What Happens To Old Scares?

[Wry Catcher]

in re campaing finance law:

Shadow GOP groups plan final cash blitz before Election Day

By Holly Bailey holly Bailey – 17 mins ago
With just eight days to go until Election Day, outside conservative groups collectively known as the Shadow GOP are planning a final multi-million dollar ad blitz aimed at helping Republicans win control of the House and Senate.

Already, two of the leading outside GOP groups—American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS—have together spent a combined average of $1 million a day so far this month. On Sunday, American Crossroads filed notice that it had spent another $500,000 in ads and direct mail, including $400,000 alone for ads targeting independent candidate Charlie Crist in Florida's Senate race. That spending is notable, in part, because leaders of the Senate GOP two weeks ago shifted money they had planned to spend on Republican Marco Rubio's behalf to other key Senate races.

That strategic move is testimony to how crucial the new infusions of outside campaign cash are to candidates and national parties. Among other things, the contributions from independent "issues" groups gives GOP candidates the flexibility to spend their cash on other priorities, such as get-out-the-vote efforts, without losing ground against Democratic opponents. Indeed, outside cash is the sole reason certain contests are competitive, as the New York Times' Jim Rutenberg reports this morning.

In Florida's 24th U.S. House district, Rep. Suzanne Kosmas, a freshman Democrat, is losing her re-election race to state GOP Rep. Sandy Adams, even though Kosmas has raised and spent almost four times as much cash as Adams has. As Rutenberg notes, Adams hasn't run a single campaign ad in the race. But outside groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, have spent more than a $1 million on attack ads aimed at Kosmas, making Adams the favorite to win.

Link: Shadow GOP groups plan final cash blitz before Election Day | The Upshot Yahoo! News

 

[martybegan]

I support "to fetter them all". I have for long believed the only way for this great experiment in self rule to survive is to (somehow) get money out of the game.
The media will not support such a movement, for the revenue in an election year is great; incumbents will not, or they would have.
We have become an Oligarchy, and I firmly believe Citizens United has paved a road, a short cut, to an everlasting Plutocracy.

A nice concept, but difficult to accomplish. Remember all these groups are really are collections of people. Collections desgined to do different things. Corporations to make a product and make money out of it, unions to get the most compensation for the labor of thier members, and special interest groups to advocate for cause "X." Each has viable reasons to have its view heard, by those in power, and those electing those in power.

Election reform may be possible, but you would have to radically change how candiates are financed, then basically scrap the first amendment when it comes to supporting those candiates outside the rules that are created.

Inertia is hard to overcome. It maybe that Citizens United becomes the force to accomplish change.
As for the first amendment argument, there exists case law and statutory laws limiting free speech.
Libel and slander laws are the most obvious examples, but hate speech, fighting speech and threats are all forms of restricted speech.
Example of libel and slander in this political year are ubiquitous - negative ads may include half-truths, but also outright lies and unproven innuendos.

Hate speech is not outlawed de jure, just pushed underground de facto. I don't see klan leaders being arrested for speeches. Hate speech in itself does not fall under libel, slander or fighting/yelling fire exceptions to free speech.

Most political adds are not libel or slander as described by law, and that is what really matters. They are, as you say, half truths (with added out of context quotes for ha-ha's)

 

[JBeukema]

It was a near miss on the Cold War. Some of the stuff that's come out since the end made it clear we were at the brink far more times than anyone cares to admit.

Like twice when we would've been wiped out if it weren't for Soviet generals ignoring protocol and delaying orders to fire?
\

Plus, we've seen that once a country and it's rival have nukes, they're much more likely to talk. India and Pakistan used to go to start wars on any day that ends with "Y". Since they both got the bomb, they talk a great deal more and fight a great deal less.

It's non-State agents we're worried about.

 

[Madeline]

A nice concept, but difficult to accomplish. Remember all these groups are really are collections of people. Collections desgined to do different things. Corporations to make a product and make money out of it, unions to get the most compensation for the labor of thier members, and special interest groups to advocate for cause "X." Each has viable reasons to have its view heard, by those in power, and those electing those in power.

Election reform may be possible, but you would have to radically change how candiates are financed, then basically scrap the first amendment when it comes to supporting those candiates outside the rules that are created.

Inertia is hard to overcome. It maybe that Citizens United becomes the force to accomplish change.
As for the first amendment argument, there exists case law and statutory laws limiting free speech.
Libel and slander laws are the most obvious examples, but hate speech, fighting speech and threats are all forms of restricted speech.
Example of libel and slander in this political year are ubiquitous - negative ads may include half-truths, but also outright lies and unproven innuendos.

Hate speech is not outlawed de jure, just pushed underground de facto. I don't see klan leaders being arrested for speeches. Hate speech in itself does not fall under libel, slander or fighting/yelling fire exceptions to free speech.

Most political adds are not libel or slander as described by law, and that is what really matters. They are, as you say, half truths (with added out of context quotes for ha-ha's)

 

[Madeline]

It was a near miss on the Cold War. Some of the stuff that's come out since the end made it clear we were at the brink far more times than anyone cares to admit.

Like twice when we would've been wiped out if it weren't for Soviet generals ignoring protocol and delaying orders to fire?
\

Plus, we've seen that once a country and it's rival have nukes, they're much more likely to talk. India and Pakistan used to go to start wars on any day that ends with "Y". Since they both got the bomb, they talk a great deal more and fight a great deal less.

It's non-State agents we're worried about.

Not me. Non-state agents are not likely to have missile silos or long distance strike capacity.

 

[uscitizen]

What Happens To Old Scares?

They go on Wailfare?

They get Mummicade?

Social Scaretutity?

 

[JBeukema]

It was a near miss on the Cold War. Some of the stuff that's come out since the end made it clear we were at the brink far more times than anyone cares to admit.

Like twice when we would've been wiped out if it weren't for Soviet generals ignoring protocol and delaying orders to fire?
\

Plus, we've seen that once a country and it's rival have nukes, they're much more likely to talk. India and Pakistan used to go to start wars on any day that ends with "Y". Since they both got the bomb, they talk a great deal more and fight a great deal less.

It's non-State agents we're worried about.

Not me. Non-state agents are not likely to have missile silos or long distance strike capacity.

They don't need either.

And do you know anything about the [total lack of] security when it comes to many Russian sites?

 

[Dr.Traveler]

It was a near miss on the Cold War. Some of the stuff that's come out since the end made it clear we were at the brink far more times than anyone cares to admit.

Like twice when we would've been wiped out if it weren't for Soviet generals ignoring protocol and delaying orders to fire?
\

Plus, we've seen that once a country and it's rival have nukes, they're much more likely to talk. India and Pakistan used to go to start wars on any day that ends with "Y". Since they both got the bomb, they talk a great deal more and fight a great deal less.

It's non-State agents we're worried about.

That first one is the kind of thing I was thinking about. It's coming out that more than once the USSR thought we'd launched, went to highest alert, fueled up the missles, and some unlucky shmuck on watch pretty much decided the fate of the world. I imagine we'll eventually find out that we were just as close more than once. I know that if JFK had invaded during the Cuban Missle Crisis, as his generals were pushing him to do, there'd have been an exchange. Castro had launch capability it turned out.

The non-state agents are serious trouble, but they can't bring about an extinction level event like the USA and USSR could. A non-state agent with a bomb and an agenda could take out millions, but they can't completely wipe out life on Earth.... yet.

What we have found is that once a nation state gets the bomb, there's a sense of responsibility that enters the equation, especially if a rival state also has the bomb. Once complete annihilation becomes a very real possibility, people find they want to talk.

 

[rightwinger]

I'm still waiting for Y2K to kick in

 

[Madeline]

I'm still waiting for Y2K to kick in

*Laughs*

OMG, I forgot that one!

 

[Madeline]

Like twice when we would've been wiped out if it weren't for Soviet generals ignoring protocol and delaying orders to fire?
\It's non-State agents we're worried about.

Not me. Non-state agents are not likely to have missile silos or long distance strike capacity.

They don't need either.

And do you know anything about the [total lack of] security when it comes to many Russian sites?

Yes. Sorry, just all out of atomic anxiety.

 

[rightwinger]

Not me. Non-state agents are not likely to have missile silos or long distance strike capacity.

They don't need either.

And do you know anything about the [total lack of] security when it comes to many Russian sites?

Yes. Sorry, just all out of atomic anxiety.

I have a desk you can hide under

 

[Madeline]

They don't need either.

And do you know anything about the [total lack of] security when it comes to many Russian sites?

Yes. Sorry, just all out of atomic anxiety.

I have a desk you can hide under

LMAO! You are onna roll tonight, rightwinger.

 

[eagleseven]

I'm not a science person, but I like science news....I'm curious, I guess. I cannot help wondering, why have none of the doomsday scenarios I have been fed by various scientists over the years ever come to pass? You guys pranking me, or what?

Scares are a good way to increase public spending on your area, hence more grant money. I wrote earlier about spinning your topic so that you get lots of federal money?

* The A Bomb. I grew up on bomb shelters, air raid drills, the Cuban Missile Crisis, Dr. Strangelove, etc. And that was when the only other nuclear power was the former Soviet Union. Nowadays, half the dictators on Planet Earth have the Bomb and yet no one discusses the Atomic Clock anymore. What gives?

The threat is still very much there...only that we're so close that worrying about it is futile. The Atomic Clock is at six minutes to midnight, closer than it was during most of the Cold War.

For comparison, during the Cuban Missile Crisis, we were seven minutes to midnight. Hence, why everyone is panicked about North Korea and Iran.

* Pollution. From nuclear waste to chemical run off, the rivers and lakes were supposedly dying forty years ago. Did we clean all that up?

