Aging
LMB
John Pickels
> The older I get, the more importance I place on tolerance. Still, the
> older I get the less tolerant I become of the Extreme Right and Left.
before Left.
Sometimes folks that lean either way (as if there were only two way to
lean)but are definitely not Extreme get shifted a bit too far. Politics
has always been difficult but lately the one side only, no compromise,
is in my opinion sad butcher of our constitution and the magic of our
founders.
A benevolent dictator would be perfect, unfortunately, for many on both
extremes. Too many.
LMB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Barge Religion and Politics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to barge-relpol...@barge.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/barge.org/d/msgid/barge-relpol/a691046e-aaef-ee49-8d55-ca1036b28709%40gmail.com.
Quick
Patti Beadles
- Stacking the court with the express goal of overturning Roe, and doing it
- The extreme restrictions on reproductive rights in the wake of that
- White supremacy
- Christian nationalism/Religious extremism
- Authoritarianism and a willingness to ignore it
- The anti-movement, e.g. anti-gay, anti-trans, anti-POC, anti-semitic
- Ron DeSantis
- White nationalism
- The center of the Republican base
That's not a comprehensive list but it's a good start.
-P
Quick
Quick asks what I would consider extreme right:- Stacking the court with the express goal of overturning Roe, and doing it
- The extreme restrictions on reproductive rights in the wake of that
- White supremacy
- Christian nationalism/Religious extremism
- Authoritarianism and a willingness to ignore it
- The anti-movement, e.g. anti-gay, anti-trans, anti-POC, anti-semitic
- Ron DeSantis
- White nationalism
- The center of the Republican base
Patti Beadles
-P
LMB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Barge Religion and Politics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to barge-relpol...@barge.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/barge.org/d/msgid/barge-relpol/20230711222515.2A99CC2321%40kpmb.net.
Rick Charles
LMB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Barge Religion and Politics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to barge-relpol...@barge.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/barge.org/d/msgid/barge-relpol/0b073e41-09d4-4f34-987b-016527c0d06a%40app.fastmail.com.
Quick
Quick
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/barge.org/d/msgid/barge-relpol/d5f287db-5e5a-4de7-a323-e3be04be2c70%40app.fastmail.com.
LMB
Patti Beadles
> "denial of the election of Biden" Please elaborate on denial?
In a normal world this would maybe be a few extremists on the fringe and both parties would be united in criticizing this aberrant attack on the foundations of our democracy. In the current Republican party this behavior is treated as normal, and the few Republicans who have been willing to stand up for the truth and the Constitution have been voted out of office.
This is not normal.
-P
P.S. You know what else isn't normal? Tommy Tuberville trying to clam that white nationalists aren't racist. OK, it's probably normal for HIM, but it's not normal for our country.
Rick Charles
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/barge.org/d/msgid/barge-relpol/CANF_7tjZ3jtmYOGwpGfdyd1-OynP_sdC2O978167JLiwWKEmyg%40mail.gmail.com.
E. Stephen Mack
John Pickels
Quick, Patti, Pickles, are back.Not a single argument. Adhominem.Yeah!
LB
On Tue, Jul 11, 2023, 4:25 PM Patti Beadles <pat...@pattib.org> wrote:
> Thank you for the reply; but I was kind of looking for a centrist's view of extreme right :)
You got one. You're welcome!
-P
While I am not a "centrist" ... at least I do not I understand what that actually might be, I would describe myself as "leaning right" when only two "leans" are allow to exist. [It must be remembered that I really like a lot of what is described as "libertarian" (small "l") definitely not Libertarian.]
Apparently, Patti thinks she expresses the views of the "centrists" ... I do not believe she supported that idea in the quite specific "opinions" she expressed and then "ignored" with this response.
I will attempt one example ... her ideas on the Constitution and Roe v Wade seem quite in tune with what I consider more than leaning "left" ... I agreed with the compromise created by Roe v Wade even though it is quite obviously unconstitutional. It was a dramatic "compromise" of politically, religiously, humanly, scientifically, morally "ideas" about human life. "Abortion" is a State matter. It involves life and death. [Just like the death penalty, allowed by some states and denied in others.]
