinking? I for one applaud the opposition to building new prisons in favor of treatment and rehabilitation. The fact that it's coming out of TX just illustrates how "rock bottom" they were to begin with.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#8 Oct 18 2011 at 6:53 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
Avatar
*****
12,622 posts
Color me confused. Granted I didn't totally read the article but why is Texas rejecting legislation put forward by a Canadian Lawmaker?

Did something happen that I don't know about?

I don't want to share a country with Ugly!
____________________________
When I say "Red light" stop, when I say "Green light" go.

Ready?
#9 Oct 18 2011 at 7:41 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,003 posts
There would be no sharing. It's all mine. You can borrow a spot though.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#10 Oct 18 2011 at 7:55 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
37,043 posts
Less incarceration, more incineration. Let's make it happen Texas.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
WINSDAY COMIC REVIEW
Current Time Killer


#11 Oct 18 2011 at 8:07 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
Avatar
*****
12,622 posts
Burn baby burn.
____________________________
When I say "Red light" stop, when I say "Green light" go.

Ready?
#12 Oct 18 2011 at 8:32 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
15,461 posts
They eat enough barbecue already.
____________________________
gbaji wrote:
It'll be close, but Romney has the momentum.
#13 Oct 18 2011 at 9:25 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
6,568 posts
It is a gross waste of money and Harper is an idiot. It didn't work in the states, and it isn't going to work here. I am shocked to say this but I agree with Texas?.

Also Our Country is pretty @#%^ing left. But a lot of Harpers idea's are just fluff wrapped in needless spending. Canadian politics is so @#%^ed up. I guess its why I tend to not care that much what happens because in ? years (could be any amount really) we just hit reset and watch the children play in the political playground in Ottawa for another 4 years.



____________________________
.FREE ROG PUPPIES.
#14 Oct 18 2011 at 10:22 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
****
6,429 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
They eat enough barbecue already.


You can never have enough BBQ.
#15 Oct 18 2011 at 10:50 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
8,230 posts
rdmcandie wrote:

Also Our Country is pretty @#%^ing left. But a lot of Harpers idea's are just fluff wrapped in needless spending. Canadian politics is so @#%^ed up. I guess its why I tend to not care that much what happens because in ? years (could be any amount really) we just hit reset and watch the children play in the political playground in Ottawa for another 4 years.



cough cough "ship building"
____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.

clicky
#16 Oct 18 2011 at 12:07 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
6,568 posts
Olorinus wrote:
rdmcandie wrote:

Also Our Country is pretty @#%^ing left. But a lot of Harpers idea's are just fluff wrapped in needless spending. Canadian politics is so @#%^ed up. I guess its why I tend to not care that much what happens because in ? years (could be any amount really) we just hit reset and watch the children play in the political playground in Ottawa for another 4 years.



cough cough "ship building"


cough cough "jobs"
____________________________
.FREE ROG PUPPIES.
#17 Oct 18 2011 at 2:47 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
Avatar
***
1,083 posts
Olorinus wrote:

cough cough "ship building"


rdmcandie wrote:

cough cough "jobs"


Medical marijuana a little harsh?
____________________________
SSubZero wrote:

MNK: "OK we're gonna go in and get those items."
WHM: "Did you have a plan?"
MNK: "Plan? I was going to walk through the front door and start punching people."
#18 Oct 18 2011 at 4:13 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
29,058 posts
Olorinus wrote:
Sir Xsarus wrote:
It's a pretty terrible bill.


yeah, agreed. I just didn't realize HOW FAR our country has gone to the right.


I think your first mistake is associating "building lots of prisons" with being politically "right". Drop that false assumption, and nothing about this story is really that shocking.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#19 Oct 18 2011 at 10:02 PM Rating: Excellent
It has been a hallmark of right leaning governments, so it's a pretty obvious association to make. Tough on crime talk almost always comes out of the right.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#20 Oct 18 2011 at 10:21 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
4,461 posts
Eske Esquire wrote:
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
They eat enough barbecue already.


