Hillary Vs. Trump: No Opposition to Welfare State Violence?

found online by Raymond

 
From libertarian Michael A. LaFerrara at Principled Perspectives:

Ivanka’s fraud and Hillary’s facts headlined a New Jersey Star-Ledger editorial during the Democrat convention. The subject was Leftist “social welfare” planks that both Clinton and Trump announced they support—Hillary explicitly and Trump through his daughter. The Star-Ledger writes:

Ivanka Trump said all the right things [at her GOP convention speech introducing her father].

She said that quality child care should be affordable and available for everyone, and that as President, her father will “fight for equal pay for equal work,” and “change the labor laws that were put into place at a time when women were not a significant portion of the workforce.”

The Star-Ledger says you can’t trust Trump to follow through on promises to impose this Leftist agenda.

– More –
 

Move over, Martin Shkreli: Palmer Luckey is here!

found online by Raymond

 
From PZ Myers at Pharyngula:

Give a young man way too much money, and they turn into instant assholes. That’s what I conclude from the story of Palmer Luckey, who was one of the people behind the VR headset Oculus Rift, which he sold for over $2 billion dollars. He’s now worth $700 million (what happened to the other 1.3 billion?), and he’s got to do something to better humanity with that that money.

So he’s funding a company that’s backing Donald Trump.

– More –
 

And The Universe Laughed

found online by Raymond

 
From tengrain at Mock Paper Scissors:

When you have to cite the name of blessed St. Hannity in your defense:

TRUMP: Wait a minute. I was against the war in Iraq. Just so you put it out.
HOLT: The record shows otherwise, but why—why was…
TRUMP: The record does not show that.
HOLT: Why was—is your judgment any…
TRUMP: The record shows that I’m right. When I did an interview with…

– More –
 

Keith Lamont Scott and the Visuals of Brutality

found online by Raymond

 
From Darcwonn at The Intersection of Madness and Reality:

Days ago, a great confidant by the name of Anthony Haskins noted that he wasn’t going to watch anymore videos of black men being killed by police. When I read this, I was fully supportive. From my perspective, watching videos of people being killed can have a negative effect on you. With so much happening in this country (and the world), replaying scenes of death and destruction disrupts the mind and numbs the soul. Plus, the last thing this country needs is an apathetic Black man that is “getting used to it”. Thus, I agreed because I didn’t want Anthony “getting used to it”.

Oh, by the way: “getting used to it” is a reference to “getting used to seeing black bodies become soulless by cop killings”.

Yet, I may just be the master of selling medicine that I’m not willing to take. You see, I took the plunge. I actually made time out of my life to watch the video that Rakeyia Scott (Keith Lamont Scott’s wife) filmed.

– More –
 

Trump and Social Authoritarian Conservatives

by Ryan

In response to Michael A. LaFerrara’s Principled Perspectives

I don’t find much to cheer about in Donald Trump. But one positive aspect of Trump is that he is not a social/religious conservative. He’ll pay lip service to the GOP’s social conservatism when need be. But he has no burning desire to push the conservative social agenda. I didn’t listen to Trump’s acceptance speech. But my understanding is that he didn’t once mention God or abortion. That’s very telling for a Republican nominee—and for me, a positive sign.

Michael A. LaFerrara, September 21, 2016

And a comment by Mike Kevitt

If Ms. H. Clinton is elected, we won’t ever get the benefits of a Republican Party that is consistently for liberty. Within 4 yrs., all rights, including the right of speech, will be gone, we’ll have a centralized economy, and Federal jackboots will be out on the streets of every city. The people, Americans, will submit and bend like willows, hordes of them eagerly, not just in resignation. If Trump is elected, THEN people will rise up and assert themselves, violently. People can’t be forced to be free, but they can certainly be LEFT free, without ‘guidance’ (orders) from ‘governmental authorities’. They’ll rebel against that, hankering for orders. That there will be enough people appreciative of a major party that is consistently for liberty to prevail is questionable.

Mike Kevitt, September 21, 2016

Just read that comment from Mike Kevitt. It looks like a Democrat is going to take away all of our rights again! I’m not sure what it means to lose them several times over, but it sounds pretty bad. Maybe we should write a few more constitutions just in case.