Roe v Wade denied abortion when it was "too late" to deny the rights of an unborn human being and forbade it from being denied at the earliest stage of the life of that human being and controlled it in the middle. A loser for both ends of the political spectrum but a compromise none the less. Choice and compromise. I was unhappy when it was overturned. I hope it would be reinstated ... maybe a real compromise in the federal government to amend the Constitution to allow its return. Unfortunately, people who are not just "leaning" left or right at not in charge any more. I lean right and approve of Roe v Wade even if it is unconstitutional ... I detest that some States would allow a living baby to be killed at birth because the mother (fathers need not be consulted) just did not do it long ago when it was "legal" but now she can wait until the end to slaughter a child. [Remember, we are not talking about Sophie's choice here or her life is in danger ... she can just throw the child in the garbage and walk away.]
You asked for an opinion from a centrist but you did not get one.
John Pickels
I certainly acknowledge being a progressive. I acknowledge that I'm left of center.
With that acknowledgment, I would say an extreme example of the Right currently is the denial of the election of Biden. It tears at the fabric of democracy as Pickles has pointed out.What is most frightening about this extreme view? Is that many of the Republican leaders elected and otherwise except and spread this nonsense.What is the justification for such ugly disregard of the electorate?
I am not impressed with those who say that they "deny" the election of Biden ... I remember with another guy challenged presidential election results but did not get ripped in the press about it. I am quite sure that there is fraud in all elections ... certainly the one I am familiar with. Both sides buy votes from poor people ... sometimes with promises that will never be kept and sometimes with cold hard cash. Old news ... does anyone doubt that the pharmaceutical industry works both sides of the aisle so it does not matter to them who is in charge as long as they get the benefits?
There is no un-slanted news any more. Financially, the "sides" have chosen when they want to hear and if their side does not continue to produce it, they pick another source. Free press indeed.
But I agree, it is stupid to continue a stupid argument ... too
many like to avoid the compromises by trying for all out control.
The evil works both ways at both ends.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/barge.org/d/msgid/barge-relpol/CANF_7tjZ3jtmYOGwpGfdyd1-OynP_sdC2O978167JLiwWKEmyg%40mail.gmail.com.
John Pickels
Rick, please tell your friend that a tiny handful of individual Democrats not in power and in denial of Trump winning the election in 2016 and expressing it via a phrase that just means "the current President does not represent me or my views" does not in any way compare to baseless claims of election fraud by countless prominent elected officials despite more than 50 lawsuits not finding any basis for that claim, and not one lawsuit finding in favor of election fraud. Nor does it begin to touch the atrocity of January 6 and the culpability of Trump for the loss of life and violence for that day.
50 lawsuits with not one finding of fraud sounds like a pretty
good reason to not believe that whatever those that were saying
there was fraud were not successful in "proving" it. Sounds like
a good result. Why keep talking about it?
On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 12:12 AM Rick Charles <rick.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
Denial of the election like the bulk of the Democrats stating "Not my president" about Trump when he was in office? That kind of denial? Again, asking for a friend.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Barge Religion and Politics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to barge-relpol...@barge.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/barge.org/d/msgid/barge-relpol/CAL9e_KKGQ1c-CxoCzpzDom188Z2ZqhHn2quNGGTOCwxEFh%2B9Qg%40mail.gmail.com.
Paul Zuzelo
Quick
Don't play word games -- e.g., feign ignorance or stupidity about the definition and/or usage of common words like "denial"
Rick Charles
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/barge.org/d/msgid/barge-relpol/1057bdc5-25f9-47d3-bb96-74b2322b6d3en%40barge.org.
Patti Beadles
> Those who were basically welcomed in by Capitol Hill Police through open
> doors and just wandered around and didn't harm anyone or anything are STILL
> being held with those who *were* violent.
-P
John Pickels
Quick wrote:"denial of the election of Biden" Please elaborate on denial?
Rick wrote:"Denial of the election like the bulk of the Democrats stating "Not my president" about Trump when he was in office?"
In all good faith and seriousness, I'm going to make a suggestion assuming participants in this group really want to engage in serious and substantive discussion about political topics.