You can never have enough BBQ.


Spoken like a true Texan.
____________________________
Mah priezt
#21 Oct 19 2011 at 6:13 AM Rating: Excellent
Sir Xsarus wrote:
It has been a hallmark of right leaning governments, so it's a pretty obvious association to make. Tough on crime talk almost always comes out of the right.
The left probably builds more prisons, the right would rather just pack the prisoners into the existing ones like it's a boxcar in Warsaw in 1940.
____________________________
Edited, Mar 21st 2011 2:14pm by Darqflame Lock Thread: Because Lubriderm is silly... ~ de geso

Almalieque wrote:
I know what a glory hole is, but I wasn't sure what the business part was in reference to.

My Anime List
#22 Oct 19 2011 at 7:40 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
6,429 posts
IDrownFish wrote:
Eske Esquire wrote:
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
They eat enough barbecue already.


You can never have enough BBQ.


Spoken like a true Texan.


\m/
#23 Oct 19 2011 at 9:21 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,003 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
It has been a hallmark of right leaning governments, so it's a pretty obvious association to make. Tough on crime talk almost always comes out of the right.
Tough on crime is great. Building more prisons isn't. I'd rather see that money get invested in hiring and fielding more police officers. An increased presence from more police officers tends to lower crime rates, almost universally.

And let's revamp this young offenders crap. Someone hits 20+ offences under the age of 17 and they need to fall under stiffer penalties.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#24 Oct 19 2011 at 9:45 AM Rating: Excellent
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Sir Xsarus wrote:
It has been a hallmark of right leaning governments, so it's a pretty obvious association to make. Tough on crime talk almost always comes out of the right.
Tough on crime is great. Building more prisons isn't. I'd rather see that money get invested in hiring and fielding more police officers. An increased presence from more police officers tends to lower crime rates, almost universally.
Smiley: thumbsup

It's also important to keep the psychiatry programs in prisons active. So many criminals have mental issues and their risk can be greatly dropped with help, but that's an area that's lost lots of funding.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#25 Oct 19 2011 at 10:59 AM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
Avatar
*****
16,234 posts
Yeah. They release an unmedicated paranoid schizophrenic back onto the streets, and then get surprised when he shoots someone for looking at him funny a week later.
____________________________
All jobs at level 99 Bard 4 Life
Hanging out in the Ionosphere these days ::Finale II HNM
Daurdabla 85 completed 3-18-2013 *** Gjallarhorn 95
Turin wrote:
(Zelduh)'s won the argument by going so far off the deep end that no one is willing to follow.
#26 Oct 19 2011 at 11:34 AM Rating: Decent
****
7,819 posts
Much cheaper to execute murderers than to lock them up! It makes perfect sense!
____________________________
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v619/ImGatomon/Request.jpg

. “Power even if it is raw uncontrolled potential is just as dangerous as a trained assassin. It is unpredictable and deadly if your are not prepared." ~Gatomon From the story A Fox Among Wolves.
#27 Oct 19 2011 at 11:39 AM Rating: Excellent
****
7,094 posts
Tailmon wrote:
Much cheaper to execute murderers than to lock them up! It makes perfect sense!


Naw that's expensive with all the lawyers and appeals and stuff. Cheaper to just lock all the crazies in together and turn a blind eye.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#28 Oct 19 2011 at 1:04 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
37,043 posts
We should just go with Arkham Asylum.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
WINSDAY COMIC REVIEW
Current Time Killer


#29 Oct 19 2011 at 1:49 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
15,461 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
We should just go with Arkham Asylum.

