What one issue do you struggle with the most?

[Dragonlady]

My problem with the death penalty is that I have zero confidence in the courts to determine who is guilty and who is not.

They are however, very good at determing who has money and who does not!

I'm not in favour of the death penalty for any number of reasons, but this is primary among them. And all too often, there is a rush to conviction of a heinous crime on flimsy evidence, and then things come out on appeal, or someone who lied, develops a conscience.

 

[Mac1958]

I'm not in favour of the death penalty for any number of reasons, but this is primary among them. And all too often, there is a rush to conviction of a heinous crime on flimsy evidence, and then things come out on appeal, or someone who lied, develops a conscience.

So the second part of the thought process here is looking for a solution to each individual issue within the problem. I feel the same way about this as you do, but there's that nagging thought that I don't know how I would react if this were personal.

We might be able to identify individual cases for which there is enough clear evidence to fully eliminate the possibility of error. I don't know. That definitely does sound subjective, though (what constitutes "enough'?), and that makes it tougher.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So the second part of the thought process here is looking for a solution to each individual issue within the problem. I feel the same way about this as you do, but there's that nagging thought that I don't know how I would react if this were personal.

We might be able to identify individual cases for which there is enough clear evidence to fully eliminate the possibility of error. I don't know. That definitely does sound subjective, though (what constitutes "enough'?), and that makes it tougher.

I think we already do that with the advancement of technology. Sure, you will find cases from the 80s and 90s where people were wrongly convicted, sentenced to death, and our newest technology found them innocent, but that's not true of cases today and at least the last ten years or more.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Limbaugh didn't provide you with "empirical evidence", he exaggerated the left wing media bias, which studies found to be about 7% into a huge reality gap that meant that NOTHING the left says can be trusted. Right wingers bought into Limbaugh's lies and hate, further dividing the left from right.

At the same time, Limbaugh, FOX News, and other right wing media outlets promoted lies about Democrats, conspiracy theories, and outright bullshit that Rupert Murdoch made up, so that now people like you are believing garbage you would have laughed at as ridiculous 10 years ago.

Just look at the lies he told you about that young woman who simply wanted her birth control included in her health insurance, that she was paying $10,000 in insurance premiums to her Catholic University, to purchase on her behalf. He called her a slut, and every disgusting name he could come up with, simply because she wanted her rights.

There is no right to birth control. You see, these are the lies Limbaugh and others brought out about you and your comrades. If you want birth control, pay for it your Fn self.

The lies come from the left-wing media. Being an extension of the Democrat party, they also suppress stories that would put down Big Brother.

FLASHBACK: 16% of Biden voters would have voted differently if Hunter Biden laptop story was not suppressed by media, big tech

A poll previously put out by the Media Research Center showed that fully 16 percent of voters who were unaware of the Hunter Biden laptop scandal would have switched their minds and not voted for Joe Biden for president, had they known about it at the time.

thepostmillennial.com

While we were experiencing the best economy a lot of people never seen before, the MSM reported negatively about Trump between 90% and 100% of the time. They told people that everything negative about the Communists was Russian disinformation. Today they report that the disaster of our country had nothing to do with Biden. They are nothing but an arm of the Communist party.

Sandra Fluke Says She Didn't Know Target Sells Birth Control Pills for $9

Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke on 'The View' with Joy Behar and Sherri Shephard. (AP/ABC Lou Rocco)

cnsnews.com

 

[playtime]

So you think pushing gender bending propaganda as early as preschool is appropriate?

gender bending? you mean drag queens & trannies reading books in libraries? don't bring yer kid then. see? easy peazy. & there is no mass indoctrination to turn kiddies into little 'gay' mini mes.

Or using puberty blocking drugs on preteens

not happening unless a child really wants & feels that is best for themselves. & which is reversable.

and double mastectomies on girls as early as 12 or 13 yoa is a good thing?

not happening - that is complete bullshit. find me an unbiased credible link that is happening anywhere. i'll wait kitty cat.

That's exactly what commiecrats are pushing. Isn't it hard enough on a child that is coming of age without filling their heads with all that crap?

.

lol ... you're certifiable.

