Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Ted Cruz

7 (6.5%)

Rick Santorum

16 (14.8%)

Michelle Bachmann

13 (12%)

Chris Christie

23 (21.3%)

Rand Paul

49 (45.4%)

Total Members Voted: 107

[Owlbread]

I'm inclined to support the idea of journalists being forced to reveal their political views by law. Same with referees revealing what football team they support.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I'm inclined to support the idea of journalists being forced to reveal their political views by law.

Because that could never be abused by the government or any other power structure.

Tell me, if this was law, would you have no fear that the MPs down in London might try to keep Scottish nationalists down?

[Owlbread]

Because that could never be abused by the government or any other power structure.

Tell me, if this was law, would you have no fear that the MPs down in London might try to keep Scottish nationalists down?

They already do, every single day. I don't really see how it could be abused by a power structure.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Because that could never be abused by the government or any other power structure.

Tell me, if this was law, would you have no fear that the MPs down in London might try to keep Scottish nationalists down?

They already do, every single day. I don't really see how it could be abused by a power structure.

Because it gives you a handy list of exactly whom to discredit, or sue for slander, or to pressure/bribe their organization into firing. Who to blacklist, dig up the past of, or frame. Any kind of bad thing, really.

[Owlbread]

Because it gives you a handy list of exactly whom to discredit, or sue for slander, or to pressure/bribe their organization into firing. Who to blacklist, dig up the past of, or frame. Any kind of bad thing, really.

When you are actually on the receiving end of a horribly biased media, stuff like that doesn't seem like as big an issue.

[SalmonGod]

Because that could never be abused by the government or any other power structure.

Tell me, if this was law, would you have no fear that the MPs down in London might try to keep Scottish nationalists down?

They already do, every single day. I don't really see how it could be abused by a power structure.

Because it gives you a handy list of exactly whom to discredit, or sue for slander, or to pressure/bribe their organization into firing. Who to blacklist, dig up the past of, or frame. Any kind of bad thing, really.

This sounds exactly like what I was saying in our debate regarding mass surveillance a while back.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Because that could never be abused by the government or any other power structure.

Tell me, if this was law, would you have no fear that the MPs down in London might try to keep Scottish nationalists down?

They already do, every single day. I don't really see how it could be abused by a power structure.

Because it gives you a handy list of exactly whom to discredit, or sue for slander, or to pressure/bribe their organization into firing. Who to blacklist, dig up the past of, or frame. Any kind of bad thing, really.

This sounds exactly like what I was saying in our debate regarding mass surveillance a while back.

It's not exactly a dissimilar idea.

[SalmonGod]

Because that could never be abused by the government or any other power structure.

Tell me, if this was law, would you have no fear that the MPs down in London might try to keep Scottish nationalists down?

They already do, every single day. I don't really see how it could be abused by a power structure.

Because it gives you a handy list of exactly whom to discredit, or sue for slander, or to pressure/bribe their organization into firing. Who to blacklist, dig up the past of, or frame. Any kind of bad thing, really.

This sounds exactly like what I was saying in our debate regarding mass surveillance a while back.

It's not exactly a dissimilar idea.

Oh, I know.  I just couldn't help but notice because, IIRC, you took the opposite stance back then

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I never argued in favor of mass surveillance, I believe that it is inherently flawed and doomed to be subverted and fail due to changes in social activity.

Mass surveillance is. Forcing it back into the bottle is nigh-impossible. Legislating that you must wear your political ideals on your sleeve is not, though plenty of people do it anyway. I only oppose the expansion of this sort of thing because that is the only realistic goal. The rest will fall in good time.

[SalmonGod]

Alright.  I guess that wasn't very clear before.  It seemed to me like you were saying that mass surveillance wasn't very prone to abuse and didn't matter very much overall.  So it weirded me out to see you saying the opposite here.

[Scoops Novel]

I never argued in favor of mass surveillance, I believe that it is inherently flawed and doomed to be subverted and fail due to changes in social activity.

Mass surveillance is. Forcing it back into the bottle is nigh-impossible. Legislating that you must wear your political ideals on your sleeve is not, though plenty of people do it anyway. I only oppose the expansion of this sort of thing because that is the only realistic goal. The rest will fall in good time.

It seems only slightly less impossible to me. I also highly doubt it will be in "good time". I think we're stuck with providing counter-measures.

[FearfulJesuit]

Here's a good dissection of the logic behind opposing the immigration bill. Basically, passing immigration reform will create 11 million new voters who will just vote for the Democrats anyway, so why support it? Of course, if this passes, no illegal immigrants will be gaining citizenship until the 2028 presidential election; the GOP will have to clean up its act before then if it wants those votes. It's a nice analysis, except, you know, that it's wrong.

If you'd like to disregard the voice of reason altogether, this chap over at FOX News has an interesting theory: by opposing immigration reform, the GOP will increase its popularity with Hispanic voters. I don't even.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

The irony is that the GOP doing this kind of thing is part of what's going to knock them out of power, thereby allowing the Democrats to eventually pass immigration reform completely as they wish it written, thereby allowing them to take all the credit and make the GOP even less powerful.

[FearfulJesuit]

I'm more and more getting the sense that half the positions pushed by the Republican party for the last ten years have been the work of deep cover liberals.

[Morrigi]

This poll.
Okay, it's sponsored by Fox, so divide the number by two.

Doesn't help much, does it?