You want to turn them into super villains?
____________________________
gbaji wrote:
It'll be close, but Romney has the momentum.
#30 Oct 19 2011 at 1:51 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
37,043 posts
Sure, then it won't make me dressing as Batman look nearly as silly.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
WINSDAY COMIC REVIEW
Current Time Killer


#31 Oct 19 2011 at 2:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
15,461 posts
One could hope.
____________________________
gbaji wrote:
It'll be close, but Romney has the momentum.
#32 Oct 19 2011 at 2:57 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
29,058 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
It has been a hallmark of right leaning governments, so it's a pretty obvious association to make.


It is? So conservative countries like China have great records when it comes to dumping people in prison and letting them rot?

Quote:
Tough on crime talk almost always comes out of the right.


There's a difference between tough on crime and "toss em in prison and throw away the key". It's usually a combination of factors. The right is much most willing to accept laws which allow the specifics of the case to determine the resulting penalties and tends to drive for greater maximums to ensure that people who commit truly heinous crimes are penalized heavily. But it's the left who fight for standardized sentences for a crime based on statute. This creates a condition where in order to punish the worst offenders sufficiently you end out over punishing the majority as well.


I would not simplify the result as just a "conservative/liberal" issue. It's more complicated than that (at least in the US).

Edited, Oct 19th 2011 1:58pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#33 Oct 19 2011 at 3:08 PM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,003 posts
gbaji wrote:
It is? So conservative countries like China have great records when it comes to dumping people in prison and letting them rot?
Poor example, because in the above scenario, China is conservative. Communism is liberal in economics( in theory), but conservative in social aspects.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#34 Oct 19 2011 at 3:12 PM Rating: Excellent
gbaji wrote:
There's a difference between tough on crime and "toss em in prison and throw away the key". It's usually a combination of factors. The right is much most willing to accept laws which allow the specifics of the case to determine the resulting penalties and tends to drive for greater maximums to ensure that people who commit truly heinous crimes are penalized heavily. But it's the left who fight for standardized sentences for a crime based on statute. This creates a condition where in order to punish the worst offenders sufficiently you end out over punishing the majority as well.
Most of the tough on crime stuff, and the topic of this article is about minimum mandatory sentences, not maximum ones. And most if not all the talk of minimum mandatory sentences comes from the right. This has nothing to do with the worst offenders, it's all about putting people in jail who don't necessarily need to be in jail, and removing the judges ability to find alternate solutions.

Ugly addressed the other part.

Edited, Oct 19th 2011 4:15pm by Xsarus
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#35 Oct 19 2011 at 3:27 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
37,043 posts
Besides, prisoners in China don't rot. They get to play World of Warcraft.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
WINSDAY COMIC REVIEW
Current Time Killer


#36 Oct 19 2011 at 5:03 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
29,058 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
gbaji wrote:
It is? So conservative countries like China have great records when it comes to dumping people in prison and letting them rot?
Poor example, because in the above scenario, China is conservative. Communism is liberal in economics( in theory), but conservative in social aspects.


Assuming we agree that a modern liberal is someone who believes that the government has a responsibility to directly involve itself in some aspect of society in order to make society better, then the same label applies. Communism is just a more extreme example, but is a logical extension. The whole "socially conservative and economically liberal" bit is BS. Both are "liberal".

One of the key arguments that conservatives use against applying those modern liberal principles is that they increase the amount of power the government has over our lives and inevitably this will lead to abuses of that power. Liberals love to try to deflect this by labeling the over-authoritarian result "social conservatism", but it's not. Both the economic and social aspects are connected. The more the government takes responsibility for your economic outcomes, the more it *must* control your social activities. You just don't like the result, so you apply a different label to it so as to not have to face the consequences of your own policies.

Well, that or you just honestly bought that BS when it was taught to you by a liberal professor in school. Smiley: wink

Edited, Oct 19th 2011 4:05pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#37 Oct 19 2011 at 5:21 PM Rating: Excellent
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,507 posts
gbaji wrote:
Uglysasquatch wrote:
gbaji wrote:
It is? So conservative countries like China have great records when it comes to dumping people in prison and letting them rot?
Poor example, because in the above scenario, China is conservative. Communism is liberal in economics( in theory), but conservative in social aspects.


