Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Surprising absolutely nobody, CIA 'mistakenly' destroys copy of 6,700-page US torture report
That's my impression as well. Vermont is not really known for race issues and he would have been fairly isolated from them there. And the tussle about reparations for slavery as explained here
also sounds like "economy wonk" and not "closet racist".
As far as the weird sex thing goes, Sanders wrote a very messed up piece back in the 1970s in which he claimed that, among other things, women who don't start having sex early in their teens are being repressed, and that said repression, somehow, causes cancer.
It's a ludicrous statement that he has been called out on. And rather than saying "yeah, I wrote a stupid thing forty years ago" which I'd accept, he's instead cried satire and blamed people for not getting the joke. Which is immature at best.
And then there's the whole "let's ship Vermont's nuclear waste to a Latino community in Texas" thing. And the "no reparations for slavery because there are poor white people" thing. I mean there are reasons to oppose reparations, I suppose, but that ain't one of them.
edited 18th May '16 12:20:51 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
Greenmantle:
I was reading a book on economic history the other day (that I got as a Christmas present) and it made the point that the modern economic revolution only occurred because we stopped running economies by authoritarian means and started encouraging people to seek personal enrichment. As just one example of this, it was for a long time considered nakedly sinful to pursue individual wealth, and this taboo had to be deliberately overcome in order for free-market ideas to catch on.
Command economies, such as those found in Maoist/Stalinist ideology; and Communist economies, such as those found in anarcho-socialist and Marxist ideologies, are, somewhat paradoxically, reversions to an older state of mankind wherein the majority of individuals were relieved of worrying about their financial success because seeking personal wealth was taboo and one's masters took care of figuring out how resources got distributed (or there were no resources to distribute and everyone starved equally).
By contrast, Keynes imagined a state in which the market, operating on capitalist principles, would go about its work of enriching society, restrained by a government that made sure it didn't trample too many rights in the process or introduce too much instability into the system. One might call Adam Smith the father of economics but Keynes was the father of modern economic systems.
If we are to be "progressive" in this regard, we should aim higher than tearing down our institutions and joining Dennis the Dirt Farmer.
I am "statist" to the extent that I believe that only powerful democratic nations — and, ultimately, a world government — offer the necessary stability and clout to take humanity into the future without us wrecking our shit every couple of decades.
edited 18th May '16 12:28:58 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"You realize Sanders voted for the Assault Weapon Ban, right?
Any group who acts like morons ironically will eventually find itself swamped by morons who think themselves to be in good company.OK, no.
Seeing as I linked the Vox article on the reparation thing earlier, the part about "poor white people" is way wrong. There were other things at play as well. Nuclear waste is standard NIMBY fare and stripped from the context I am not even sure if there was a geologically suitable place in Vermont. Frankly, this is all so out of context that I am inclined to not believe any of it.
Also, regarding overtime play: Considering this, why is "Obama's third term" a bad thing again?
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanWait, repatriations? As in paying the descendants of slaves? Isn't that kinda like numbing the children's teeth because their fathers ate sour grapes?
On empty crossroads, seek the eclipse -- for when Sol and Lua align, the lost shall find their way home.I gotta admit that my reaction to finding out Sanders wanted to dump nuclear waste in Texas was basically "Fuck you Sanders, we got enough problems down here." It's a pretty classic case of "not in my backyard" wherein if you don't represent a section of people, you don't have to particularly worry about what happens to them. And I'm wondering what actually happened to that nuclear waste, because hoo boy, I don't want that near any community.
Ok, I went looking for that specifically and got this politifact article. And actually tells us what the waste is; irradiated gloves and the like.
And the original article on the issue:
http://archive.bangordailynews.com/1998/07/30/maine-vermont-nuclear-waste-compact-approved-by-house/
edited 18th May '16 12:30:25 PM by AceofSpades
The nuclear waste thing seems like standard Sanders protectionism, back when it was just about Vermont, I'm sure that nowadays he'd be for exporting all US nuclear waste to some other country instead. Like I've said its not a race thing, but he is very much being blind to the racial tint to things.
