Elon Musk is proof that just because someone is rich, doesn't mean they are smart.

I mean like when it happened

Remember when gay marriage was legalized throughout the country that was awesome

There are two ways that climate change will pane out. The first, and most likely scenario, is that our inability to slow or stop climate change will severely affect food supply and raise sea levels, particularly in underdeveloped countries that do not have the capability to handle distribution of resources or mass migration of their citizens. As a result, people from these countries will likely immigrate to developed countries in North America and Europe. As we have recently seen, mass migration from underdeveloped countries to developed ones often results in reactionary, neo-fascist movements, which have gained political currency across America and Europe, as citizens feel threatened by mass migration, and demographic and electoral shifts. This will be especially true as the threat of raising sea levels and food supply shortage looms overhead.

The second, highly unlikely scenario, is that socialist policies are enacted to ensure cohesive policies to slow and eventually stop climate change, before the aforementioned affects occur. However, if they do occur, that distributive measures are enacted to provide a more egalitarian distribution of resources.

Etienne Balibar - Spinoza and Politics — StreetlightX

This has been on my radar for some time. Can you let me know what you think?

With ecological catastrophe on the horizon, I don't see how humanity will save itself if it doesn't transition to socialism.

A standard definition of Socialism is “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” — tinman917

Except this is about as ludicrous a definition as saying Capitalism is "two people freely trading commodities". A more workable understanding of socialism, which has been debated, even among self-described socialists for 200 years, would need to incorporate relationships and decision-making within the production process, distribution of goods, wealth, and services, and the political and institutional structures placed to secure and bolster these processes.

Lol property rights = ability to fire people for no reason. ok

If only conservatives cared about uncorroborated allegations that affect and ruin the lives of disenfranchised minorities as they did about Kavanaugh, then the USA would look very different. And extend that to other repugnant issues, such as healthcare, student loans, that deeply affect lives. But conservatives only really give a shit about a very particular group of Americans.

At least this should be just another catalyst for a blue turnout

The ramifications of global warming within the next 80 years will be far more detrimental to civilization than the non-skeptic public understands.

This is the "even if" argument now being proposed. That is, even if the Ford allegations were bullshit, Kavanaugh is disqualified because he denied it improperly. Even if it's all bullshit, he should withdraw to protect the integrity of the Supreme Court. Even if it's all bullshit, some people remain unconvinced. My position is if it's bullshit, it's bullshit, which means that's the question we ought continue focusing on, not conceding it's not true but then arriving at other reasons why it doesn't even matter if it's not true. — Hanover

"Denying it improperly" is a curious way to elide the fact that he was openly partisan, excessively indigent (which he just admitted in an op-ed in the WSJ) and outright lied about his drinking habits, and several other details, as corroborated by nearly a dozen peers. So yes, even if Ford's accusations are proven to be totally false, there are still the above issues which should disqualify him from one of the most important, high profile, positions in the world.

As @ssu points out, Kavaugh's openly partisan conspiratorial outbursts are immediately disqualifying. Of course, nearly all judicial Supreme Court hearings are political to a degree, but that Kavanaugh was so explicit and outspoken, lashing out to such a hyperbolic degree, means that any lawyer arguing in front the of SC has to take into account what he said. Any preponderance to neutrality is out the window.

lol what a fucking joke Hanover, jesus christ

What is missing in political discourse? Respect for other views than your own — ssu

Many views simply aren't respectable, of course; or they are just agonizingly myopic or unquestionably stupid. In fact, I would say one of the major problems with the New York Times, The Atlantic, and other center/left-of-center publications is that they are precisely beholden to the notion that both sides are valid, and that we should hear them.

This is worse: — Relativist

I mean is it surprising that a guy who publicly mocked a disabled reporter, called some people "low IQ", openly considers journalists to be the "enemy of the people", and a Sunday shopping cart list of whatever else, will deride the victim of a credible sexual assault case? It shouldn't be surprising, it's not abnormal, etc. this is simply the character of Trump. It's who he is. Personally, I think this display was mainly to detract from the New York Times story, but as stated, it's also not out of character either.

Instead of reading claptrap rags such as Quillette or anything from Peterson, Rubin, Shapiro, etc. who, as you note, just garble the same pseudo-intellectual talking points among themselves like some bacchanalian circle-jerk, or even banal left-of-center publications, such as The New York Times, or The Atlantic, you could look into progressive, far left publications. My favorites are: Jacobin, The Nation, Current Affairs, Vox, and specific individual contributors to those publications and others. I also recommend Chris Hayes' podcast.

From The New York Times:

The president has long sold himself as a self-made billionaire, but a Times investigation found that he received at least $413 million in today’s dollars from his father’s real estate empire, much of it through tax dodges in the 1990s.

Anyway, I think the Kavanugh debacle is starting to digress into territory similar to Trump's, where the lies just compound and compound until it's difficult to keep track, unless one is paying very close attention, and therefore it becomes easier to dismiss the accusations and shrug one's shoulders, as repetition increases banality.

Btw, it's absolutely vital that this is primarily framed as a job interview, rather than a trial. In any other position if the employer were to discover that a job applicant may have committed sexual assault, they'd be dropped immediately as a potential hire.

