Paul Ryan Discussion

[LisaA]

Right. So, if we have monozygotic twins, it doesn’t matter if one of them dies since the distinct DNA survives? DNA has been digitalized and brought to life. Granted, it’s only been done with bacteria, but we have a proof of principle. DNA is code. So, presumably, we could digitalize human DNA, change the code, and bring it to life. Would we be obligated to bring to term every possible variation of the code? No, it seems that the uniqueness of DNA isn’t the real issue. If we were to clone humans beings, it seems equally strange to say that those beings would not have a right to life simply because their DNA was not unique…

You are creating and answering questions not asked and raising silly arguments. The point of the DNA discussion is that many use the “it’s part of the woman’s body” argument to provide support for her ability to be the ONLY decision maker with respect to the unborn child.

The baby is a distinct human being from conception. If the fertilized egg splits and twins are born while they have the same DNA they are obviously two separate persons. So yes it does matter that one twin dies or is killed by his/her mother.

I hardly think bacteria is equivalent to a baby but you do seem to belittle human life so maybe you believe our ability to manipulate bacteria means we also have the right to kill unborn babies?

So what kind of cells become a human being? The embryonic stem cells divide and multiply, eventually specializing and resulting in a body with a brain. Skin cells, and other cells, can be manipulated into behaving much like embryonic stem cells. In the right environment, and with the right technology, perhaps a person could emerge. Do skin cells deserve the right-to-life because of this theoretical potential? Why not? If they could potentially become a human being, why not?
.

Again you make up arguments that were not posed. A theoretical possibility is not a human. I am not talking about a theoretical or a potential baby baby. It’s a real baby in there, not skin cells in a Petri dish.

No, it doesn’t measure humans by usefulness. What is the difference between a fly and a chimp? Are they of equal value? If not, why not? If a superintelligent chimp was born – a chimp who could talk with us, share with us, be a person with us – it would be a monstrous thing to kill him. Why? Because of his properties. What is the moral difference between a rock, a plant, a bacteria, a fly, a rat, a pig, a chimp, and a human? Moral value corresponds with mental properties. What properties? The ability to experience existence. To feel, to suffer, to enjoy, to think, to be. Something has to matter to them. For a rock, there is nothing. For a bacteria, close to nothing. For a fly, a little bit more. For a rat, a bit more still. And so on.
.

For the third time you make up arguments never posed. I asked you to support the idea that certain human beings do not have the right to life because in your opinion, their brains are not sufficiently developed or functioning to deserve life. I did not ask if a fly or a chimp has the same rights. Totally irrelevant.

You apparently don’t believe people who are under anesthesia, in a coma or maybe even in a very deep sleep are human since they are not “suffering, enjoying or thinking.” Have you ever been under anesthesia? I assure you not much thinking is going on and thankfully not much physical sensation either.

I dated a man who’d been in a horrible accident. He showed me the journal kept by his mother during the lengthy coma. His mother was told that a) he would die b) if he didn’t die he’d be in a permanent coma or c) if by chance he did awake, he would be “a vegetable.” Did she want to pull the plug? Thankfully she didn’t. He was in a coma for several weeks, awoke somewhat unexpectedly, and was immediately lucid. He did not remember either the accident or anything during the coma.

So should Mom have pulled the plug? Was he a human during the coma?

Looks like the answers are no, and yes.

Here is the reality. In your opinion, informed by whatever “spiritual” tradition you claim informs your conscious, only people with a certain level of CURRENT brain function are granted human rights.

How incredibly silly.

Dementia slowly destroys the brain, and by implication, it destroys the mind. What better evidence for saying that the mind resides in the brain? As I said earlier, it’s difficult to know what mental states you are still capable of with severe dementia or severe mental impairment, but we can still acknowledge that something is not right. At some point, the person with severe dementia is lost. Everyone observing a family member with dementia can attest to that. The person is slowly dying and leaving this world. He loses himself slowly but surely, and in the last stages, not much is left, if anything at all.

.

So apparently you believe the person can be killed by those who have power over him or her at the point in time that they are considered “gone” mentally.

This is kind of how abortion works in most countries. Abortion is restricted, and those restrictions are based on (sometimes outdated science) on fetal development.

.

And this is relevant because? Again I asked if you think anyone is sufficiently knowledgeable to determine the point in time a brain functions sufficiently to make the unborn baby a human with human rights.

At any rate we are talking about abortion in the US which is sadly not restricted as to fetal development. The Dems just voted down a restriction on abortion at 20 weeks. At that point Persuader it’s a BABY but the Dems have fought against ANY restriction on abortion. It’s a gruesome club you belong to.

Really? What about the arguments then? Your standard is presumably established by proper arguments, and not merely «a matter of opinion». Why would you think it’s different for pro-choice? It’s not, of course. I have already given some arguments, and none of those arguments are simply «a matter of opinion». And what do you mean when you talk about subjective standards?

.

Because "pro choice aka pro abortion rights has NO standard. If the mother wants an abortion, even if the baby is at eight months’ gestation, she can get one. That sounds pretty subjective to me.

OTOH conception, a fertilized egg is a specific point in time. Once this happens, a distinct human is created. He or she simply needs support and nourishment to completely develop

PS: I don’t think you got around to answering the problems with Ayn Rand.

Actually I did. You just didn’t like the answers.

Lisa

PS will respond separately to your welfare section

 

[DeSanto]

You didn’t bother to answer the question.

**You didn’t bother to go back and read my previous comments or the references I supplied. I stated wind and solar along with fracking if done safely wit regulations should be considered along with other forms of energy as an overall energy package.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/peak_oil**

Why do you disparage oil for energy. We have a large supply under our control and by cooprating with Canada and Mexico could get a ready and safe supply without dealing with enemies.

Billions have been wasted propping up solar energy companiies. They cannot survive without significant tax breaks and subsidies.

**Funny you don’t mind sending tax dollars to oil company subsidies who btw made record breaking profits while the country struggles to put gas in the cars.

priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies**

Why are we spending money to prop up a failing industry? Given we’ve spent decades on this technology, that we still cannot produce it economically to compete with other sources (Natural Gas)

Your facts sound like a clip and post from an Al Gore site. People no longer buy all of the global warming, air pollution, coal is evil mantra.

m.democracynow.org/stories/12971 still denying, huh? You can’t stick your head and the sand and hope it goes away. The only possible reason to deny it is for political reasons.
As to oil and gas companies blocking technology…many of them are involved in this technology and if it were actually a viable and profitable endeavor they would continue to invest.

With regard to windmills, again have you ever been in a “wind farm?” Do you have any idea the difficulty of counting on or storing power from a sporadic and undependable source? One of the smartest oil and gas men in the world made a huge investment in wind power (T Boone Pickens) If he failed in this business who are you to claim that this is a viable technology?

Again, it’s worth including it in an overall energy package. Not for all our energy needs, why couldn’t we utilize all our technology to get off oil dependency in the future? And again, very pessimistic in the ability of our country to lead in new and improved technologies. You saying it can’t be done? Let’s just stay in the last century as long as we can.

You have a lot of Democrat talking points but not very many facts.

** I can’t help it if you refuse to face the facts. There are so many facts to support climate change, do some research. Global warming is real. Al Gore was right. Admit it!**

Lisa

 

[ProVobis]

First of all, it didn’t close before then. Secondly, I don’t think Ryan was blaming him for the plant closing but for making such promises beforehand, when he knew the plant was in trouble and slated for closing, and then the plant closed down anyway.

The whole economy was in trouble. Foreign investors were threatening to pull their money out of our markets. Commodities and stocks plummetted. Ryan panicked like everyone else. And now he’s pointing fingers at a candidate who was making promises to make things better? Tell him to look at Bush’s buddy Bernanke who in 2005 promised that home prices would never decline or bankers who promised their clients their money was always safe with them. I would strongly recommend watching “Too Big To Fail” if you want a real view of the situation in 2008 that came out of the Bush years.

 

[LisaA]

DeSanto your post within a post is impossible to quote or clip so here goes:

Global warming, the old 'hockey stick" had been debunked. Climate has changed over the millenia with or without human intervention. Greenland is called Greenland because it was green. There have been small ice ages, non-existent summers and even the global warming fanatics no longer use the term…they use “climate change” which works if it gets hot or it gets cold. It’s simple baloney by the Left who wants control over our lives.

So no I won’t admit it because it’s not true and I am not interested in reading a bunch of Lefty blogs on the subject.

As to gas and oil, when a different source of energy becomes as readily available and as economical, then we will ‘get off’ gas and oil just as we no longer use kerosene lamps or have our horses pull plows. There is no crisis, no rush.

Obviously I have no problem with developing technology. I remember when calculators first came out…big clunky things with minimal functions. We never dreamed of something like an iPhone. If there is a need, a product will be developed to fill it or if you are Steve Jobs you will let us know what we need!

At any rate President Obama’s policies have been restrictive and draconian. The EPA is now the Employment Prevention Agency. I hope that Romney Ryan will get RID of the whole department but if not, then at least starve the beast. It creates costs without commensurate value. Ditto with the Energy Department, started to get us off foreign oil. How’s that workiing out? We need to incentivise and develop our resources here and stop paying bills for foreign countries who are none too friendly.

Oh and while we’re at it, let’s get the nuclear power industry back on its feet. Destroyed by hysteria and political pandering.

Obama claims “all of the above” when he means none of the above when referring to below ground resources. When he starts powering Air Force One with a windmill I’ll reconsider the validity of his position.

Lisa

 

[Mickey_Finn]

CNN Fact Check: Did Ryan get Obama’s GM speech right?

edition.cnn.com/2012/08/30/politics/pol-fact-check-ryan-gm/index.html

Verdict - true but incomplete

_

“We’ve seen some tough times. We’ve seen some longterm layoffs. We’ve seen some recessions. But we’ve never faced a plant idling. Like I said, it’s not a plant closing. It’s a plant idling,” clarified Andy Richardson, president of UAW Local 95.

wkow.com/global/story.asp?s=9573971

_

April 2009

GM plant in Janesville closing for good this week

jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/43254027.html?ipad=y

GM Plant in Janesville Ends Production for Good This Week

youtube.com/watch?v=56h1gobtkIo

_

Barack Obama Thrice Mentioned Janesville GM Plant In 2008

The President twice said he would help retool the plants like the Janesville one to help them re-open or stay open

buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/barack-obama-thrice-mentioned-janesville-gm-plant

_

Just because Ryan took money from stimulus at the request of an constituent does not disprove anything Ryan said at the RNC. Stimulus was a failure

Your funny.The plant was closed before he took office. That work still went on there, is neither here nor there. As for the rest of it, Ryan has proven himself to be just another self serving POL. Doing one thing, and saying something else. Depending on what best serves his interest. Not a man to put your faith in.

ATB

 

[Mickey_Finn]

The whole economy was in trouble. Foreign investors were threatening to pull their money out of our markets. Commodities and stocks plummetted. Ryan panicked like everyone else. And now he’s pointing fingers at a candidate who was making promises to make things better? Tell him to look at Bush’s buddy Bernanke who in 2005 promised that home prices would never decline or bankers who promised their clients their money was always safe with them. I would strongly recommend watching “Too Big To Fail” if you want a real view of the situation in 2008 that came out of the Bush years.

Clinton had a hand in it as well. You don’t want to overlook the Gramm, Leach, Bliley act.

 

[meltzerboy]

washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/08/30/obama-could-not-have-saved-janesville-gm-plant-it-closed-before-he-took-office/

Last night Paul Ryan said that Obama failed to save a GM plant in Janesville, Wis. Many outlets — including Wonkblog — said that was a lie. But some conservatives have tried to salvage the claim. Jonathan Adler of the National Review asks, “What was ‘false’ in Ryan’s statement? Was Janesvile ‘about to lose’ the factory at the time of the election? Yes. Did Obama fail to prevent this as he had promised? Yes.”

Let’s break down, then, the exact chronology of the Janesville plant closing; Conn Carroll of the Washington Examiner has helpfully posted one here, which I add to below. The basic takeaway, however, is this: by December 2008, the plant had reached a point of no return where the plant would be shut down regardless of federal action. Ryan was faulting Obama for an that was event that was inevitable over a month before he took office.

February 2008: At a campaign stop in Janesville, Obama says, ”I believe that if our government is there to support you, and give you the assistance you need to re-tool and make this transition, that this plant will be here for another hundred years.” As Politifact writes, “That’s a statement of belief that, with government help, the Janesville plant could remain open — but not a promise to keep it open.”

June 3, 2008 – GM decides to close the Janesville plant, announcing that production will end by 2010, after months of rumors it might close. The press release declares, “Janesville, Wisconsin, will cease production of medium-duty trucks by the end of 2009, and of the Tahoe, Suburban and Yukon in 2010, or sooner.” Senators Herb Kohl and Russ Feingold, both Democrats, and Paul Ryan, whose House district includes Janesville, write the company urging it to reverse the decision.

September 2008 – Paul Ryan flies to Detroit to urge GM to reconsider its decision to close the plant. According to the Los Angeles Times, he pitched “a $224-million proposal that included roughly $50 million in state enterprise zone tax credits, local government grants worth $22 million and major contract concessions from the United Auto Workers union local.” Throughout, Ryan frequently speaks with GM chief Rick Wagoner.

Oct. 11, 2008 – Barack Obama comments on the Janesville closing. He does not promise to prevent the closing-in-progress, but instead declares he will “retool plants like the GM facility in Janesville” (emphasis mine) as president. Regardless of one’s views of the auto bailout, it has saved facilities like the Janesville one, if not the Janesville one in particular.

November/December 2008 – Congress weighs a bailout of GM and other automakers. One proposal, backed by Ryan and 31 other House Republicans, but not Mitt Romney, would have provided $15 billion in bridge loans. The bill passed the house but was not picked up by the Senate. The Bush administration declines to use TARP funds to rescue automakers, but approves a bridge loan on Dec.19, too late to save the Janesville plant.

Dec. 23, 2008 – Lacking a bailout, the plant closes. The plant holds a “final goodbye ceremony” as it builds its last SUV. In a statement to MSNBC, GM confirmed that the plant “was idled” in December. But — and this is where it gets confusing — winding down a plant takes time.

April 21, 2009 – The Janesville plant builds its last medium-duty truck and shuts down its last assembly line, completing the shutdown process started in June 2008.

In short, the Janesville shutdown commenced in June 2008. Once it was clear that aid wasn’t forthcoming in November, actual assembly lines were being shut down by December. It is true that Paul Ryan tried to get the Obama administration to save another plant, in Kenosha, which the Obama administration failed to do. Attacking Obama for that is fair. But hitting him for Janesville is dishonest. The first assembly line stopped rolling in December 2008. Workers unfurled banners declaring the “Last Vehicles Off the Janesville Line” at a “final goodbye ceremony,” The plant was closing regardless of what Obama did.

This is a very strange dispute, in a way. Mitt Romney wrote an op-ed in the New York Times under the title “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt,” and now his campaign is trying hard to fault Obama for not bailing out automakers aggressively enough. Not only that, but after the campaign’s repeated denunciation of the Obama administration for “picking winners,” Ryan is faulting Obama for not “picking a winner” not just among companies, but among plants. He’s attacking Obama for not using the government to micromanage GM’s affairs.

boston.com/politicalintelligence/2012/08/16/ryan/WEMawbCVyVTq2qi0pyBheK/story.html

WASHINGTON _ After seeking millions of dollars from a federal stimulus program he opposed, Republican vice presidential candidate Rep. Paul Ryan repeatedly denied lobbying the Obama administration for home state aid – first on a Boston radio station in 2010 and then again on Tuesday in an interview with a Ohio television station.

On October 28, 2010, after the Wisconsin Republican penned at least five letters to two federal departments seeking grants under the Obama administration’s economic recovery package, Ryan responded to a caller on WBZ’s Nightside with Dan Rea who asked if he sought any of the money.

Ryan said that he would not vote against something “then write to the government to ask them to send us money.”

“I did not request any stimulus money,” he continued.

Meanwhile, in an interview yesterday with an Ohio television station, Ryan repeated the denial, before quickly adding “I don’t recall.”

You were saying?

Good post and commentary on the bizarre nature of the dispute. YOU should be a fact-checker!

 

[ProVobis]

Clinton had a hand in it as well. You don’t want to overlook the Gramm, Leach, Bliley act.

Yes, the movie made mention of that at the beginning. Also Reagan, although aside from appointing Greenspan, I don’t know why they mentioned him.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Your funny.The plant was closed before he took office. That work still went on there, is neither here nor there.

It sure would not have seemed “neither here nor there” to the ones who were still employed there after Obama took office. To them, it would indisputably have looked like it closed when they, themselves, were laid off.

 

[stevegravy]

Your funny.The plant was closed before he took office. That work still went on there, is neither here nor there. As for the rest of it, Ryan has proven himself to be just another self serving POL. Doing one thing, and saying something else. Depending on what best serves his interest. **Not a man to put your faith in. **

ATB

We have been told to not put our faith in no man.

But, as a POL like all the others in Washington including the current fund raiser in chief he is sounds better than most. I think we have to work with what we have.

 

[stevegravy]

DeSanto your post within a post is impossible to quote or clip so here goes:

Global warming, the old 'hockey stick" had been debunked. Climate has changed over the millenia with or without human intervention. Greenland is called Greenland because it was green. There have been small ice ages, non-existent summers and even the global warming fanatics no longer use the term…they use “climate change” which works if it gets hot or it gets cold. It’s simple baloney by the Left who wants control over our lives.

So no I won’t admit it because it’s not true and I am not interested in reading a bunch of Lefty blogs on the subject.

As to gas and oil, when a different source of energy becomes as readily available and as economical, then we will ‘get off’ gas and oil just as we no longer use kerosene lamps or have our horses pull plows. There is no crisis, no rush.

Obviously I have no problem with developing technology. I remember when calculators first came out…big clunky things with minimal functions. We never dreamed of something like an iPhone. If there is a need, a product will be developed to fill it or if you are Steve Jobs you will let us know what we need!

At any rate President Obama’s policies have been restrictive and draconian. The EPA is now the Employment Prevention Agency. I hope that Romney Ryan will get RID of the whole department but if not, then at least starve the beast. It creates costs without commensurate value. Ditto with the Energy Department, started to get us off foreign oil. How’s that workiing out? We need to incentivise and develop our resources here and stop paying bills for foreign countries who are none too friendly.

Oh and while we’re at it, let’s get the nuclear power industry back on its feet. Destroyed by hysteria and political pandering.

Obama claims “all of the above” when he means none of the above when referring to below ground resources. When he starts powering Air Force One with a windmill I’ll reconsider the validity of his position.

Lisa

Truer words et cetera et cetera.

 

[salusanimarum17]

The whole economy was in trouble. Foreign investors were threatening to pull their money out of our markets. Commodities and stocks plummetted. Ryan panicked like everyone else. And now he’s pointing fingers at a candidate who was making promises to make things better? Tell him to look at Bush’s buddy Bernanke who in 2005 promised that home prices would never decline or bankers who promised their clients their money was always safe with them. I would strongly recommend watching “Too Big To Fail” if you want a real view of the situation in 2008 that came out of the Bush years.

I have no interest in “tu quoque” deflection or otherwise changing the topic by pointing to other people. All of what you’re saying is beside the point: the whole economy is still in trouble. Obama made promises he didn’t keep, e.g., the Janesville GM plant. I will conclude that you admit that much since you have not denied it but only changed the subject.

 

[salusanimarum17]

Your funny.The plant was closed before he took office. That work still went on there, is neither here nor there. …

Actually, this comment makes me conclude that “your funny.” It was closed but still functioning but it doesn’t matter. Good one.

 

[salusanimarum17]

Good post and commentary on the bizarre nature of the dispute. YOU should be a fact-checker!

Such is the nature of today’s “fact check”–just cut and paste someone else’s work and hope that nobody actually checks the original sources.

 

[ProVobis]

I have no interest in “tu quoque” deflection or otherwise changing the topic by pointing to other people. All of what you’re saying is beside the point: the whole economy is still in trouble. Obama made promises he didn’t keep, e.g., the Janesville GM plant. I will conclude that you admit that much since you have not denied it but only changed the subject.

Salvation of souls, I’ll agree to the point that he shouldn’t have made a promise which presupposed that the plant would still be open by inauguration day, two and a half months after an election. All candidates should make whatever disclaimers are necessary in their campaigns to avoid such criticisms later. How’s that?

 

[fix]

I don’t think it implies a lack of understanding, empathy and compassion. Pro-choice people generally do not believe that an embryo or a fetus (at least up to a certain age) is a person, and thus they do not believe that they are killing a person. You must know the arguments, I’m sure.

How can it not imply those things? The arguments are disingenuous.

 

[DeSanto]

DeSanto your post within a post is impossible to quote or clip so here goes:

Global warming, the old 'hockey stick" had been debunked. Climate has changed over the millenia with or without human intervention. Greenland is called Greenland because it was green. There have been small ice ages, non-existent summers and even the global warming fanatics no longer use the term…they use “climate change” which works if it gets hot or it gets cold. It’s simple baloney by the Left who wants control over our lives.

**You are incorrect about Greenland. Please do your research before stating such claims. When Greenland was discovered it was by no means green! The use of the name greenland was more than likely because of the blue/green tent reflected off the ICE. And also, was considered a possible marketing ploy to attract new settlers. Yes, there are cyclical warmings more like once every so often, not on going like we are beginning to see. Here, just check out the facts…and please review the info on the melting ice sheet.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_ice_sheet**

Oh, and please don’t be fooled, our lives are controled. Mind control may be something you should worry about. I just want to be good stewarts of our planet and live on a planet where I can drink the water, eat the food, and breathe without being poisoned. I will not waste my time on the importance of the EPA with you, or the necessary role of government in these areas. I suppose you would not care if you or someone you love got lysteria, ecoli or salmanila because some for profit corp, skipped out on some regulations to save a buck.

So no I won’t admit it because it’s not true and I am not interested in reading a bunch of Lefty blogs on the subject.

**At least I don’t deny that facts. Would you ever be willing to admit the same distaste for the truth coming from the right? I doubt it. **

As to gas and oil, when a different source of energy becomes as readily available and as economical, then we will ‘get off’ gas and oil just as we no longer use kerosene lamps or have our horses pull plows. There is no crisis, no rush.

**Ok, now we’re getting somewhere. Why wait for a crisis Lisa? BP. There are many other reasons to consider investing now. I won’t wast my time repeating myself. **

Obviously I have no problem with developing technology. I remember when calculators first came out…big clunky things with minimal functions. We never dreamed of something like an iPhone. If there is a need, a product will be developed to fill it or if you are Steve Jobs you will let us know what we need!

ok, just don’t deny the resistance by special interest groups to prevent this progression. its so obvious.

At any rate President Obama’s policies have been restrictive and draconian. The EPA is now the Employment Prevention Agency. I hope that Romney Ryan will get RID of the whole department but if not, then at least starve the beast. It creates costs without commensurate value. Ditto with the Energy Department, started to get us off foreign oil. How’s that workiing out? We need to incentivise and develop our resources here and stop paying bills for foreign countries who are none too friendly.

**You forgot Department of Education!!! How’s that denial working out for you? I guess you also deny there is any obstruction going on in our Congress. **

Oh and while we’re at it, let’s get the nuclear power industry back on its feet. Destroyed by hysteria and political pandering.

Go for it buddy! Can we just please acknowledge the need to regulate it?

Obama claims “all of the above” when he means none of the above when referring to below ground resources. When he starts powering Air Force One with a windmill I’ll reconsider the validity of his position.

**Again, do you really think he would be able to pass anything like that in Congress. PHU-LEASE. **

Lisa

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

All I can say about Ryan over Biden.

“Biden. He’s like a giant grin with a body behind it.”

 

[qui_est_ce]

DeSanto:
DeSanto, please learn how to use the “quote” feature. It makes it much easier to read your posts and respond point by point.

Putting * where no space should be.

Begin quote *quote=xxx]

End quote */quote]

or use the quote feature (yellow quote pic) to wrap quotes.

 

[DeSanto]

DeSanto, please learn how to use the “quote” feature. It makes it much easier to read your posts and respond point by point.

Putting * where no space should be.

Begin quote *quote=xxx]

End quote */quote]

or use the quote feature (yellow quote pic) to wrap quotes.

I am quite new at this. Honestly, this thread has moved so fast I haven’t had much time to check out all the features. I’ll work on it.