 

[OKTexas]

gender bending? you mean drag queens & trannies reading books in libraries? don't bring yer kid then. see? easy peazy. & there is no mass indoctrination to turn kiddies into little 'gay' mini mes.



not happening unless a child really wants & feels that is best for themselves. & which is reversable.




not happening - that is complete bullshit. find me an unbiased credible link that is happening anywhere. i'll wait kitty cat.



lol ... you're certifiable.

School attempts to hide student's gender transition from parents, pushes LGBTQ+ content for middle schoolers

Emails reveal staff members at a Pennsylvania school district attempted to hide a middle schooler’s preferred pronouns from the student’s parents.

www.foxnews.com

Science shows transgender education doesn’t belong in schools

School districts are embroiled in a battle over whether to teach children in grades K-3 about being transgender.

nypost.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/06/03/schools-gender-identity-transgender-lessons/

How public schools brainwash young kids with harmful transgender ideology

Militant transgender advocates are imposing their agenda with uncompromising zeal on schoolchildren. That’s fine with President Joe Biden. His administration announced this month that by April, it …

nypost.com

Mother: teachers manipulated child to change gender identity

A mother who claims teachers secretly manipulated her 11-year-old daughter into changing her gender identity and name has filed a legal case against a tiny California school district

abcnews.go.com

I’m a Pediatrician. How Transgender Ideology Has Infiltrated My Field and Produced Large-Scale Child Abuse.

Transgender ideology is intruding into the lives of the most innocent among us, and with the apparent growing support of the medical community.

www.dailysignal.com

There are thousands more. Feel free to look them up yourself.

.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

not happening unless a child really wants & feels that is best for themselves. & which is reversable.

What if a child feels a shot and a beer every day is best for themselves, or smoking a pack of cigarettes a day?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

So you agree that those where there is no doubt should be put to death. I would not allow any appeals either. Put them down as dispassionatey as if it was a rabid rat.

I see no mitigating factors when sentencing someone who is known to indeed have committed the crime. A mass shooter for example.
Other cases where it isn’t as clear cut require more diligence.
The qualifications required to seek the death penalty should be far more stringent than those currently in use. Simply creating a narrative that the jury sympathizes with is not enough.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The difference is the state has the authority to execute because they represent the public. It's about as stupid of a comparison as saying how could a judge lock up a kidnapper. They both kept people from leaving on their own.

I’m talking about when they’re wrong and execute an innocent, dope.
You would know that if you actually read the thread rather than responding without understanding the context.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

They give the condemned their day in court and due process, including appeals. Not a hard concept to grasp.

.

When they are later found to be innocent, dope.

 

[OKTexas]

When they are later found to be innocent, dope.

If you're looking for perfection I suggest you buy a D flawless triple X diamond. That's about as close as you'll get to it on this earth. As for the criminal justice system, we have built in safeguards and it's the best system I know of, but it will never be as perfect as that diamond.

.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

What one issue do you struggle with the most?​

Pretending Mac is a moderate is really tough

 

[Lesh]

That doesn't happen today with the advancements in detecting crime. Years ago somebody could be sentenced to death over an eye witness. Today there is just too many things needed to prove murder outside eye witnesses.

Completely untrue.

 

[Burgermeister]

Hoping for an interesting, illuminating conversation here.

The one major issue I struggle the most with is the death penalty. My impulse is to be against the death penalty, because (a) I don't see it as a deterrent, and (b) because I kinda like the idea of letting someone rot for killing someone else. HOWEVER, if someone I love were murdered, I may want that killer to be made dead ASAP. I've never been in that position, so I can't tell how I would react.

What's yours?

10 facts about the death penalty in the U.S.

Here’s a closer look at public opinion on the death penalty, as well as key facts about the nation’s use of capital punishment.

www.pewresearch.org

Good question. Healthcare is mine. I'm sure there is a way to bring market forces to bear with some help from the government to broaden coverage and keep a decent safety net. The way the government is being used now is not working. It never works well, so it is perplexing.

 

[Lesh]

I was a kid back in the 60's. People were very discriminatory back then. Hell, even my father was told he couldn't become a bricklayer because the union didn't want anybody of Polish descent. it wasn't until he became outraged at a hearing because he was a Korean war vet, and that's the only reason they let him in.

it was altogether a different time that younger people can't relate to. Oh, they can read about it, but it's not an environment that they seen with their own eyes.

I have no idea that that nonsense has to do with your idiot claim that fewer people were on welfare in the 60s

 

[Lesh]

There is no right to birth control.