Largely yes. People can swim in Lake Erie again, while the Cuyahoga River no longer catches on fire. We have radically cleaned our environment, so that the only thing American environmentalists complain about is CO2...the non-toxic gas we exhale.

* Deforestation. The Rain Forest is supposed to have been disappearing at the rate of an acre an hour since the 1970's....why isn't it all gone yet? Old growth forests, mountaintop coal mining, etc. How come it still rains?

Rainforest is still being depleted, thanks largely to China and Japan chopping down Brazil.

In most first-world countries, including the US, we've entirely shifted to sustainable cutting, so that forests aren't depleted.

* Population. Population levels have risen, maybe as fast as predicted. Why isn't Planet Earth rejecting its human load yet? Where are the famines, pandemics, etc. that were supposed to correct this?

Our scientific advancement has outpaced our population growth...both in terms of public health, and agriculture. We're still at risk for famines, however...particular when we do stupid things like turn corn into fuel.

Let me tell you about all the fun things you can contract in third-world countries, though...you'll be afraid to leave your house.

* Technology. From cars that kill to electric power lines that "poison" to radon in homes, we should all be dead by now. That's what you claimed decades ago.....was that an exaggeration?

In short, yes.

Bacon and eggs, once demonized, are now good for you. Egg yolks are full of more unique nutrients per ounce than most vegetables, while bacon is full of olive-oil-quality unsaturated fats.

It's confusing for us lay people to know when you scientists are actually warning us and when you are just raising our anxiety levels for shits and giggles. Is there a wink or a nod I can look for in future?

Wish there was...I know PhDs that are a touch overwhelmed by the amount of junk science and BS they wade through in daily life.

 

[Madeline]

Fabulous reply, eagleseven.

Thankies!

 

[Wry Catcher]

A nice concept, but difficult to accomplish. Remember all these groups are really are collections of people. Collections desgined to do different things. Corporations to make a product and make money out of it, unions to get the most compensation for the labor of thier members, and special interest groups to advocate for cause "X." Each has viable reasons to have its view heard, by those in power, and those electing those in power.

Election reform may be possible, but you would have to radically change how candiates are financed, then basically scrap the first amendment when it comes to supporting those candiates outside the rules that are created.

Inertia is hard to overcome. It maybe that Citizens United becomes the force to accomplish change.
As for the first amendment argument, there exists case law and statutory laws limiting free speech.
Libel and slander laws are the most obvious examples, but hate speech, fighting speech and threats are all forms of restricted speech.
Example of libel and slander in this political year are ubiquitous - negative ads may include half-truths, but also outright lies and unproven innuendos.

Hate speech is not outlawed de jure, just pushed underground de facto. I don't see klan leaders being arrested for speeches. Hate speech in itself does not fall under libel, slander or fighting/yelling fire exceptions to free speech.

Most political adds are not libel or slander as described by law, and that is what really matters. They are, as you say, half truths (with added out of context quotes for ha-ha's)

Hate Speech is outlawed. Please see California Penal Code section 422.6; speech alone no, but as part of a threat and with the means to carry out the threat, a misdemeanor (up to one year CJ, $5,000 fine + PA and community service).

Some political ads meet the standard for libel and slander; however, the threshhold for a public figure is higher; my point was it should not be.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

7. "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag. Man can sustain militant interest in any issue for only a limited time...."
After the original scare the science catches up with the lie.
I was brought up on "acid rain". When I got older I learned to research the facts and it was bogus along with AGW.

3. "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)

 

[Madeline]

Wry Catcher wrote:

Hate Speech is outlawed. Please see California Penal Code section 422.6; speech alone no, but as part of a threat and with the means to carry out the threat, a misdemeanor (up to one year CJ, $5,000 fine + PA and community service).

Some political ads meet the standard for libel and slander; however, the threshhold for a public figure is higher; my point was it should not be.

Wry, dear, "I hate minorities" or whatnot in a tv ad could never be illegal in the US.

 

[JBeukema]

i'm still waiting for y2k to kick in

Just be sure to go 64-bit by 2038

 

[Wry Catcher]

Wry Catcher wrote:

Hate Speech is outlawed. Please see California Penal Code section 422.6; speech alone no, but as part of a threat and with the means to carry out the threat, a misdemeanor (up to one year CJ, $5,000 fine + PA and community service).

Some political ads meet the standard for libel and slander; however, the threshhold for a public figure is higher; my point was it should not be.

Wry, dear, "I hate minorities" or whatnot in a tv ad could never be illegal in the US.

Maddie, here's the link to PC 422.6
CAL. PEN. CODE § 422.6 : California Code - Section 422.6

Your example is likely correct, however, " no person may be convicted of violating subdivision (a) based upon speech alone, except upon a showing that the speech itself threatened violence against a specific person or group of persons and that the defendant had the apparent ability to carry out the threat."

My point, the First Amendment Right is not sacrosanct. There are limits de jure.