Gulch Live: Radio Interrupted 09.18.2015

Posted by GaltsGulch 2 years ago to The Gulch: Live
98 comments | Share | Flag

Links from the show...
The Geneh War - Near Future Science Fiction with a Philosophical Flavour
http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts...

Net Step and Civic Sports
http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts...

How To Be a Rocket Scientist - or succeed like one
http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts...

- - - - - -

Radio Interrupted is a live show. During showtime, 1PM - 2PM ET, please participate in the real-time conversation on the Gulch Activity Feed: http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/activ...

HOW IT WORKS:
1. At 1PM ET, go to the Gulch Activity feed: http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/activ...
2. At the top, you'll see a "Gulch Live" box.
3. Type your comment, submit, and poof, your comment will be automatically injected into the stream - along with everyone else's comments as well.

NOTE
- For the best experience, post your comments in the Activity Feed. If you post your comments here, you'll not see the live stream responses and things might get a little confusing.
- When addressing someone on the feed, consider using @membername to address them directly or no one will no who you're talking to.
- All comments submitted to the feed will automatically be added to this post.
SOURCE URL: https://www.spreaker.com/embed/player/standard?show_id=1497330&autoplay=false


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by khalling 2 years ago
    a country does not have values. Individuals have values.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  jbrenner 2 years ago
      Politely I disagree. A country DOES have values. That is why they have a constitution in the first place. Countries are at least supposed to be the embodiment of the thoughts/values of their individuals.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 2 years ago
        Semantics and definitions. A country is just dirt. Dirt cannot think nor reason. What makes it a nation is people. That's why in the military we take our oath of office to their thoughts as embodied, as you said, in the Constitution from their thoughts and values. We do not take an oath of allegiance to the country which to complete the circular argument why many of do not care for the 'thanks for serving your country' phrase. Correct but words have meanings no matter how well the intent. Using inalienable instead of unalienable is an example. Someone out there will use it against you sooner or later.

        By saying serve your country instead of constitution or even citizens it leads the way to misuse. In this day and age I don't serve a country with a government that dumped the constitution for the patriot act. That would be breaking my oath of office.

        But thanks for thanking me for serving the Constitution and the people. I knew what you meant. At least I hope you knew what you meant.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  jbrenner 2 years ago
          Thank you for the correction on inalienable.
          You are correct about the semantics and definitions. In my prior statement, what I meant was that nations have values that are supposed to the embodiments of the thought/values of their individuals. While my country may just be dirt, it is MY dirt. I have earned it, and I will defend it.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
          • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 2 years ago
            good to go two points. and now it's my turn to point you at new posts. There are two. The second one is the corrected and accurate answer to un or in and the use of each. The liberals still don't win on that score so all is safe.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 2 years ago
    She said something about being thankful for the ability to move out of Russia and specifically to the USA but nothing else comes to mind on immigration. I'll review my source material.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 2 years ago
    @x. "Objectivists could have never founded this country." Objectivism is based on Aristotle and Locke. The Enlightenment. The body of the work, is this. ALL men (not just those born and raised in the US) are EQUAL under the Law. You have some re-reading to do, my friend. :)
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by xthinker88 2 years ago
      I didn't say Objectivism couldn't have led to the founding of the country - only that Objectivists could not have done it. They tend to be more dogmatical and quicker to brand heresy than the worst of the Inquisition.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by khalling 2 years ago
        They keep those principles alive and do not brush principles to the side of the road in order to pass. This is important. don't you think I would like to say build a big ass wall?! My principles check me on that.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by xthinker88 2 years ago
        Would you agree to any immigration section in a Constitution that did not allow completely free and open immigration??
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 2 years ago
          the source of authority is "

          § 2-1 THE SOURCE OF THE FEDERAL POWER

          Throughout the history of the United States the Supreme Court has upheld all manner of federal statutes regulating immigration. By contrast, Supreme Court decisions preclude states from passing legislation that directly impinges on this area of federal dominion. The Supreme Court’s basis for action is clear when the area regulated is naturalization. Article 1, § 8, clause 4, of the United States Constitution specifically grants Congress the power to establish a "uniform Rule of Naturalization." By expressly allocating this power to Congress, the Constitution prevents the confusion that would result if individual states could bestow citizenship. The Constitution does not, however, explicitly provide that the power to deny admission or remove non-citizens rests with the federal government as opposed to state governments. Hence, in the early immigration cases the Supreme Court faced the problem of identifying the source of the federal government's exclusive and plenary power over immigration. Later cases found the plenary power to be an inherent sovereign power."

          So there are no 9th and 10th Amendment issues.

          There are several others pertaining 14th Amendment is one of them.

          As for my own opinion the answer is no. It there is No. That means the most heinous criminals could be automatically allowed in?

          What am I saying they are including a five times serial killer.

          I would expect it to be enforced by more than a slap on the wrist and temporary deportation.

          As for regulating the amount yes, giving preference to those with job skills we need yes, but regulating and having different standards for each country or ethnic group no that's where it crosses the line from the practical to the impractical. as for your last sentence Subjectivists could never have founded a country anywhere. The mindset is saying is the same a doing and that doesn't grow carrots for the stewpot.