That's the GOP folks. Those legislators LISTEN to freaks like this guy

 

[Mac1958]

Good question. Healthcare is mine. I'm sure there is a way to bring market forces to bear with some help from the government to broaden coverage and keep a decent safety net. The way the government is being used now is not working. It never works well, so it is perplexing.

Good one.

FYI, there already is a solid government/free market combination in effect that is popular with its participants: The Medicare / Medicare Advantage / Medicare Supplement system, that provides seniors with a solid foundation and FREE MARKET choices, competition and innovation. It could easily be tweaked to cover everyone. There are several moving parts that can be revised to keep costs down.

For example, here's an idea of mine: The Medicare portion can be smaller when people are younger and healthier, and they'd then have options with FREE MARKET Medicare Advantage plans or FREE MARKET Medicare Supplements. Those would cost less than they do now because, again, the person is younger and healthier. Then, as we age and become more expensive to cover, the government portion can increase to what it is now, and the participant can still get a supplemental policy.

Right now, our health care "system" (ha) includes seven (7) different service delivery/payment systems, NONE of which communicate seamlessly with the others : Individual, Group, Medicare, Medicaid, VA, Worker's Comp and indigent. That is fucking INSANE.

Everyone would have their own portable, personalized plan. Imagine the increased efficiencies of not having seven (7) different internal systems. Imagine the cost monkey it would take off the backs of American employers. It's just sitting there, ready to go (with some doable tweaks), but our "leaders" (ha) are no longer allowed to communicate, collaborate, or compromise in any way.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Good one.

FYI, there already is a solid government/free market combination in effect that is popular with its participants: The Medicare / Medicare Advantage / Medicare Supplement system, that provides seniors with a solid foundation and FREE MARKET choices, competition and innovation. It could easily be tweaked to cover everyone. There are several moving parts that can be revised to keep costs down.

For example, here's an idea of mine: The Medicare portion can be smaller when people are younger and healthier, and they'd then have options with FREE MARKET Medicare Advantage plans or FREE MARKET Medicare Supplements. Those would cost less than they do now because, again, the person is younger and healthier. Then, as we age and become more expensive to cover, the government portion can increase to what it is now, and the participant can still get a supplemental policy.

Right now, our health care "system" (ha) includes seven (7) different service delivery/payment systems, NONE of which communicate seamlessly with the others : Individual, Group, Medicare, Medicaid, VA, Worker's Comp and indigent. That is fucking INSANE.

Everyone would have their own portable, personalized plan. Imagine the increased efficiencies of not having seven (7) different internal systems. Imagine the cost monkey it would take off the backs of American employers. It's just sitting there, ready to go (with some doable tweaks), but our "leaders" (ha) are no longer allowed to communicate, collaborate, or compromise in any way.

That only sounds good on paper, but it has several disadvantages as well. For one, it would give the federal government control over our lives. They could tell us what we can eat, what we cannot, how much BMI we are allowed, just a host of things since nearly everything we do in life relates to healthcare.

Secondly is the cost. When they ran the numbers on Bernie Sanders plan, it would cost just as much as our federal budget each year.

There are good doctors and hospitals and not so good doctors and hospitals. If government ran healthcare, we would all want the good doctors and hospitals, wouldn't we? That would bring even more politics into the issue. If Democrats ran the show they would give their constituency groups the better places to go, and if Republicans were in leadership, the same thing. It would be a complete mess.

The unsaid part about all this is government doesn't want to run healthcare because if you wanted to sue somebody for malpractice, you'd have to sue the government which would be nearly impossible. Many of our Congress critters were lawyers, and they are not about to stab their associates in the back by getting rid of these lawsuits.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

That's the GOP folks. Those legislators LISTEN to freaks like this guy

Well if birth control is a right, then show us freaks where that right is written.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I have no idea that that nonsense has to do with your idiot claim that fewer people were on welfare in the 60s

Back then, the people on welfare lived in poorer communities because it didn't pay that much. People who could work did because that was the only possible way to have a relaxing life. You didn't see many if any welfare people in middle-class areas. Today they are loaded with them and when Democrats are in charge, even promote more of it.

Biden and Dems Are Set to Abolish the Suburbs | National Review

If suburban voters knew what the Democrats had in store for them, they’d run screaming in the other direction.

www.nationalreview.com