Sure, but honestly? That's the (third-to) last war. It's pretty far from the scariest threat around right now, if you're looking at the big picture.
"global-warming-may-be-irreversible-by-2006"
As Z S (who sounds like he's doing good work in the area) said, there are degrees involved, and a good bit of scientific uncertainty, synergistic with our present emissions, about what to expect over a certain baseline of unavoidable climate change (global warming of at least 2 degrees celsius and perhaps closer to 3). Also as he said, it's pretty important to do what's possible to mitigate that change to avoid what may be potentially catastrophic results (perhaps in the 4 degree neighborhood, almost certainly above that), which will affect a great many more people (no comparison, really), and probably far more severely, than our detention policy. Ignoring the issue is not only potentially suicidal in the long run, but privileges present (and, to an extent, American) people over future (and primarily non-American) ones.
― C.K. Dexter Holland, Friday, 16 December 2011 16:31 (twelve years ago) link
Not that it's right, necessarily, to present it as an either-or, but I think that is in fact the case if this is your single issue on whether to vote for Obama, and one issue is unquestionably more important than the other imo.
― C.K. Dexter Holland, Friday, 16 December 2011 16:33 (twelve years ago) link
http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2011/12/14/reinventing-debtors-prisons-for-the-21st-century/
In many jurisdictions, bail posted to get out of being jailed for contempt of the discovery process is used to pay creditors. Besides being a great deal for creditors — as noted above, people often pay a huge economic penalty to get out of jail — it functions as a de facto debtors’ prison. As law professor Alan White described this process, “If, in effect, people are being incarcerated until they pay bail, and bail is being used to pay their debts, then they’re being incarcerated to pay their debts.” As the FTC noted, debtors being jailed for nonappearance “may be willing to pay the bail (and indirectly the judgement) using assets (such as Social Security payments) the law prohibits creditors from garnishing or otherwise obtaining to satisfy a judgement.”
― slandblox goole, Friday, 16 December 2011 16:35 (twelve years ago) link
this payroll tax cut thing is so amazingly stupid. seems bizarre that Boehner wants to make such a big deal out of killing the Keystone pipeline - which is what will happen if his stupid amendment passes.
― aesthetic partisan (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:04 (twelve years ago) link
I think it's def the more important issue - otoh Obama's been totally shitty w/regard to addressing energy policy and climate change too so uh, what's yr point
― aesthetic partisan (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:05 (twelve years ago) link
and don't get me wrong I have no doubt the GOP crowd would be exponentially worse on this issue
― aesthetic partisan (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:06 (twelve years ago) link
i've given up hope of any u.s. president doing the right thing on energy/climate policy. at this point i think only civil disobedience in the u.s. on a large scale will accomplish anything.
― Z S, Friday, 16 December 2011 17:08 (twelve years ago) link
i think you'd have to see an american city seriously threatened by rising waters. i think even venice could disappear (let alone dhaka) and it would mean little here.
otoh if that happened, we'd be in a place where global crop yields would be haywire. if the food system gets threatened i think americans would definitely respond.
though again, as with all things in US governance, we would have had waxman's carbon bill be the law of the land if not for the current internal rules and practices of the US senate
― slandblox goole, Friday, 16 December 2011 17:13 (twelve years ago) link
you'd have to see an american city seriously threatened by rising waters
too bad New Orleans wasn't really an American city. never calvinist enough for that.
― Aimless, Friday, 16 December 2011 17:14 (twelve years ago) link
otoh if that happened, we'd be in a place where global crop yields would be haywire.
this is pretty much guaranteed to happen. of course, the right wing denialists will insist on some other unscientific explanation (END TIMES! probably lol)
― aesthetic partisan (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:15 (twelve years ago) link
i think in that case it will turn into something like the memory of the civil rights movement -- conservatives will completely forget they were on the wrong side at the time. liberals will turn out to be the "real anti-conservationists" or something, by 2040
― slandblox goole, Friday, 16 December 2011 17:18 (twelve years ago) link
Libertards, conservaturds, they're all sheep!
― billy goat, Friday, 16 December 2011 17:44 (twelve years ago) link
don't you mean to say "sheeple"?
― Aimless, Friday, 16 December 2011 18:00 (twelve years ago) link
btw as much as i was trying to troll upthread i promise i do not agree w/ c.k. dexter holland
― max max max max, Friday, 16 December 2011 18:07 (twelve years ago) link
wow. no payroll tax agreement unless we agree to destroy our future
Regarding that legislation, Don Stewart, a spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell emails me with the following statement: “The Leader will not support any bill without the Keystone XL language as part of the agreement.”
it boggles the mind
― Z S, Friday, 16 December 2011 19:30 (twelve years ago) link
a REPUBLICAN is refusing to lower taxes for people, that's crazy enoughunless we address our oil addiction by exploiting disgusting, last resort veins. fuck.
― Z S, Friday, 16 December 2011 19:31 (twelve years ago) link
the weird thing that I don't get is that, paradoxically, if that amendment is approved it will essentially kill the project altogether - all the agencies involved have said they can't approve it in so short a timeframe, which means they will just reject it outright.
Boehner & McConnell must be aware of this, which would seem to indicate this is just a deeply cynical PR maneuver (ie "you can't make it look like we're against tax cuts unless we get to make it look like you are destroying jobs")
― aesthetic partisan (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 16 December 2011 19:39 (twelve years ago) link
I guess I do get it, really
that being the case I guess I wouldn't be surprised if Obama retracts his veto threat and lets the bill go through as soon as he can receive guarantees that the pipeline project will be killed anyway
― aesthetic partisan (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 16 December 2011 19:40 (twelve years ago) link
Boehner & McConnell must be aware of this, which would seem to indicate this is just a deeply cynical PR maneuver
HAI DERE
― Lord Sotosyn, Friday, 16 December 2011 19:41 (twelve years ago) link
my mom, who voted for palin (decidedly not for mccain) in 08, just overheard me say i wasn't gonna vote for O in '12. response: GOOD! IT'S ABOUT TIME YOU WOKE UP!
― HOOS aka driver of steen, Friday, 16 December 2011 19:41 (twelve years ago) link
my condolences
― Aimless, Friday, 16 December 2011 19:47 (twelve years ago) link
the ongoing agony of being multifacted in a binary world
― OH NOES, Friday, 16 December 2011 19:49 (twelve years ago) link
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3645&utm_campaign=CBPPTwitter
Dem Ron Wyden teams up with Paul Ryan for Medicare plan. Why????
― Another Suburbanite, Friday, 16 December 2011 20:42 (twelve years ago) link
Wyden really likes to cut bipartisan deals. It is part of his modus operandi as a senator. Wyden also has built his career on good constituent service for the aged, so I expect that his staff's analysis of the proposal's effects differed from that provided in the linked article.
― Aimless, Friday, 16 December 2011 21:23 (twelve years ago) link
If you want a single issue to turn you against Obama, I don't know why you would pick the one that affects a small handful of individuals who in all likelihood are "combatants,"
sorry, i got off the Obama boat the second he started to seriously talk about "reforming" Social Security. everything since then has been noise, and i will only vote for Obama again in the increasingly unlikely scenario of Gingrich winning the GOP nomination (in which case it would really be a vote AGAINST Gingrich and yes if Romney or [God forbid} Ron Paul win i'm not voting for Obama again).
― deine Mutter lutscht Schwänze in der Hölle (Eisbaer), Friday, 16 December 2011 22:26 (twelve years ago) link
sorry, i got off the Obama boat the second he started to seriously talk about "reforming" Social Security.
lol don't even remember this. SS has been basically untouched in his presidency, this seems like weird thing to get het up about.
― aesthetic partisan (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 16 December 2011 22:27 (twelve years ago) link
it was during the debt ceiling fiasco this summer.
― deine Mutter lutscht Schwänze in der Hölle (Eisbaer), Friday, 16 December 2011 22:28 (twelve years ago) link
and it isn't so weird a thing to get het up about if (like me) you see fighting for SS (and Medicare and Medicaid) to be quintessentially progressive issues.
― deine Mutter lutscht Schwänze in der Hölle (Eisbaer), Friday, 16 December 2011 22:30 (twelve years ago) link
well I think both programs are worth fighting for but a) neither party wants to fuck with either, and to-date neither has been able to and b) actual legislation/policy that Obama has implemented have been much worse
― aesthetic partisan (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 16 December 2011 22:34 (twelve years ago) link
(in which case it would really be a vote AGAINST Gingrich
i guess the only reason why this seems unusual - voting as voting against, isn't there a lincoln quote about that? - is that it did kinda seem like you could be voting for the right guy last time
― Never translate German (schlump), Saturday, 17 December 2011 00:19 (twelve years ago) link
Obama is def preferable to McCain come on now
― aesthetic partisan (Shakey Mo Collier), Saturday, 17 December 2011 00:20 (twelve years ago) link
McCain is senile AND bonkers
what would be different?
― Dr Morbius, Saturday, 17 December 2011 00:35 (twelve years ago) link
we would MAYBE be at war with russia tbf
― Never translate German (schlump), Saturday, 17 December 2011 00:40 (twelve years ago) link
would've bombed Iran by now
― aesthetic partisan (Shakey Mo Collier), Saturday, 17 December 2011 00:42 (twelve years ago) link
Libya would have been an even bigger clusterfuck
don't ask/don't tell still in place
― aesthetic partisan (Shakey Mo Collier), Saturday, 17 December 2011 00:43 (twelve years ago) link
social security/medicare/medicaid totally gutted
― aesthetic partisan (Shakey Mo Collier), Saturday, 17 December 2011 00:44 (twelve years ago) link
7-3 majority of conservative assholes on the supreme court
no stimulus, no ARRA funding = even higher unemployment
― aesthetic partisan (Shakey Mo Collier), Saturday, 17 December 2011 00:45 (twelve years ago) link
probably would've fucked up the handling of the BP oil spill in the gulf somehow
― aesthetic partisan (Shakey Mo Collier), Saturday, 17 December 2011 00:46 (twelve years ago) link
EPA abolished
Bush tax cuts made permanent
― aesthetic partisan (Shakey Mo Collier), Saturday, 17 December 2011 00:47 (twelve years ago) link
Policy driven by intermittent rage.
― Aimless, Saturday, 17 December 2011 00:47 (twelve years ago) link
war in Iraq still going on, probably even heavier presence in Afghanistan
― aesthetic partisan (Shakey Mo Collier), Saturday, 17 December 2011 00:49 (twelve years ago) link
Bin Laden still alive/Al Qaeda still functional
People everywhere prefacing everything they say with, "My friend..."
― clemenza, Saturday, 17 December 2011 00:50 (twelve years ago) link
Sarah Palin in national office
― aesthetic partisan (Shakey Mo Collier), Saturday, 17 December 2011 00:50 (twelve years ago) link
osama bin laden somehow a member of GOP administration
― Never translate German (schlump), Saturday, 17 December 2011 00:50 (twelve years ago) link