Don't feign ignorance by pretending to misunderstand the definition or usage of common words like "denial" or phrases like "denial of the election of Biden." If you think a definition is imprecise, don't just use quotes to indicate that, but instead write your own definition for clarity's sake. If your goal is to "own the libs" by pretending to misunderstand and/or nitpicking at every definition and phrase, then meaningful discussion is impossible.
Don't make unprovable, blanket assertions like "... the bulk of the Democrats stating [something about Trump]..." when no such "bulk" or majority of Democrats ever did so. Instead, cite reliable, verifiable statistical research that shows over 50% of Democrats agreeing with any fact that you assert, or quantify the statement accurately (e.g., "In June of 2022, about 70% of Republicans said they don't think Joe Biden is the legitimate winner of the 2020 election, according to most polls."). If you simply don't like the sentiment expressed by the other side, then state that, but don't ascribe it to the bulk or majority of your opponents without some proof.
If you honestly don't understand a phrase (e.g., "denial of the election of Biden") be specific about exactly what you don't understand so that you can elicit a specific, targeted explanation.
Feigning misunderstanding, writing unsupported assertions, nitpicking and denying common word definitions, etc., all combined to kill any serious discussion on RELPOL in the past. Unless something changes, the same fate awaits any resurrection of RELPOL.
Paul, you are responding to my post (below) but actually talking about Quick's post which he already responded to ... and which I quote for you.
[and before you go off on an assumption again, note that I did not say which candidate. ]"
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
--On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 8:37:51 AM UTC-7 johnp...@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/12/2023 2:56 AM, E. Stephen Mack wrote:
Rick, please tell your friend that a tiny handful of individual Democrats not in power and in denial of Trump winning the election in 2016 and expressing it via a phrase that just means "the current President does not represent me or my views" does not in any way compare to baseless claims of election fraud by countless prominent elected officials despite more than 50 lawsuits not finding any basis for that claim, and not one lawsuit finding in favor of election fraud. Nor does it begin to touch the atrocity of January 6 and the culpability of Trump for the loss of life and violence for that day.50 lawsuits with not one finding of fraud sounds like a pretty good reason to not believe that whatever those that were saying there was fraud were not successful in "proving" it. Sounds like a good result. Why keep talking about it?
On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 12:12 AM Rick Charles <rick.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
Denial of the election like the bulk of the Democrats stating "Not my president" about Trump when he was in office? That kind of denial? Again, asking for a friend.--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Barge Religion and Politics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to barge-relpol...@barge.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/barge.org/d/msgid/barge-relpol/CAL9e_KKGQ1c-CxoCzpzDom188Z2ZqhHn2quNGGTOCwxEFh%2B9Qg%40mail.gmail.com.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Barge Religion and Politics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to barge-relpol...@barge.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/barge.org/d/msgid/barge-relpol/1057bdc5-25f9-47d3-bb96-74b2322b6d3en%40barge.org.
John Pickels
Capitol, in the Capitol, but being peaceful and not creating any
disturbance at all?
What was the total number of people in the Capitol?
What was the total number of people arrested?
What was the total number of people put in jail?
What was the total number of people in jail two months after the incident?
Three months?
Four months?
What was the total number of people denied bond?
What was the total number of people still in jail on Jan 6, 2023
How many people have been convicted?
Are there any other people still being held?
Have you ever heard of a peaceful protest that got bad because some
people involved actually wanted a violent protest but most did not?
What was the total number of people convicted?
Paul Zuzelo
Quick wrote:
John Pickels
On 7/11/2023 9:20 PM, LMB wrote:
I certainly acknowledge being a progressive. I acknowledge that I'm left of center.
With that acknowledgment, I would say an extreme example of the Right currently is the denial of the election of Biden. It tears at the fabric of democracy as Pickles has pointed out.What is most frightening about this extreme view? Is that many of the Republican leaders elected and otherwise except and spread this nonsense.What is the justification for such ugly disregard of the electorate?