Mr. LaFerrara is making a few dubious assumptions:

  1. That the GOP’s essential Christian base will continue to support it, fueled perhaps entirely by opposition to Democrats, if it continues to put up people like Trump or people who don’t care about Christian issues. Perhaps he expects independent voters and some Democrats to start voting for the GOP if it drops Christianity from its platform, but it’s not clear that that group’s numbers would make up for the loss of the first group.
     
  2. Either that Trump supporters are not all that motivated by Christian issues (obviously false) or that Trump, by being elected or merely by being the GOP’s nominee, will somehow make those people care less about Christian issues.
     
  3. That becoming less socially authoritarian means that the GOP will accept abortion. The trouble with seeing abortion as a “social authoritarian” issue is that, for many (most?) people who oppose it, it is a matter of protecting human life rather than a matter of imposing arbitrary religious rules. None of us would say that laws against murder are socially authoritarian (at least not in a bad way), so it doesn’t make much sense to expect people who regard abortion as murder to see it that way either.

Furthermore, the libertarian notion of social authoritarianism is so broad as to encompass virtually any policy that aims to protect individuals or our society in the long run through forced or incentivized changes to behavior, even if that policy is based on shared, non-religious beliefs. That’s just not a very popular position.

Finally, even if Trump somehow improves the GOP in the way Mr. LaFerrara imagines, he will have also done harm by encouraging the “deplorables.” It is unclear if Mr. LaFerrara finds them to be good company, but I certainly wouldn’t want them.

Hated by Evangelicals, Loved by Heathens – Fox’s ‘Lucifer’

found online by Raymond

 
From The Life and Times of Bruce Gerencser:

Fox’s hit show Lucifer began its second season this week, wasting no time as Lucifer Morningstar and others continue to mock all that Christians hold dear. Last season ended with Lucifer’s mother escaping hell. The latest episode finds Lucifer, played by Tom Ellis, explaining to his therapist (played by Rachael Harris) his Dad (God) and Mom’s relationship:

Lucifer: Very well. In human terms, once upon a time, a boy met a girl, and they fell in love. They had sex. The only trouble was, they were celestial beings, so that moment created the universe.

Linda: MM, the Big Bang?

Lucifer: Never knew how appropriate the name was until now, did you? Anyway, they became Mum and Dad. They had a whole litter of kids, including yours truly. And they built a house. They called it Heaven. They were happy. Dad was… Well, Dad, and Mum… Well, Mum was rather lovely in the beginning. But things change, don’t they? Dad started going into the garage and tinkering with a little project he called humanity. Mum grew cold… Distant. And pretty soon, they were both neglecting their family.

Linda: And then one of his children started to act out?

Lucifer: Indeed. Yeah… So Dad got pissed off and tossed me out of the house.


– More –
 

Could We Eliminate Poverty
in the U.S.? – YES!

found online by Raymond

 
From jobsanger:

Could the United States eliminate poverty within its borders? It’s an interesting question. Sadly, too many Americans don’t think we could. They will quote the saying that “the poor will always be with us”. They think it would take a prohibitive tax rate to eliminate poverty — a rate that the working and middle class could not afford to pay. They believe the best we could do is for the government to provide a subsistence level for the poor.

I believe they are wrong. The United States is the richest country on Earth, and the richest country that has ever existed in the world. We have the economic means to eliminate poverty, and we could do it without a lot of new government spending. All we need is the moral and political will to do so.

How could it be done?

– More –
 

Updated: The Teter Totter

found online by Raymond

 
From Vixen Strangely at Strangely Blogged:

I am going to leave the story as originally posted, both in the interest of not being a punk myself and owning up–Lesson for myself: don’t post mad and don’t get pissed-ass moralistic because you might have to eat what you wrote someday. Although I maintain my position that honest-to-goodness rotten people do show up at these rallies, I understand that protesters also use tactics that are antagonistic and also, I should keep in mind that stories have two sides (even if only one side was widely reported at the time of my posting. )

Shirley Teter is 69 years young and is appalled by what Trump stands for. Among other things, she doesn’t like that he is the bottom when in bed with Putin; and when she brought this perfectly obvious fact out to one of the Trumpensturmers, they tried to knock the taste out of her mouth.

– More –