(Part 2) Best products from r/moderatepolitics

i didn't know it was my job to take seriously people who can't understand the complexities of campaign finance and democratic government. if you want to read an enlightening book, i would suggest this: http://www.amazon.com/Republic-Lost-Money-Corrupts-Congress--/dp/0446576433/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1334193301&sr=8-1

Biden enters this race with his own substantial baggage. How will Biden defend his use of public office to make his son, Hunter, a multi millionaire of off biz deals with China and Ukraine? Read this book before you get on the Biden band wagon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/0062569368/ref=cm_sw_r_sms_awdb_t1_Y4JYCb9Y0821H

There are 19 other candidates and counting. Biden does not deserve the lead.

It's Ironic that I'm reading Niel Stephenson's Fall, or Dodge in Hell and he has people who have literally curated their own reality through news feeds and have become 'post-fact'. It's ironic because at least in the beginning he portrays red-staters like this, and really goes after truthers, but now with a Trump admin we have a completely false narrative about Trump being a russian spy, and also a huge theory about white supremacists being all over the place when they're actually a smaller belief group than the Hare Kristnas.

I wonder if they can use Amazon or similar services to get these items. For example:

https://www.amazon.com/Tropicana-Orange-Juice-Ounce-Pack/dp/B001AQTUK4

>Why is higher education, as you describe it, a treasure to be protected?

I didn't really describe it that way. I said Paglia is not a treasure to be protected. I said that colleges only act counter to their mission if their mission is higher education. If their mission is profit-seeking, it makes total sense why they listen to students.
>Paglia is definitely eccentric and a provocateur but also an academic, a Democrat, and not a white supremacist. Her media critiques are well-researched, well-written, and lack much basis for contention.

Paglia, especially in recent years in light of growing awareness of feminism and trans issues, has been writing less and less well-researched and well-written work and more and more controversy for the sake of it. Just look at the title of her latest book.
>There are so many shit professors out there who don’t have a fraction of the passion that she has.

Passion isn't the only metric. Charles Murray has passion, and he's a dangerous idiot.

I'm not after Paglia's job. I don't think she even ranks in the Top 100 worst people. But I'm not shedding any tears if a middling school decides they want to shed a controversial professor.

Don't miss the sequel

https://www.amazon.com/Dog-Whistle-Politics-Appeals-Reinvented/dp/019022925X

> Hey, we want to help the poor by giving more financial assistance. Let us rewrite gun laws to fit our interests, and we'll help Dems help the poor.

You have no idea.

Read this book: https://www.amazon.com/Run-Fugitive-Fieldwork-Encounters-Discoveries/dp/022613671X

Read Amazon reviews before that to understand what the book is about.

Problem of inner city poverty is not about marginally increasing the giveaways, and it’s nothing Democrats care about solving.

Not everyone agrees. Even former police chiefs.

Depends on the individual. In Rich Dad, Poor Dad the recommendation is to go bankrupt before your 30.

If you don’t, or don’t come close you’re not taking enough risk and most likely won’t become wealthy.

Here are three textbooks that cover that a zygote is a unique, living, human life.

Care to provide any sort of statement on why, exactly, a zygote, which is scientifically human, alive, and unique, is not a human life? If you want to argue personhood, that's not science, that's philosophy of the mind, and we can go down some dark paths about what constitutes a human. If you want to argue science, there's no argument to be made.

Even people like Peter Singer concede this, because there's nothing to be argued against it. People that want to try and argue against it are trying to morally rationalize their decisions or wants, at least be consistent with it.

Mexico doesn't do anything about illegal immigration because it's embarrassing for them. There was one incident a while back where a group of border crossers were found dead in the desert from dehydration. It got some news coverage and Mexico had declared them national heroes and had the bodies flown back for burial. The other is because they gain finically from all the foreign remittance that gets sent back. This isn't just for Mexico but other countries that have a high count of illegal immigration in the US.

For an example of just how lucrative it can be, PEW says that for 2017 that Mexico received over $30 billion dollars sent in remittances. Other countries like El Salvador rely on it and actually makes up a large amount of their GDP. Just over 17% in their case.

Because of how easy the money is for these countries they have no real pressure or reason to act. What needs to be figured out is how to make it where the amount of money coming in isn't worth the cost.



https://www.pewresearch.org/global/interactives/remittance-flows-by-country/

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/01/29/remittances-from-abroad-are-major-economic-assets-for-some-developing-countries/

The story about the migrants being called heroes is from this book. https://www.amazon.com/Devils-Highway-True-Story/dp/0316010804

This isn't really a helpful comment, and isn't it inaccurate? I thought Sullivan was a conservative?

>who submitted a four page summary that deliberately left out much of Mueller's findings

Well... DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

The summary is intended to give a SUMERIZATION of the RESULTS of the investigation. it was never intended to be the be all end all report and the Muller report is released. So what are you whining about? That the 4 page summary he released didnt have the information YOU were specifically seeking? Probably because it wasnt intented to confirm your bias. It was intended to summarize the investigations ultimate findings and give the country the short hand version as quick as possible. Why are you pretending like hes currently sitting back there in his AG office clutching the rest of the Muller report as if I cant LITERALLY buy it on Amazon RIGHT NOW and have it delivered to my house, same day. Stop conflating the summary which is dead news with current events.

https://www.walmart.com/ip/The-Mueller-Report-Paperback/459479691?wmlspartner=wlpa&selectedSellerId=0&adid=22222222228278011730&wl0=&wl1=g&wl2=m&wl3=336277855171&wl4=pla-652099434885&wl5=9016103&wl6=&wl7=&wl8=&wl9=pla&wl10=8175035&wl11=online&wl12=459479691&wl13=&veh=sem&gclid=Cj0KCQjwzunmBRDsARIsAGrt4muYXhmQEzV0v4XKbaEfk56dLEAmkHfjpQf3dD84QTkMh2SNPn1xVI8aAq6_EALw_wcB

https://www.amazon.com/Mueller-Report-Special-Counsel-Collusion/dp/1510750169

I disagree that your predicted outcomes would happen, but then again I'm getting my argument from a comic book: https://www.amazon.com/Open-Borders-Science-Ethics-Immigration/dp/1250316960

Just responding to your steel man case: If its true (or anywhere close to true) that the average American commits 3 felonies a day, then punishing people just because they don't respect our laws isn't something we do, or want to do. That's probably for the same utilitarian reasons you articulate in your pro case.

As a general principle? No, I don’t believe so. It’s not even psychology; it’s game theory and economics. Read a book.

Here, I’ll get you started. Try this on for size and argue with an idea instead of attacking people’s motivations.

I believe some agencies actually do classify it as a chemical weapon. Source Of course, I suppose you could technically call anything a chemical weapon since they're all ultimately made of chemicals in some form.

White phosphorus is some nasty stuff too. I've read horror stories about its use in WWII, including incidents where soldiers who got it on them shot themselves instead of going through the pain. Pretty much nothing will stop it from burning and, even if you survive the burning, there's a decent chance it'll poison you. Source and very good read too. Actually, given that part, I can see how you could make that case that it's a chemical weapon.

Edited: Needed some punctuation.