I am not impressed with those who say that they "deny" the election of Biden ... I remember with another guy challenged presidential election results but did not get ripped in the press about it. I am quite sure that there is fraud in all elections ... certainly the one I am familiar with. Both sides buy votes from poor people ... sometimes with promises that will never be kept and sometimes with cold hard cash. Old news ... does anyone doubt that the pharmaceutical industry works both sides of the aisle so it does not matter to them who is in charge as long as they get the benefits?
There is no un-slanted news any more. Financially, the "sides" have chosen when they want to hear and if their side does not continue to produce it, they pick another source. Free press indeed.
But I agree, it is stupid to continue a stupid argument ... too many like to avoid the compromises by trying for all out control. The evil works both ways at both ends.
I sure seem like I can kill a thread as good as anyone.
I agree that the extreme right is a danger to our country but I also believe that the extreme left is also a danger.
Too many folks was "their" ideas to be the only correct way ... no compromise necessary. All people, every single one, must follow THE rule ... no exceptions. No State need have a different rule for any action of any citizen. No city or town or county should differ in any way from what the ruler/federal government says is the correct LAW.
No guns in any small uninhabited part of the country ... no guns means no gun violence in New York city ... the guy living on the land in Alaska do not need to kill innocent animals to eat. He needs to move to a big city ... all the people there will tell him what he needs to do, what to say, how to live and put him in jail if he disagrees with one word.
History of eugenics - Wikipedia
7 Beloved Famous People Who Were Wildly Pro-Eugenics| National Catholic Register (ncregister.com)
21 Eugenics Movement Supporters That Might Shock You (allthatsinteresting.com)
Being a "racist" was more than just a small deal in the USA. After the WWII, it was not only black folks that had a problem. I remember the "NO JEWS ALLOWED" signs were up in hotels and restaurants and black folks had to go "around back" to get a hamburger. New York had those signs and so did Miami Beach.
I do not want to go "back" to only one way of thinking is the correct way of thinking.
Extremes bother me ... we do not need a dictator no matter how "far" he/she is.
We need to return to States Rights and not get one person "in charge" ... divide the federal government and make them stick to what the constitution says they can and cannot do ... let the lesser government entities at lower levers take care of their own people.
We do not need people in California and New York (just because
there are so many of them) telling the people of Nebraska and
Wyoming EXACTLY what to do and think and be and how to live in
every single way every single day.
Oregon has an interesting history of not treating black folks
very good ...
State of Oregon: Black in Oregon - National and Oregon Chronology of Events
Oregon never shows up here to be added to the South as evil.
Racism is bad and can start a war. Whether it is Jews, Indians, Blacks, Japanese ... add your favorite.
Too many people think killing an innocent child as long as the cord is attached is perfectly OK. I do not want those people in charge of anything ... some folks just want to go "too far" with their version of the truth. All sides of the political spectrum are often guilty as charged.
John Pickels
Paul Zuzelo
Dave Horwitz
Quick wrote:"I was thinking it was denial of future election and not denial of past election results."
well, it's just a teeny bit disingenuous that you believe
Patti Beadles
My question for Rick was very simple. How many people who "just wandered around and didn't harm anyone or anything" are "STILL being held with those who *were* violent"? I await Rick's supporting evidence.
I'll take a crack at some of the Pickels questions anyway.
More than 2000 people entered the building. I don't think we have a precise number but that seems like a sufficient approximation.
The following data are as of July 7 2023:
- 1064 people have been charged federally.
- 616 have pleaded guilty.
- 58 people have been convicted on all charges.
- 37 received mixed verdicts.
- 1 has been acquitted on all charges.
- 563 people have been sentenced.
- 62 have received prison time.
- 5 cases have been dismissed
As for statistics on people still being held awaiting trial, I am deferring to Rick on that since he made the original assertion and therefore must have better data than I do.
-P
John Pickels
Thanks for your reply, Patti
The protest was not a good moment in USA history. The trouble makers were properly punished in my opinion. I personally do not believe that "everyone" came to the Capitol with the same intent, but that is just an opinion. Those that did were foolish at the least.
I wonder how much damage and human beings were hurt in the protest?
I do know that there have been many other protests over the last few years. Do you think they got the same coverage and treatment (just your opinion) as the protestors at the Capitol?
List of incidents and protests of the 2020–2023 United States racial unrest - Wikipedia
[This is very well presented but seems to me to be a bit slanted.]
Polls have estimated that between 15 million and 26 million people have participated at some point in the demonstrations in the United States, making them the largest protests in United States history.
Armed members of the Not Fucking Around Coalition (NFAC) have demonstrated in separate protests across the US, making their first appearance on May 12. On July 4, 100 to 200 NFAC members marched through Stone Mountain Park near Atlanta, Georgia, calling for the removal of the Confederate monument. On July 25, more than 300 members were gathered in Louisville, Kentucky, to protest the lack of action against the officers responsible for the March shooting of Breonna Taylor. On October 3, over 400 members of the NFAC along with over 200 other armed protesters marched in downtown Lafayette, Louisiana.
On March 13, Breonna Taylor was shot and killed. Demonstrations over her death began on May 26, 2020, and lasted into August. One person was shot and killed during the protests.
Protest erupted again on September 23, the night after the grand jury verdict was announced, protesters gathered in the Jefferson Square Park area of Louisville, as well as many other cities in the United States, including Los Angeles, Dallas, Minneapolis, New York, Chicago, Seattle. In Louisville, two LMPD officers were shot during the protest and one suspect was kept in custody.
The George Floyd protests are generally regarded as marking the start of the 2020 United States unrest.
In Minneapolis–Saint Paul alone, the immediate aftermath of Floyd's murder was the second-most destructive period of local unrest in United States history, after the 1992 Los Angeles riots. Over a three night period, the cities experienced two deaths, 617 arrests, and upwards of $500 million in property damage to 1,500 locations, including 150 properties that were set on fire.
A riot occurred in downtown Minneapolis in reaction to false rumors about the suicide of Eddie Sole Jr., a 38-year-old African American man; demonstrators believed he had been shot by police officers. Surveillance video showed that Sole Jr. shot himself in the head during a manhunt for a homicide suspect in which he was the person of interest. Controversially, the police released the CCTV camera footage of the suicide in attempts to stop the unrest. Overnight vandalism and looting of stores from August 26 to 27 reached a total of 76 property locations in Minneapolis–Saint Paul, including four businesses that were set on fire. State and local officials arrested a total of 132 people during the unrest.
On August 29, a large group of pro-Trump counterprotesters, arrived in downtown Portland by a vehicle convoy. They were met with opposition from the protesters, resulting in multiple instances of physical clashes. 1 counterprotester was shot and killed in an incident during the protest.
On October 26 Walter Wallace Jr. was killed by Philadelphia police officers while holding a knife and ignoring orders to drop it. A march for Wallace occurred in West Philadelphia, while other areas of the city reported looting and vandalism. Police also said 30 officers were injured, many struck by bricks and other debris and that 91 protesters were arrested.
On December 8, protesters in Portland gathered to blockade parts of the Humboldt Neighborhood in order to protect a family who had been evicted after living in said house for 65 years. Protesters blockaded the area similar to the Capitol Hill Occupied Protest.
Several protests took place outside the Kenosha County Courthouse in Kenosha, Wisconsin during the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse between November 1, 2021, and November 19, 2021. Following Rittenhouse's acquittal on November 19, rioting broke out in Portland, Oregon. Large protests also occurred in New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Minneapolis.
Lots more, of
course ... peaceful protests are a big part of American
history. Some protests are not peaceful.
Protests are sometimes called "attacks" ... that does not seem consistent.
We morn the loss of that great man, MLK ... he understood the power of peaceful protest.
Nolan Dalla
-P
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Barge Religion and Politics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to barge-relpol...@barge.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/barge.org/d/msgid/barge-relpol/20230713185226.F1D6DC2321%40kpmb.net.
Patti Beadles
The Wikipedia page for the attack seems to have an excellent synopsis and is well-cited: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_6_United_States_Capitol_attack
-P
Rick Charles
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/barge.org/d/msgid/barge-relpol/351837820.1566902.1689278808607%40mail.yahoo.com.
Paul Zuzelo
Paul Zuzelo
Quick wrote:
Quick
Jeez, Quick, can you cite three instances in the past year where someone used the phrase "denial of the election of Biden" and they WEREN'T referring to the results of the 2020 election? That phrase is almost as unambiguous as "the sun rises in the east."
Patti Beadles
> I guess I had no idea. Thanks for telling me what I actually meant when I
> said that.
-P
Nolan Dalla
Quick
There may be a few people in the world who don't live in that reality but pretty much anyone is going to understand what that phrase means.
Patti Beadles
> (blah blah ... "birthing person" .. blah blah)
Oh look, a hook with a worm on it! I'm not biting. Quick, let us know when you're interested in a good-faith discussion.
-P
John Pickels
Thanks for the reference ... any reason to just dismiss all the other questions?
John Pickels
We all pick and choose which discussions are offered in "good-faith" [sorry for the quote] don't we?
We pick one and ignore all others.
Paul Zuzelo
We pick one and ignore all others."
Randy Hudson
One way to make that less likely is for each of them, when they suspect a difference between their own usage and others' usage, to explain what they understand as that meaning. That lets the other person recognize the mismatch, draw attention to it, and explain their own understanding.
Once each person knows what the other means, it doesn't matter which meaning is more right; what matters is that they understand one another's points.
John Pickels
It's easy for a conversation to go off the rails if the participants have different understandings of the meaning of a word or phrase, but they each believe the other means the same as they do.
One way to make that less likely is for each of them, when they suspect a difference between their own usage and others' usage, to explain what they understand as that meaning. That lets the other person recognize the mismatch, draw attention to it, and explain their own understanding.
Once each person knows what the other means, it doesn't matter which meaning is more right; what matters is that they understand one another's points.
Usually there is more than one thread in a discussion group. This group currently only has one thread. It is more than enough to cause problems of its own.
Interesting ... I'll start a new thread named
WORDS
On July 13, 2023 7:49:46 PM EDT, Quick <qu...@imapmail.org> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 13, 2023, at 3:26 PM, Paul Zuzelo wrote:
Jeez, Quick, can you cite three instances in the past year where someone used the phrase "denial of the election of Biden" and they WEREN'T referring to the results of the 2020 election? That phrase is almost as unambiguous as "the sun rises in the east."
I guess I had no idea. Thanks for telling me what I actually meant when I said that.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Barge Religion and Politics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to barge-relpol...@barge.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/barge.org/d/msgid/barge-relpol/B946CB67-A686-462B-9B87-9E74EAD0BBB0%40panix.com.
John Pickels
The word is "centrist".
First used as a political opinion ... limited to not leaning too far
left or right.
Oops, may need to define "too far" ... and "left" and "right".
There we go ... and when we finish, we answer the simple question ...
Is Patti a "centrist" in her political opinions?
Next "word" ... follows
Randy Hudson
What dimensions are to be considered? Nowadays US views tend to be correlated; I can generally predict someone's views on gun control based on their position on abortion. That is not the case outside the US, and has not historically been the case within the US.
For issues that are bimodal, what does a "centrist" position mean? Most people are either men, or women. People at the center of that distribution are relatively rare. Does a centrist take a central position on bimodal questions, or take a modal position but not care very strongly, or take a mix of modal positions that makes it hard to characterize that mix on a two-dimensional left-right label?
I have generally found I learn more when talking with those whose politics I disagree with, and I feel better when talking with those whose politics I agree with. When I'm feeling stressed, it's easier to avoid talking with those I disagree with politically, even though I learn less that way. Perhaps if others behave similarly, it explains why they are less prone to discuss politics with those they disagree with politically.
bere...@tds.net
From: Randy <i...@panix.com>
To: barge-relpol <barge-...@barge.org>
Date: Friday, 14 July 2023 2:43 PM CDT
Subject: Re: [BARGE-RelPol] Centrist
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Barge Religion and Politics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to barge-relpol...@barge.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/barge.org/d/msgid/barge-relpol/8DA08F14-BDDD-45ED-918A-2AA71512232E%40panix.com.
Quick
This is exactly the kind of response I meant when I wrote, in my original post,
Paul Zuzelo
Patti Beadles
> Patti says:
> "Oh look, a hook with a worm on it! I'm not biting. Quick, let us know
> when you're interested in a good-faith discussion."