As for the old sexual repression thing, I'd need a link to fully understand that.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran@Septimus Heap
I have no issue with him not wanting it in Vermont. The fact is there were places to put it that weren't in somebody else's backyard. Thanks to complaints from other people, in fact, that's what ultimately happened—the stuff got shipped out to the middle of the desert, where it is impacting as few people as possible. Sanders, however, was not a part of that process. He was all in favour of it going to Sierra Blanca, refusing even to visit the site because "I'm going to be running for reelection in the state of Vermont".
edited 18th May '16 12:34:40 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
I know. The ban on usury was part of that, I guess?
...and also in a different manner, Fascist ideology.
Keep Rolling On
Unlike the imagery that's generally evoked at the mention of "Nuclear waste" (e.g. Simpsons-style yellow barrels dripping with green goo), it's stuff that's been exposed to radiation, but aren't capable of producing it. And yeah, definitely a huge NIMBY thing regardless of where they decided to put it - my parents' town voted overwhelmingly against establishing a regular garbage dump there, in spite of the existing one being nigh-overflowing.
"Why would I inflict myself on somebody else?"That area looks plenty desertic to me. Looks like something right out of Fallout.
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.Except that it wasn't just gloves etc. From the third article I linked—which is from the time period, so if someone's trying to do a hatchet job on Sanders' presidential ambitions they're using a goddamn time machine—I give you the descriptor of the "low level" waste being shipped:
"Low level waste is everything else, from the control rods that absorb excess radioactivity and prevent a nuclear chain reaction, to used reactor components and, eventually, the walls of the reactor itself. The longer a nuclear reactor operates, the more radioactive these components become, and the greater the variety of long-lived “transuranic” (heavier-than-uranium) wastes that is generated. Proponents make much of the least radioactive components: gloves, tools, and medical waste. According to Department of Energy statistics compiled by the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, medical waste contributed only 0.004 percent of all the radioactivity in Vermont, Maine and Texas’ low-level waste stream through 1994. By volume, the nuclear power industry contributes about 85 percent of all low level waste nationally."
So yeah, it wasn't just radiated gloves or medical waste. It was everything that wasn't spent fuel rods. Which they were going to put in an unlined trench, in canisters that, it had already been demonstrated, cracked after a brief exposure.
Now a lot of that is on then-Governor Bush, but since Sanders was pushing for it, some of it is on him to. Again, the article—linked again here
—is from October, 1998, so it's not from some crazed Clinton supporter.
EDIT: Just to clarify something, do I think Sanders is an overt racist? No. Do I think a lot of his policies have that effect anyway? Yes.
edited 18th May '16 12:50:37 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
It's still low leve waste, though. The word "low level" is key. And even so, there is no rationality in nuclear waste debates. Seen it in Switzerland as well, I am not surprised to see it there as well.
Also, from Ace of Spades's link I see that Sanders did have a contrary opinion on immigration reform once. Which makes me wonder how quickly his more dislikeable political positions can be changed.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
There are degrees of irrationality. Not wanting it near you? That's fairly standard. Not caring where it goes, even if the place it is going to is insufficiently safe? That's not as standard. Sanders was prepared to ship it to a badly built site, where the waste would have been held in poorly constructed canisters in an unlined trench, in a region which regularly floods if there's any rain.
It's one thing to not want it in your backyard. It's a whole other thing to be okay with the above. When asked if he would at least come and look at the proposed dump site so that he could see the problems with it, he flat out refused, because he apparently didn't want to know about it. At which point we're dealing with wilful ignorance at best.
edited 18th May '16 12:54:08 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
Ambar's link discusses how Sanders deliberately lobbied to remove (and succeeded at) any ability on the part of the townspeople to have a say. Even if you disagree with the alarmism over the waste, it's kind of a dick move to deliberately say that the people will have to live with it just because you, a guy several states and miles away and not a representative of those people, say so. Kind of puts a dent in the "power to the people" image he's trying to build here.
And again, the fact that it's a majority Latino community just puts the shine of racism on the issue, even if he's not intentionally being racist.
Gee, I wonder if that is factually true. I can't find anything more recent than this though
.

Donald Trump unveils 11 potential Supreme Court nominees.
A lot of Dubya appointees. 5 were suggested by the Heritage Foundation.
Obama liked to tout himself as an outsider because he was a fresh face in the political landscape.
Sanders likes to tout himself as an outsider because he's not a part of the Democrat establishment and his ideas are more leftist than the norm.
edited 18th May '16 11:56:21 AM by Demonic_Braeburn
Any group who acts like morons ironically will eventually find itself swamped by morons who think themselves to be in good company.