Assuming we agree that a modern liberal is someone who believes that the government has a responsibility to directly involve itself in some aspect of society in order to make society better, then the same label applies. Communism is just a more extreme example, but is a logical extension. The whole "socially conservative and economically liberal" bit is BS. Both are "liberal".
Yeah, I know. Those liberals even try to butt into personal matters, like making those pesky women get ultrasounds before they have an abortion! The free market would certainly have provided for this need if it were truly necessary! Instead, here's the government, telling me what I need and forcing the God-fearing American public to foot the bill.

No conservative would get between me and my doctor, that's for sure!
____________________________
Iamadam the Prophet wrote:

You know that feeling you get when you have a little bit of hope, only to have it ripped away? Sweetums feeds on that.
#38 Oct 19 2011 at 5:30 PM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,003 posts
gbaji wrote:
You just don't like the result, so you apply a different label to it so as to not have to face the consequences of your own policies.
My policies? I'm a fucking conservative you tit, who happens to be socially liberal.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#39 Oct 19 2011 at 6:10 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
29,058 posts
Sweetums wrote:
Yeah, I know. Those liberals even try to butt into personal matters, like making those pesky women get ultrasounds before they have an abortion!


You're correct. The liberals would do things like mandate you have an abortion if you've had more than your quota of children that the state can afford to care for. That's so much better!


Showing instances of conservatives applying social restrictions does not counter the argument that liberal policies lead to social restrictions. They're often different and implemented for different reasons is all. My point is this bizarre belief that "liberal" in this context somehow means "free". It doesn't. And in most cases, the liberal political agenda results in far far greater restrictions on people's lives than the conservative.

I'll also point out that the requirements for ultrasounds are a response to increased state funding for abortion over the same period of time. It's a response to increased state interference. If everyone was required to pay for (elective) abortions out of their own pockets, no one would care about requiring ultrasounds. Do you see how one leads to the other?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#40 Oct 19 2011 at 6:14 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
29,058 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
gbaji wrote:
You just don't like the result, so you apply a different label to it so as to not have to face the consequences of your own policies.
My policies? I'm a fucking conservative you tit, who happens to be socially liberal.


While I know that the label "social conservative" has come to have a specific meaning (thanks to liberals repeating it over and over), but if your social position is that government should be as minimally involved in your social actions and choices as possible, you are a social conservative. I disagree with the label you're choosing to apply is all.

You've bought the liberal BS. Modern conservatism is based on classical liberalism. Modern liberalism is based on social liberalism. If we're to use those labels as references to the respective political positions, then it is conservatives who want to minimize government control over our lives, and liberals who want to do the opposite. When I was a kid, I repeated the same "fiscally conservative and socially liberal" language. Over time, I've realize that it's total BS.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#41 Oct 19 2011 at 6:16 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
15,461 posts
Is it just me, or is gbaji getting dumber?
____________________________
gbaji wrote:
It'll be close, but Romney has the momentum.
#42 Oct 19 2011 at 6:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,003 posts
My god, if you could step back and see yourself.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#43 Oct 19 2011 at 6:33 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
29,058 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
Is it just me, or is gbaji getting dumber?


Only if your definition of "dumber" means "disagrees with me".


I know it's an unpopular thing to say, but I honestly believe that it's modern liberal actions which lead to social restrictions on our lives. It may not occur directly, but it does lead to them. I also just completely disagree with the notion that you can separate the concepts of fiscal and social policy. IMO, they are linked directly. As I said before, the more the government takes responsibility for the financial aspects of our lives, the more it *must* take control of the social aspects of our lives.

How many laws have we passed solely based on an argument of the cost to the people (the government really) if we don't? Everything from seat belt laws, to the individual mandate in the health care bill rest on the idea that we can and should regulate the behavior of our citizens, not because their actions directly harm others, but because the government has chosen to take responsibility for the costs of something and the actions in question may affect that cost.

I don't think it's dumb at all to point this out.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#44 Oct 19 2011 at 6:35 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
29,058 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
My god, if you could step back and see yourself.


I see myself and my positions completely clearly and absent the tinted glasses of assumption which most people today seem to wear. Why not actually state what you disagree with and why rather than just make vague statements about me?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#45 Oct 19 2011 at 6:44 PM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
Avatar
*****
16,234 posts
And yet it's Republicans that want to control the most social aspect of our lives, our sex lives.
____________________________
All jobs at level 99 Bard 4 Life
Hanging out in the Ionosphere these days ::Finale II HNM
Daurdabla 85 completed 3-18-2013 *** Gjallarhorn 95
Turin wrote:
(Zelduh)'s won the argument by going so far off the deep end that no one is willing to follow.
#46 Oct 19 2011 at 6:48 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
****
6,429 posts
gbaji wrote:
I see myself and my positions completely clearly and absent the tinted glasses of assumption which most people today seem to wear.


You wear the tinted glasses of assumption that tell you that you can objectively review yourself and your positions.
#47 Oct 19 2011 at 6:53 PM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,003 posts
gbaji wrote:
[Why not actually state what you disagree with and why rather than just make vague statements about me?
I've typed them out twice now and deleted it before posting because I have no desire to see you spin them through your "untinted lenses". You'll spout some crap about how I'm being manipulated by liberals, like you already have, but deny the possibility that you've been manipulated by wing nut "conservatives". It's pointless and tiring.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#48 Oct 19 2011 at 6:59 PM Rating: Excellent
Gbaji views his positions without the biasing tint of reality. I don't give a sh*t what you define your version of conservatism Gbaji. I'm talking about the right as it actually exists.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#49 Oct 19 2011 at 7:01 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
15,461 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
Gbaji views his positions without the biasing tint of reality. I don't give a sh*t what you define your version of conservatism Gbaji. I'm talking about the right as it actually exists.


This.

If you're actually going to argue that China is a great example of liberalism, you are out of your mind.
____________________________
gbaji wrote:
It'll be close, but Romney has the momentum.
#50 Oct 19 2011 at 7:19 PM Rating: Excellent
The Duck Whisperer
*****
15,507 posts
gbaji wrote:
Sweetums wrote:
Yeah, I know. Those liberals even try to butt into personal matters, like making those pesky women get ultrasounds before they have an abortion!


You're correct. The liberals would do things like mandate you have an abortion if you've had more than your quota of children that the state can afford to care for. That's so much better!

They'll even force you to marry gay people!
____________________________
Iamadam the Prophet wrote:

You know that feeling you get when you have a little bit of hope, only to have it ripped away? Sweetums feeds on that.
#51 Oct 19 2011 at 7:34 PM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
Avatar
*****
16,234 posts
Sweetums wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Sweetums wrote:
Yeah, I know. Those liberals even try to butt into personal matters, like making those pesky women get ultrasounds before they have an abortion!


You're correct. The liberals would do things like mandate you have an abortion if you've had more than your quota of children that the state can afford to care for. That's so much better!

They'll even force you to marry gay people!


Rick Santorum's plan is to force all the Democratic single mothers to get married so they can stop sucking the government teat and vote Republican.

He doesn't say who he wants to marry them to, which makes me wonder if he's in cahoots with FLDS or something, even though he is Catholic.

Edited, Oct 19th 2011 9:34pm by catwho
____________________________
All jobs at level 99 Bard 4 Life
Hanging out in the Ionosphere these days ::Finale II HNM
Daurdabla 85 completed 3-18-2013 *** Gjallarhorn 95
Turin wrote:
(Zelduh)'s won the argument by going so far off the deep end that no one is willing to follow.
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 73 All times are in CDT
Jimpadan, lolgaxe, Omegavegeta, Anonymous Guests (70)