>
> This has been your response for a few years now. You don't seem to be
> interested in any sort of discussion either.
Would you like to have a legitimate, good-faith discussion about the issues around the 2020 presidential election and the ways in which Donald Trump and his associates attempted to subvert the will of the voters? If so, I'm absolutely down for having that conversation. Please bring your A-game.
-P
Rick Charles
John Pickels
Oldbear once told me he was middle of the road. I said ok but the road in Mississippi runs pretty far to the right.
Apparently, I took the one less traveled. LOL
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Barge Religion and Politics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to barge-relpol...@barge.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/barge.org/d/msgid/barge-relpol/896804747.25598951.1689364742837.JavaMail.zimbra%40tds.net.
John Pickels
On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 12:43 PM Randy Hudson <i...@panix.com> wrote:
Where is the political center? If it's just an average of everybody's views, whose views are included in that average?
What dimensions are to be considered? Nowadays US views tend to be correlated; I can generally predict someone's views on gun control based on their position on abortion. That is not the case outside the US, and has not historically been the case within the US.
For issues that are bimodal, what does a "centrist" position mean? Most people are either men, or women. People at the center of that distribution are relatively rare. Does a centrist take a central position on bimodal questions, or take a modal position but not care very strongly, or take a mix of modal positions that makes it hard to characterize that mix on a two-dimensional left-right label?
I have generally found I learn more when talking with those whose politics I disagree with, and I feel better when talking with those whose politics I agree with. When I'm feeling stressed, it's easier to avoid talking with those I disagree with politically, even though I learn less that way. Perhaps if others behave similarly, it explains why they are less prone to discuss politics with those they disagree with politically.
This is definitely the sort of response I was hoping for ... I
hope there are more.
I also might not qualify as being a "centrist" because I do lean right in the mandatory two-sides-only implied by the very word "centrist" as usually used in political discussions.
I was surprised that Patti described herself (at least I think that is what she said) as a "centrist". I am hopeful she might elaborate and also respond in more to the more detailed comments I made.
She is definitely extremely intelligent and well educated ... but she seems also quite dedicated to one way of looking at certain issues. That is her right (no pun intended) of course but she seems non-interested in other ways of openness to compromise in various areas ... one way only sort of thing. No exceptions.
John
----
On July 14, 2023 2:39:41 PM EDT, John Pickels <johnp...@gmail.com> wrote:The word is "centrist". First used as a political opinion ... limited to not leaning too far left or right. Oops, may need to define "too far" ... and "left" and "right". There we go ... and when we finish, we answer the simple question ... Is Patti a "centrist" in her political opinions? Next "word" ... follows
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Barge Religion and Politics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to barge-relpol...@barge.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/barge.org/d/msgid/barge-relpol/8DA08F14-BDDD-45ED-918A-2AA71512232E%40panix.com.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Barge Religion and Politics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to barge-relpol...@barge.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/barge.org/d/msgid/barge-relpol/CALgMZTAvj-vWoq3cKQQfjXXwv2B-hkJpO1G8A6_4j_3X11D0RA%40mail.gmail.com.
John Pickels
Trump" "and his associates" [again I assume you mean those that entered
the Capitol and made a disturbance, Proud Boys, etc.] ... [intended] and
"attempted to subvert the will of the voters" [and "voters" do not
include anyone who did not vote for Biden or illegal votes for Biden].
I hope I am clear.
Do you think there was anything about the entire affair that actually
worked to the advantage of anyone involved in that "attempt"?
I do not believe that anything that happened seemed "to me" to be an
attempt to do anything other than make a giant mess happen ... I do
believe that anyone involved seemed to have no idea that makes any sense
to me about how such a "demonstration" would work out for the best for
them or for whatever it was that makes crazy people do what they do.
[I know you do not like comparisons about demonstrations (that get out
of hand) other than just this one, but I again try and compare
demonstrations during BLM actions that result in quite serious non-good
actions and results.]
What I mean is, that maybe "some" of the demonstrators was not as Proud
as some other demonstrators and got involved in something more than they
thought was going on ... i.e. a demonstration against a result that they
felt was wrong and the government was not acting impartially in the
investigations.
So, I do NOT believe that all the demonstrators in question were trying
to "subvert the will of the voters" ... some were and some wanted to
create a shameful and horrible attack on the Capitol of our country.
I was hurt when they took down the statue of Andrew Jackson ... but I am
not going to hurt someone about it and I am not going to think ill of
the many BLM folks that I know. I also know that those "cancellations"
have IMO a negative effect on people who are not hard-left (whatever
that really means) and really quite racist in their own right. White
racists exist ... so do Black racists. So what ... as long as neither
gets in charge of anything really important (killing Andrew Jackson is
close) then maybe we can learn to just get along with each other.
Would you support a constitutional amendment that made Roe v Wade the law?
Women would lose their right to abortion in the Third Trimester in every
State ... OK? I wish it could happen.
Ed Baker
>
Sorry, I'm just catching up here. This statement rubs me the wrong way, even though I agree with it in theory. The problem is that it implies that they are equal.
John Pickels
Ed, do you consider yourself a "centrist"?
Do you consider Patti a "centrist"?
Do you consider me a "centrist"?
Welcome back to RelPol ... all opinions are correct.
Rick Charles
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Barge Religion and Politics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to barge-relpol...@barge.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/barge.org/d/msgid/barge-relpol/CADS9rk3X-%3D61twWrc0scpHDZvrV6H%3Dn-vMeRLFhBRehPh3rJNQ%40mail.gmail.com.
John Pickels
I guess that's all in your perspective, Ed. I totally disagree. Both sides have their whackjobs, and both sides have alternating power. A pox on both.
RC
Chuck Breuninger a.k.a. Rick Charles
Indeed ... I see great danger from the extreme right ... I am amazed that so many only think there is danger at one end.
John Pickels
> sides have their whackjobs, and both sides have alternating power. A
> pox on both.
>
> RC
side and find no problem with their own extremists ... sometimes, they
do not realize their own prejudice. Sometimes, they like their side and
want the other side to become extinct or at lease powerless to stop
their agendas.
Randy Hudson
On July 18, 2023 2:59:43 PM EDT, John Pickels <johnp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Apparently, there are many people who are only afraid of the "other" side and find no problem with their own extremists ... sometimes, they do not realize their own prejudice. Sometimes, they like their side and want the other side to become extinct or at least powerless to stop their agendas.
It's true that many people are only afraid of the other side. In my youth, the majority of those fearful were afraid of the radical left, the Weather Underground and other groups that explicitly dismissed the democratic political process as inadequate.
Nowadays, most seem to fear the radical right, for very similar reasons: they support the use of force and fear, rather than the democratic political process, to achieve their goals.
The attack on the Capitol on 6 January 2021 was a broader attack on the principles and practice of democracy in this country than the far more deadly attack on 11 September 2001. Investigating how it came to happen, and what laws might need to change to make it less likely to happen again, should have been a top priority immediately. Instead, some Republicans sought to disrupt or prevent the investigation, to discredit the investigators, and when a report was finally issued by the House Committee tasked with
doing so, it was belittled and dismissed.
That's scary, mostly because it surprises me. It's not what I expect from my country.
John Pickels
thing. I think it was a also a stupid thing. If the purpose was to
swing central voters to the hard right, I think it resulted in just the
opposite feelings.
I think it might swing a lot of votes away from Republicans. I do not
think that those who would have shot the demonstrators would have helped
their side of the discussion at all. I am surprised such was suggested;
although, I have heard of the other side that thinks raids on
supermarkets should be stopped with bloodshed.
Such attacks/demonstrations do not help the side that I think most
people would put those events on in any case. I just wish everyone
would seek more peaceful means of getting their point across.
Unfortunately, I think that "buying votes" is a bigger problem than
either side wishes to consider ... I think that is because both sides
are guilty. Getting better at swinging the vote one way or the other is
NOT IMO the way to make life a better place in the USA. I do not excuse
anyone.
I am not sure what the solution might be. I do not like any of the
possible candidates for president. I like that the Congress is divided
right now and nothing stupid can get through the place. Sad but true.
We need people on both/all sides of the aisles to compromise a little
and let some things from both sides pass and just get along.