Really? How about health care? Conspiracy with the Russians? The destruction of our alliances? An anti-farm trade policy? Support of racism? Attacks on women? Separation of children from their families? Balancing the budget? Environmental protection? Basic competence at FEMA? Voting rights? A rational response to climate change? The repeal of the state income tax deduction? Failure to respond to mass shootings? Open your eyes. The Republicans are on the wrong side of so many issues that they are in for a historical shellacking. — Dfpolis

What the fuck are you talking about? You can't run on a platform for the midterms, after the midterms are over.

Gonna start Dracula by Bram Stoker tomorrow, because it's a S P O O K Y month

If they successfully delay the confirmation past November 6th, then there is no further platform to run on because the race is over...

If you havent seen Matt Damon's performance on SNL, watch it. — frank

I saw it, it was great.

You said that the Democrats are running on a single issue for midterms: "all the races a single issue on abortion." That's simply false.

all the races a single issue election on abortion — Rank Amateur

Lol that's demonstrably not the case.

Anyone who believes that the democratic objective is anything other than to delay confirmation until after the midterms is naive. — Rank Amateur

I don't doubt that's an adjacent objective, but it nevertheless takes a backseat to the fact that 1) the attempted rape allegation is credible and requires investigation, and 2) Kavanaugh brazenly lied multiple times under oath.

Besides, Congress doesn't suddenly change on November 7th. Republicans have until January 2019 to "plow through" the nomination and install Kavanaugh, which they will no doubt attempt to do, regardless of outcome on November 6th.

From reports I've been reading, the FBI investigation will be extremely half-assed.

I like how the idea that Ford is an agent of Putin and that this is all a big Russian conspiracy is somehow more believable then the idea that a 17-year old tried to rape a girl and is now lying about it three decades later.

Kavanaugh case has been discussed all over the United States and on this forum as well.
Everyone everyone takes for granted that Ford was an assault victim. My personal impression from the hearings is that her story has been fabricated from scratch. And here are my reasons.
1. The woman claimed she feared traveling by air and the Senate had to postpone the hearings. But at the hearings it turned out she had traveled a lot by plane to remote places such as French Polynesia.
2. Ford named 3 witnesses all of whom failed to recollect the party.
3. She was convincing answering Democrat's questions but whe asked by the prosecutor she couldn't remember how she got home located 8 miles from the assult place. The impression is Ford had no difficulty giving prepared answers and experienced evident difficulties answering prsecutor's questions that she could'n forsee.
4. When asked who paid for the poligraph test she failed to give an answer. Her attorneys explained they paid for it. What else was she paid for?
5. Ford is an experienced psychologist, she has command of special methodologies that help her to stand public pressure, questionings and interrogations .
5. Ford benefited from the K-case. She has become a celebrity and aquired a nation wide popularity.
Now suppose these my conjectures are true and the FBI investigation will reveal the whole K-case is a sham. What will the ramifications be? American political system will be dealt a mortal blow. And it is common knowledge that the most influental person in the world who hates America and has demonstrated intentions to destroy it is Russia' Putin. Hence the conclusion: Christine Blasey Ford is Putin's agent, and the Kavanaugh case is Russian conspiracy. — Proto

Excellent, one of the dumbest things I've read all week, and there was some serious competitors. Congrats.

Yes, contemporaries in the area have confirmed that Kavanaugh lied about the definitions. You won't find 'devil's triangle' referring to a banal drinking game, or 'boofing' referring to farting. In fact, if we do substitute boofing for farting, then Kvanaugh's quote would mean "have you farted yet?" I mean come on...

Not surprised an "orginalist" would re-interpret past definitions in order to advance his own interests.

Kavanaugh outright lied. May have been better for him to admit that he had a drinking problem in his youth than he was able to overcome, but instead he lied under oath.

As I said in the last page, on the scale of who would likely be nominated and win, while being closest to my Leftist ideology, I would prefer Warren

My point is that ideological/political context matters greatly here.

Oh is Palin a democrat?

Trump's nomination, and a fortiori, his presidential win, emboldened and legitimized far-right forces. A women/PoC president would be the right step in de-legitimizing them.

It's not a punishment to not be granted the honor of sitting on the highest juridical seat in the land while - what? slumming it? - as a federal judge in the meantime.

This idea that the withholding of privilege constitutes some kind of punishment is one among the more insidiously imbecilic tropes that seem to have emerged in the wider debate. — StreetlightX

It's the apotheosis of white male privilege.

Anyone who thinks Republicans will nominate a "moderate" Republican like Flake or Kasich in 2024, after voting in Trump and nearly nominating Cruz is light-years removed from the current state of the GOP.

Anyway, the who-will-be-nominated game that's been played in the last few elections have nearly always been wrong, so I personally don't see the point. I would like the Democrats to nominate Warren, personally. Trump need to lose to a women, or a person of color, or both.

Not sure the population size of "red necks", but Obama was nevertheless voted in twice. Flake is popular with no one.

Anyway the last week, the previous two days in particular, has been utterly draining. Curious to see how next week will play out considering the FBI investigation appears to be a go.

Flake v. Elizabeth Warren. That would be interesting, although likely a Flake win. — tim wood

hahahahaha