          A useful blend as we learned in high school Civics however usually will carry the day in any effort.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by khalling 2 years ago
            Michael, today was really hard. My gardener's family was here. They all speak english. One of the young sons asked, "we have diseases?" fucking amazing.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by  $  Eudaimonia 2 years ago
              So, is your argument that there has not been many examples of migrations of people who brought with them pathogens to which they themselves were immune and to which the people with whom they came in contact with were not?

              Because, I'd like to hear that argument.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
              • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 2 years ago
                Smallpox was a favorite of Conquistadores and the US Government and was used in Canada as well.
                The use of it as a biological weapon excluding unintentional use by migration
                is at least 2500 years old and not uncommon. Many sources here is the Baylor University link.

                http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/artic...

                There is no argument it's a done deal Eudaimonia wins
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
            • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 2 years ago
              Keep it up.
              Endeavor to Perservere and when the day is over and the kids tucked in their beds. Give 'em a hug, grab a mug and pour yourself a ...Tecate, Dos XXs, Pacifico!

              Unalienable not Inalienable.

              I was happily successful in hooking up to Radio Free North America in now to go find a headset with a speaker and see if that works though I think I will speak only when spoken too. Objectively speaking with some subjective hopes.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by hurc81 2 years ago
    Legal immigration is BROKEN - it takes way too long for the people who want to come here legally and become a citizen to do so - Gaby is a perfect example
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  Eudaimonia 2 years ago
      Yes, it is, and it is broken on purpose: the Right wants cheap labor and the Left wants both votes and the further implementation of their Cloward-Piven strategy.

      Neither looks at these people as human beings, but rather as means to their political ends.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by xthinker88 2 years ago
    Freedom means i do not have to pay for your welfare, your minimum wage, your medicaid, your food stamps, etc etc. As long as i am being forced to pay them i object to open borders.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 2 years ago
    If it were my ideas? I rewrote the Constitution once to suit me. The effort ended up being used by Toastmasters of Las Vegas NV as material for debate and speeches. With my ideas it would have been different but then I have hindsight. For their time they did better than pretty good effort. It was more in the realm of a miracle of foresight
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by xthinker88 2 years ago
      You and Judge Narrangassett.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 2 years ago
        thanks for the compliment. As for doing that project i was forced to really read the Citizens Handbook, do the research and match up the sections that are cherry picked and taken out of context and not always unintentionally enter a conversation with a false premise.

        One thing is there is a living mechanism in the document. It's called procedures for amendment. It's not called 'ignore it.'
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 2 years ago
    Define collectivist it's too loose a term. Much of what is seen as a negative is the ability of an individual to live within a group without losing independence. Might be useful to point out the difference

    To Xthinker88 there is not need to sneak across the border to Mexico. it's an open border. Just jump on the bus and sometimes you aren't even asked to buy a visa.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Technocracy 2 years ago
    @khalling
    In Re race, Biologically you are correct, 1 race, socially is where the artificial construct of race comes into play. And since it is invalid biologically, it is an artificial construct at base.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 2 years ago
      I don't use humans except in one sense to contrast with humanoids. Human of course is sexist. You can't say people because 'some' object and you can't say person because it's sexist.

      Therefore I switched to Terra until some decides the ending in the Spanish Dictionary denotes feminine gender.

      Gaiaan? No. Same complaint.

      How about instead of deciding what label to use don't call anyone anything. not even something or nothing. That oughta keep everyone happy.

      Loco! Que Patina in su Coco!

      Just pulling your leg Techx
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 2 years ago
    I hold the opinion that the only way to defeat racism is not allow it in any way shape form written or spoken. For that reason I fill out no form especially government forms that ask the question. I write on it. "This is racist you should be ashamed for asking." I also believe the government is the main proponent supporter of racism. Apply the same to sexism and religious bigotry.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Mermarth 2 years ago
    Good program yesterday, Rick, on immigration. You hit on many of the considerations that are often overlooked in our yearning to have open arms and be compassionate. But when the quality of life nationwide is compromised good planning, discipline, and continuity are definitely needed to make immigration both fair and healthy.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 2 years ago
    @x. strawman. I sit in a room with YOU most days. LOL. but this is an AYN RAND site. If it had been YOUR ideas that started this country? would it have ever happened? natural rights are that important? no, we need an expedient solution.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by xthinker88 2 years ago
      It is already broken. The ship is sinking. You are arguing to allow the ship to bring on as many people as want to come aboard to eat the remaining goodies in the galley.

      I'm arguing that under ideal circumstances they have a right to come but not so long as I'm paying for the goodies in the galleys and that we should fix the sinking ship first. It's even worse because the "goodies in the galley" are what are sinking the ship. (although that couldn't happen in a real nautical scenario I think)
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 2 years ago
    Freedom, means I have the right to travel freely. why do you have a right to stop people? the NSA, the TSA, national IDs, Stop and Frisk, this thinking leads leads to all of that
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo