Hitlary under investigation - again!

by silvermani Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:41 pm

The State Department has opened a formal inquiry into whether former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her aides mishandled classified information while she was the nation’s top diplomat, Fox News has learned. Despite being under investigation, Clinton and her staffers still have security clearances to access sensitive government information. The department’s investigation aims to determine whether Clinton and her closest aides violated government protocols by using her private server to receive, hold and transmit classified and top-secret government documents. The department declined to say when its inquiry began, but it follows the conclusion of the FBI’s probe into the matter, which did not result in any actions being taken against Clinton or any of her aides.

by Idéfix Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:49 pm

Great news. I hope they investigate this matter thoroughly and prosecute and punish anyone who committed a crime.

by Vakavaka Pakapaka Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:00 pm

What Hillary did in using her personal server is nothing compared to what Trump and his cronies did with Russia. If Hillary can be prosecuted for that, so should all old secretaries of state and almost everyone in the US.

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:08 pm

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:What Hillary did in using her personal server is nothing compared to what Trump and his cronies did with Russia. If Hillary can be prosecuted for that, so should all old secretaries of state and almost everyone in the US.

You seem like a lone voice from a certain group. Most Modi/BJP supporters on SUCH have transferred their love to Adolf Twitler.

by Vakavaka Pakapaka Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:29 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:What Hillary did in using her personal server is nothing compared to what Trump and his cronies did with Russia. If Hillary can be prosecuted for that, so should all old secretaries of state and almost everyone in the US.

You seem like a lone voice from a certain group. Most Modi/BJP supporters on SUCH have transferred their love to Adolf Twitler.

But I am also opposed to DKheads, Kancha Ilaiah, Commies, Jagan, Maran, Laloo, Soonya, Pappu, monomania...........

by smArtha Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:48 pm

I want both investigations - against Hillary and Trump to be taken to their conclusion sooner. And if my hunch is right both of them will come close to being guilty of criminal transgressions and then we can have better leaders take center stage.

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:33 pm

I wish the media would leave Mueller alone to noiselessly work in the background without giving us daily updates about his activities. Leper has the attention span of a gnat. If the media don't report on the investigation he'll forget it exists.
And that's good for everyone.

by Idéfix Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:53 pm

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:What Hillary did in using her personal server is nothing compared to what Trump and his cronies did with Russia. If Hillary can be prosecuted for that, so should all old secretaries of state and almost everyone in the US.

This is an important point. The Bush administration deleted millions of emails from a private email server. Let us see how many Republicans support an investigation into Bush, Cheney, Powell and Rice, all of whom had email accounts on that private server.

by Idéfix Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:03 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:What Hillary did in using her personal server is nothing compared to what Trump and his cronies did with Russia. If Hillary can be prosecuted for that, so should all old secretaries of state and almost everyone in the US.

You seem like a lone voice from a certain group. Most Modi/BJP supporters on SUCH have transferred their love to Adolf Twitler.

That is an interesting observation. This is the picture... the only box that is empty is Anti-Modi, Pro-Trump. SP, HA and SM are conservatives when it comes to both Indian and US politics. You and I are liberals in both contexts. Guruvu-gaaru and SI support liberal policies in the US and conservative policies in

	Pro-Trump	Anti-Trump
Pro-Modi	SomeProfile Hellsangel silvermani	Vakavaka Pakapaka southindian
Anti-Modi		Idefix MaxEntropy_Man confuzzled dude Merlot Daruwala

by smArtha Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:07 pm

Idéfix wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:What Hillary did in using her personal server is nothing compared to what Trump and his cronies did with Russia. If Hillary can be prosecuted for that, so should all old secretaries of state and almost everyone in the US.

You seem like a lone voice from a certain group. Most Modi/BJP supporters on SUCH have transferred their love to Adolf Twitler.

That is an interesting observation. This is the picture... the only box that is empty is Anti-Modi, Pro-Trump. SP, HA and SM are conservatives when it comes to both Indian and US politics. You and I are liberals in both contexts. Guruvu-gaaru and SI support liberal policies in the US and conservative policies in

Pro-Trump Anti-Trump
Pro-Modi SomeProfile
Hellsangel
silvermani Vakavaka Pakapaka
southindian
Anti-Modi Idefix
MaxEntropy_Man
confuzzled dude
Merlot Daruwala

How is being liberal translating to anti-Modi or pro-Modi translating to being conservative?

by Hellsangel Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:19 pm

Mr. Kaan is borrowing from GWB -

If you're not with us, you're against us.

by MaxEntropy_Man Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:22 pm

Hellsangel wrote:Mr. Kaan is borrowing from GWB -

If you're not with us, you're against us.

In that case why the covert sideways hints about your stance on the leper? Why not be as explicit about him as you've been on Hillary?

by silvermani Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:30 pm

Idéfix wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:What Hillary did in using her personal server is nothing compared to what Trump and his cronies did with Russia. If Hillary can be prosecuted for that, so should all old secretaries of state and almost everyone in the US.

You seem like a lone voice from a certain group. Most Modi/BJP supporters on SUCH have transferred their love to Adolf Twitler.

That is an interesting observation. This is the picture... the only box that is empty is Anti-Modi, Pro-Trump. SP, HA and SM are conservatives when it comes to both Indian and US politics. You and I are liberals in both contexts. Guruvu-gaaru and SI support liberal policies in the US and conservative policies in

Pro-Trump Anti-Trump
Pro-Modi SomeProfile
Hellsangel
silvermani Vakavaka Pakapaka
southindian
Anti-Modi Idefix
MaxEntropy_Man
confuzzled dude
Merlot Daruwala

Nice table but not accurate. I have spoken out against Modi's demonetization policy. I don't blindly bash or support anyone.

by Guest Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:10 pm

Idéfix wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:What Hillary did in using her personal server is nothing compared to what Trump and his cronies did with Russia. If Hillary can be prosecuted for that, so should all old secretaries of state and almost everyone in the US.

You seem like a lone voice from a certain group. Most Modi/BJP supporters on SUCH have transferred their love to Adolf Twitler.

That is an interesting observation. This is the picture... the only box that is empty is Anti-Modi, Pro-Trump. SP, HA and SM are conservatives when it comes to both Indian and US politics. You and I are liberals in both contexts. Guruvu-gaaru and SI support liberal policies in the US and conservative policies in

Pro-Trump Anti-Trump
Pro-Modi SomeProfile
Hellsangel
silvermani Vakavaka Pakapaka
southindian
Anti-Modi Idefix
MaxEntropy_Man
confuzzled dude
Merlot Daruwala

Please define 'liberal'

by MaxEntropy_Man Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:22 pm

I can give you a laundry list of what constitutes a liberal. I'll take a short cut for now and say the kind of voter who'd have readily endorsed Macron and his party in the recent French elections.

by Vakavaka Pakapaka Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:23 pm

Idéfix wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:What Hillary did in using her personal server is nothing compared to what Trump and his cronies did with Russia. If Hillary can be prosecuted for that, so should all old secretaries of state and almost everyone in the US.

You seem like a lone voice from a certain group. Most Modi/BJP supporters on SUCH have transferred their love to Adolf Twitler.

That is an interesting observation. This is the picture... the only box that is empty is Anti-Modi, Pro-Trump. SP, HA and SM are conservatives when it comes to both Indian and US politics. You and I are liberals in both contexts. Guruvu-gaaru and SI support liberal policies in the US and conservative policies in

Pro-Trump Anti-Trump
Pro-Modi SomeProfile
Hellsangel
silvermani Vakavaka Pakapaka
southindian
Anti-Modi Idefix
MaxEntropy_Man
confuzzled dude
Merlot Daruwala

Hmm...... So, Trump and Modi are typical, crooked conservatives and Laloo, Mulayam, Soonya, Jagan, Maran, Doggy, ND Tiwari, Owaisi, etc., are upright liberals. And, I must have a screw lose to support Modi and not Trump..... So, when are you starting an ashram on palmistry and astrology? Bacon would be horrified at your model-based conclusions. Sankara would be smiling that you indulged in Viswamitra's srushti and poured life into it :-)

by MaxEntropy_Man Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:29 pm

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:
Idéfix wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:What Hillary did in using her personal server is nothing compared to what Trump and his cronies did with Russia. If Hillary can be prosecuted for that, so should all old secretaries of state and almost everyone in the US.

You seem like a lone voice from a certain group. Most Modi/BJP supporters on SUCH have transferred their love to Adolf Twitler.

That is an interesting observation. This is the picture... the only box that is empty is Anti-Modi, Pro-Trump. SP, HA and SM are conservatives when it comes to both Indian and US politics. You and I are liberals in both contexts. Guruvu-gaaru and SI support liberal policies in the US and conservative policies in

Pro-Trump Anti-Trump
Pro-Modi SomeProfile
Hellsangel
silvermani Vakavaka Pakapaka
southindian
Anti-Modi Idefix
MaxEntropy_Man
confuzzled dude
Merlot Daruwala
Hmm...... So, Trump and Modi are typical, crooked conservatives and Laloo, Mulayam, Soonya, Jagan, Maran, Doggy, ND Tiwari, Owaisi, etc., are upright liberals. And, I must have a screw lose to support Modi and not Trump..... So, when are you starting an ashram on palmistry and astrology? Bacon would be horrified at your model-based conclusions. Sankara would be smiling that you indulged in Viswamitra's srushti and poured life into it :-)

No you have a perfectly logical position in both instances. Vote with the majority where you are a member of that population. When you are a member of a minority group evaluate what is beneficial to your maintaining life and limb first and foremost and vote for that party. I'm not saying it's good or bad, just that it makes sense. In the head of state elections at least that strategy led to your supporting the majority in both instances.

by Guest Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:35 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:I can give you a laundry list of what constitutes a liberal. I'll take a short cut for now and say the kind of voter who'd have readily endorsed Macron and his party in the recent French elections.

What's it about Macron that they endorse?

by Guest Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:38 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:
Idéfix wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:What Hillary did in using her personal server is nothing compared to what Trump and his cronies did with Russia. If Hillary can be prosecuted for that, so should all old secretaries of state and almost everyone in the US.

You seem like a lone voice from a certain group. Most Modi/BJP supporters on SUCH have transferred their love to Adolf Twitler.

That is an interesting observation. This is the picture... the only box that is empty is Anti-Modi, Pro-Trump. SP, HA and SM are conservatives when it comes to both Indian and US politics. You and I are liberals in both contexts. Guruvu-gaaru and SI support liberal policies in the US and conservative policies in

Pro-Trump Anti-Trump
Pro-Modi SomeProfile
Hellsangel
silvermani Vakavaka Pakapaka
southindian
Anti-Modi Idefix
MaxEntropy_Man
confuzzled dude
Merlot Daruwala
Hmm...... So, Trump and Modi are typical, crooked conservatives and Laloo, Mulayam, Soonya, Jagan, Maran, Doggy, ND Tiwari, Owaisi, etc., are upright liberals. And, I must have a screw lose to support Modi and not Trump..... So, when are you starting an ashram on palmistry and astrology? Bacon would be horrified at your model-based conclusions. Sankara would be smiling that you indulged in Viswamitra's srushti and poured life into it :-)

No you have a perfectly logical position in both instances. Vote with the majority where you are a member of that population. When you are a member of a minority group evaluate what is beneficial to your maintaining life and limb first and foremost and vote for that party. I'm not saying it's good or bad, just that it makes sense. In the head of state elections at least that strategy led to your supporting the majority in both instances.

Don't divert what vakavaka is saying. Answer the first part of his post. If you can answer that, you'll know why you guys are failing.

by Idéfix Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:47 pm

kinnera-temp wrote:
Idéfix wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:What Hillary did in using her personal server is nothing compared to what Trump and his cronies did with Russia. If Hillary can be prosecuted for that, so should all old secretaries of state and almost everyone in the US.

You seem like a lone voice from a certain group. Most Modi/BJP supporters on SUCH have transferred their love to Adolf Twitler.

That is an interesting observation. This is the picture... the only box that is empty is Anti-Modi, Pro-Trump. SP, HA and SM are conservatives when it comes to both Indian and US politics. You and I are liberals in both contexts. Guruvu-gaaru and SI support liberal policies in the US and conservative policies in

Pro-Trump Anti-Trump
Pro-Modi SomeProfile
Hellsangel
silvermani Vakavaka Pakapaka
southindian
Anti-Modi Idefix
MaxEntropy_Man
confuzzled dude
Merlot Daruwala
Please define 'liberal'

Liberal in the context of politics means someone who thinks freedom and equality are important values a society should strive for. This translates to beliefs in:

free speech, free press, religious freedom, political freedom
civil rights, equality of opportunity, nondiscrimination on classes like race, skin color, religion, gender, national origin, sexual orientation
separation of religion and state
law and order based on constitutional principles, not based on ancient traditions on religious laws
democracy with universal suffrage
government's role in protecting the naturally vulnerable from exploitation at the hands of the naturally powerful
free markets with adequate regulation (see the previous point)
international cooperation, opposition to elective war

I may have missed some things, but I think this has the gist of it.

by Idéfix Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:49 pm

silvermani wrote:
Idéfix wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:What Hillary did in using her personal server is nothing compared to what Trump and his cronies did with Russia. If Hillary can be prosecuted for that, so should all old secretaries of state and almost everyone in the US.

You seem like a lone voice from a certain group. Most Modi/BJP supporters on SUCH have transferred their love to Adolf Twitler.

That is an interesting observation. This is the picture... the only box that is empty is Anti-Modi, Pro-Trump. SP, HA and SM are conservatives when it comes to both Indian and US politics. You and I are liberals in both contexts. Guruvu-gaaru and SI support liberal policies in the US and conservative policies in

Pro-Trump Anti-Trump
Pro-Modi SomeProfile
Hellsangel
silvermani Vakavaka Pakapaka
southindian
Anti-Modi Idefix
MaxEntropy_Man
confuzzled dude
Merlot Daruwala

Nice table but not accurate. I have spoken out against Modi's demonetization policy. I don't blindly bash or support anyone.

I am not accusing you here of blindly supporting either Modi or Trump. This table shows political preference. I prefer Clinton to Trump, but I criticize Clinton when I think she's wrong. That doesn't make me Pro-Trump. You may criticize Modi from time to time, but the preponderance of evidence shows you supportive of his policies.

by Idéfix Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:51 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:Mr. Kaan is borrowing from GWB -

If you're not with us, you're against us.

In that case why the covert sideways hints about your stance on the leper? Why not be as explicit about him as you've been on Hillary?

He may be afraid of getting grabbed.

by Hellsangel Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:55 pm

Idéfix wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:Mr. Kaan is borrowing from GWB -

If you're not with us, you're against us.

In that case why the covert sideways hints about your stance on the leper? Why not be as explicit about him as you've been on Hillary?
He may be afraid of getting grabbed.

:rofl

by Idéfix Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:57 pm

smArtha wrote:
Idéfix wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:What Hillary did in using her personal server is nothing compared to what Trump and his cronies did with Russia. If Hillary can be prosecuted for that, so should all old secretaries of state and almost everyone in the US.

You seem like a lone voice from a certain group. Most Modi/BJP supporters on SUCH have transferred their love to Adolf Twitler.

That is an interesting observation. This is the picture... the only box that is empty is Anti-Modi, Pro-Trump. SP, HA and SM are conservatives when it comes to both Indian and US politics. You and I are liberals in both contexts. Guruvu-gaaru and SI support liberal policies in the US and conservative policies in

Pro-Trump Anti-Trump
Pro-Modi SomeProfile
Hellsangel
silvermani Vakavaka Pakapaka
southindian
Anti-Modi Idefix
MaxEntropy_Man
confuzzled dude
Merlot Daruwala

How is being liberal translating to anti-Modi or pro-Modi translating to being conservative?

I have given my definition for liberal in this post. There are several items on that list that you see the opposite of in Modi. Hence a liberal person is very likely to take an anti-Modi stance.

Conservatives value the preservation of the traditional mores and are more comfortable with commingling religion and state. Even when they support law and order, they seek moral authority for laws from ancient traditions and religion rather than constitutional principles. Therefore conservatives naturally support Modi's policies.

by Hellsangel Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:00 pm

Libbies are desperate for validation. They want you to criticize the person they hate. They just want to be loved.

by Guest Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:01 pm

Idéfix wrote:
kinnera-temp wrote:
Idéfix wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:What Hillary did in using her personal server is nothing compared to what Trump and his cronies did with Russia. If Hillary can be prosecuted for that, so should all old secretaries of state and almost everyone in the US.

You seem like a lone voice from a certain group. Most Modi/BJP supporters on SUCH have transferred their love to Adolf Twitler.

That is an interesting observation. This is the picture... the only box that is empty is Anti-Modi, Pro-Trump. SP, HA and SM are conservatives when it comes to both Indian and US politics. You and I are liberals in both contexts. Guruvu-gaaru and SI support liberal policies in the US and conservative policies in

Pro-Trump Anti-Trump
Pro-Modi SomeProfile
Hellsangel
silvermani Vakavaka Pakapaka
southindian
Anti-Modi Idefix
MaxEntropy_Man
confuzzled dude
Merlot Daruwala
Please define 'liberal'
Liberal in the context of politics means someone who thinks freedom and equality are important values a society should strive for. This translates to beliefs in:

free speech, free press, religious freedom, political freedom
civil rights, equality of opportunity, nondiscrimination on classes like race, skin color, religion, gender, national origin, sexual orientation
separation of religion and state
law and order based on constitutional principles, not based on ancient traditions on religious laws
democracy with universal suffrage
government's role in protecting the naturally vulnerable from exploitation at the hands of the naturally powerful
free markets with adequate regulation (see the previous point)
international cooperation, opposition to elective war

I may have missed some things, but I think this has the gist of it.

Very nice. You think Modi and Trump supporters don't believe in the above? The one ideology that doesn't believe in the above is the one from the middle east. If that ideology is proliferating into the societies which follow the above, a real liberal minded person will be brave and honest enough to oppose it. Anyone who is blind to that is not a liberal, but a libretard aka libtard. The ones supporting Modi or Trump need not be 'conservatives' (however you define it). Trump himself is not a conservative. He may be a moron, but is not a conservative, nor is Modi. Hinduism is not a conservative religion, fyi. A true liberal endorses eastern religions, not the medieval, backward and barbaric religions.

by Idéfix Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:04 pm

Hellsangel wrote:Libbies are desperate for validation. They want you to criticize the person they hate.

You seem to misunderstand the word validation. Validation does not mean "criticism of the person one hates."

Hellsangel wrote:They just want to be loved.

Are you now calling our predisent a libby? He is the biggest seeker of love and adulation that I know of.

by SomeProfile Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:11 pm

Idéfix wrote:

law and order based on constitutional principles, not based on ancient traditions on religious laws

Firstly - I don't think there is any country in the world whose constitutional principles are influenced by or based on ancient traditions or religious laws. Most modern Western constitutions and laws have a strong Abrahamic-Christian foundation to them.

Secondly - It is stupid to arbitrarily dismiss something just because it is "ancient tradition" or "religious law".

by SomeProfile Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:22 pm

Idéfix wrote:

separation of religion and state

This is bullshit foreign idea that does not apply to the Indian context.

In old Europe of the dark ages, organized Christian religion had started to grab political power for its own enrichment. The clergy had become nothing more than another exploitative royalty. Only difference - they were using their religious influence on the people to increase their power and wealth, control and harm the monarchy as well as the general public. That is why they felt the need to come up with secularism, which is the separation of religion and state.

Similarly, in middle eastern / Islamic countries, the barbaric, pieceful religion tends to grab political power and wealth, use that to perpetuate more regressive practices and harm the general population, minorities, women, etc. That is why it is essential to not just keep the barbaric pieceful religion out of government, but out of everything.

In contrast, since ancient times, most indigenous Hindu states and empires have been build with the guidance and principles of Hindu Dharma (not organized, bookish religion like the Abrahamics). There is no record of Hindu religious leaders trying for a wealth or power grab solely for the sake of their own enrichment at the cost of the general public. Nor is there any record of Hindu religious leaders or institutions using the power of the state to perpetuate any regressive religious practices. If anything, in stark contrast to desert cults, Hindu Dharma seems to have had an extremely positive influence on the governance of states and empires, and well-being of the general population.

Further, there is no record of dominant Hindu kingdoms / states treating non-Hindu citizens unfairly. On the contrary, there are plenty of examples of Hindu kings and kingdoms providing refuge and respect to non-Hindu groups and citizens. In fact, most of the current social issues in India would go away if it were to become an unabashedly, unapologetically, unambiguously Hindu state.

Given this background, we don't need any bullshit foreign ideas of "separation of religion and state" in Hindu India.

by Idéfix Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:23 pm

kinnera-temp wrote:
Idéfix wrote:
Liberal in the context of politics means someone who thinks freedom and equality are important values a society should strive for. This translates to beliefs in:

free speech, free press, religious freedom, political freedom
civil rights, equality of opportunity, nondiscrimination on classes like race, skin color, religion, gender, national origin, sexual orientation
separation of religion and state
law and order based on constitutional principles, not based on ancient traditions on religious laws
democracy with universal suffrage
government's role in protecting the naturally vulnerable from exploitation at the hands of the naturally powerful
free markets with adequate regulation (see the previous point)
international cooperation, opposition to elective war

I may have missed some things, but I think this has the gist of it.
Very nice. You think Modi and Trump supporters don't believe in the above? The one ideology that doesn't believe in the above is the one from the middle east. If that ideology is proliferating into the societies which follow the above, a real liberal minded person will be brave and honest enough to oppose it. Anyone who is blind to that is not a liberal, but a libretard aka libtard. The ones supporting Modi or Trump need not be 'conservatives' (however you define it). Trump himself is not a conservative. He may be a moron, but is not a conservative, nor is Modi. Hinduism is not a conservative religion, fyi. A true liberal endorses eastern religions, not the medieval, backward and barbaric religions.

Conservatives believe in some of the things liberals believe in. They do not believe in some of the things liberals believe in.

Let me take above list for liberals and lay out where conservatives agree and disagree with liberals. I am talking about political philosophies here.

free speech, free press, religious freedom, political freedom: conservatives agree
civil rights, equality of opportunity, nondiscrimination on classes like race, skin color, religion, gender, national origin, sexual orientation: conservatives may agree partially with this, but with some reservations. Even if they believe discrimination is bad in all these cases, they tend to think that it is not the government's job to fix it; they believe the market or society can fix it. They also tend be 1-2 generations behind liberals on agreeing here. In the '60s, conservatives wanted to conserve segregation, now they want to conserve anti-gay discrimination. In 1-2 generations, they will agree with liberals that discrimination based on sexual orientation is bad.
separation of religion and state: conservatives generally do not believe in this. Conservatives in Japan, Thailand, India, the Middle East, the US and Latin America all want religion to play a greater role in their own societies. Liberals in those countries do not want that.
law and order based on constitutional principles, not based on ancient traditions on religious laws: conservatives believe strongly in law and order, but they derive the authority for laws from ancient tradition and from religious law. This the case in India, the Middle East, and the west. When laws giving a Hindu daughter the right to inherit her father's wealth were passed, conservatives in India vehemently opposed them, liberals argued for those laws.
democracy with universal suffrage: conservatives tend to believe that tax payers should have more rights than other people. In previous centuries, they used this argument to restrict the vote to land-owners only. Liberals advocated universal suffrage. Conservatives in the US engage in massive efforts to make it harder for people to vote -- totally counter-intuitive in a democracy.
government's role in protecting the naturally vulnerable from exploitation at the hands of the naturally powerful: conservatives do not believe in this general principle; they only believe in this if this argument allows them to impose their religious views on fellow citizens. Conservatives tend to argue that nature is not equal, that survival of the fittest is the right way, and that the government should not coddle people by trying to protecting them from market forces.
free markets with adequate regulation: conservatives believe in laissez-faire free markets, they believe that regulation is bad.
international cooperation, opposition to elective war: there are two groups within conservatives on this question. One group believes in isolationism and no war (the Bannon camp in the White House), and the other group are the neocons that took us into Iraq. In general, the conservative view of international relations is based on coercion through strength rather than collaboration, while the liberal view tends to emphasize collaboration over coercion.

I will address your comments about Islam in a separate post.

by SomeProfile Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:24 pm

SomeProfile wrote:
Idéfix wrote:

law and order based on constitutional principles, not based on ancient traditions on religious laws

Firstly - I don't think there is any country in the world whose constitutional principles are influenced by or based on ancient traditions or religious laws. Most modern Western constitutions and laws have a strong Abrahamic-Christian foundation to them.

Secondly - It is stupid to arbitrarily dismiss something just because it is "ancient tradition" or "religious law".

Correction: Firstly - I don't think there is any country in the world whose constitutional principles are NOT influenced by or based on ancient traditions or religious laws.

by Idéfix Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:24 pm

SomeProfile wrote:
Idéfix wrote:

separation of religion and state

This is bullshit foreign idea that does not apply to the Indian context.

In old Europe of the dark ages, organized Christian religion had started to grab political power for its own enrichment. The clergy had become nothing more than another exploitative royalty. Only difference - they were using their religious influence on the people to increase their power and wealth, control and harm the monarchy as well as the general public. That is why they felt the need to come up with secularism, which is the separation of religion and state.

Similarly, in middle eastern / Islamic countries, the barbaric, pieceful religion tends to grab political power and wealth, use that to perpetuate more regressive practices and harm the general population, minorities, women, etc. That is why it is essential to not just keep the barbaric pieceful religion out of government, but out of everything.

In contrast, since ancient times, most indigenous Hindu states and empires have been build with the guidance and principles of Hindu Dharma (not organized, bookish religion like the Abrahamics). There is no record of Hindu religious leaders trying for a wealth or power grab solely for the sake of their own enrichment at the cost of the general public. Nor is there any record of Hindu religious leaders or institutions using the power of the state to perpetuate any regressive religious practices. If anything, in stark contrast to desert cults, Hindu Dharma seems to have had an extremely positive influence on the governance of states and empires, and well-being of the general population.

Further, there is no record of dominant Hindu kingdoms / states treating non-Hindu citizens unfairly. On the contrary, there are plenty of examples of Hindu kings and kingdoms providing refuge and respect to non-Hindu groups and citizens. In fact, most of the current social issues in India would go away if it were to become an unabashedly, unapologetically, unambiguously Hindu state.

Given this background, we don't need any bullshit foreign ideas of "separation of religion and state" in Hindu India.

smArtha and kinnera: here is an example answer to your question from the other side.

by Hellsangel Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:25 pm

Idéfix wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:Libbies are desperate for validation. They want you to criticize the person they hate.
You seem to misunderstand the word validation. Validation does not mean "criticism of the person one hates."

Hellsangel wrote:They just want to be loved.
Are you now calling our predisent a libby? He is the biggest seeker of love and adulation that I know of.

Sure. Now open the dictionary and get technical, Mr. Kaan.

You know him so well that you made such accurate predictions about him.

by Idéfix Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:35 pm

kinnera-temp wrote:The one ideology that doesn't believe in the above is the one from the middle east. If that ideology is proliferating into the societies which follow the above, a real liberal minded person will be brave and honest enough to oppose it. Anyone who is blind to that is not a liberal, but a libretard aka libtard.

There are two real dangers to liberal societies from political Islam. The first danger is that by ignoring the illiberal ideas of Islam, we let them spread, take root, and obtain political power in liberal societies. If Islamists gain political power in liberal society, liberalism will die in that society. The second danger is that in order to stop political Islam, a liberal society abandons its liberal values and becomes the mirror image of an Islamist polity, and turns into a Hindu polity or a Christian polity. If a liberal society clamps down on free expression or religious liberty in order to combat radical Islam, liberalism will die in that society.

A real commitment to liberal values means you don't abandon them in the face of mortal threats. Liberalism vs. radical Islam is a clash of ideas as much as it is a clash involving IEDs, drones, MOABs, vans and knives.

Hinduism is not a conservative religion, fyi.

I don't even know what that means. That's like saying Jupiter is not a sour planet.

A true liberal endorses eastern religions, not the medieval, backward and barbaric religions.

A true liberal is open to all religions and no religion at all, and treats people as individuals regardless of their faith or lack thereof.

by Idéfix Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:43 pm

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:
Idéfix wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:What Hillary did in using her personal server is nothing compared to what Trump and his cronies did with Russia. If Hillary can be prosecuted for that, so should all old secretaries of state and almost everyone in the US.

You seem like a lone voice from a certain group. Most Modi/BJP supporters on SUCH have transferred their love to Adolf Twitler.

That is an interesting observation. This is the picture... the only box that is empty is Anti-Modi, Pro-Trump. SP, HA and SM are conservatives when it comes to both Indian and US politics. You and I are liberals in both contexts. Guruvu-gaaru and SI support liberal policies in the US and conservative policies in

Pro-Trump Anti-Trump
Pro-Modi SomeProfile
Hellsangel
silvermani Vakavaka Pakapaka
southindian
Anti-Modi Idefix
MaxEntropy_Man
confuzzled dude
Merlot Daruwala
Hmm...... So, Trump and Modi are typical, crooked conservatives and Laloo, Mulayam, Soonya, Jagan, Maran, Doggy, ND Tiwari, Owaisi, etc., are upright liberals. And, I must have a screw lose to support Modi and not Trump..... So, when are you starting an ashram on palmistry and astrology? Bacon would be horrified at your model-based conclusions. Sankara would be smiling that you indulged in Viswamitra's srushti and poured life into it :-)

Guruvu-gaaru, I think your strategy is the smartest. It is not pro- or anti-other-guys, it is a Pro-Me strategy that is the bedrock of democracy. You are supposed to vote in your interest. If everybody is smart enough to follow this lead, democracy will work fine.

by MaxEntropy_Man Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:45 pm

Hinduism does have a lot of liberal values, but it has not been uniformly a liberal religion even in ancient India. The Chola kings who I greatly admire for their architecture, pioneering spirit, and as patrons of the arts did unspeakable things to Jaina monks. I am not familiar with the political history of other regions as I am with that of the region now known as TN so I cannot speak for Hindu kings from elsewhere.

I condemn political Islam and it is one of my few grievances about Obama that he did not take a firm stance against the Saudi royals and Wahabism, two of the greatest sponsors of terrorism and political Islam. Trump has only added to what was already Obama's legacy in that regard.

by MaxEntropy_Man Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:57 pm

I have not been following Indian politics as closely as American politics the last say two or so years because of the tumult here. It still worries me that Modi doesn't speak up immediately and clearly when Muslims get killed for eating beef etc.

However...
I have not seen reports of him actively abetting religious strife since becoming PM. He also seems to have not given the RSS a free hand in the nation's affairs. He seems to be personally clean with respect to financial graft and corruption and genuinely engaged in continuing the liberalization of the economy started by PVN. Despite many of his NRI acolytes' fervent desire, he has not picked deliberate fights with our volatile neighbor and engaged in things like hot pursuit. He seems to have a calm and deliberate approach towards China. He does not seem prone to impulsive tweeting and taking irrational and contradictory positions.

I wish he'd make provisions for me to exchange about Rs 25 k of demonetized currency.

Btw, are things generally calmer wrt Pak and India or is that just my perception?

by Vakavaka Pakapaka Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:05 pm

kinnera-temp wrote:
Idéfix wrote:
kinnera-temp wrote:
Idéfix wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

You seem like a lone voice from a certain group. Most Modi/BJP supporters on SUCH have transferred their love to Adolf Twitler.

That is an interesting observation. This is the picture... the only box that is empty is Anti-Modi, Pro-Trump. SP, HA and SM are conservatives when it comes to both Indian and US politics. You and I are liberals in both contexts. Guruvu-gaaru and SI support liberal policies in the US and conservative policies in

Pro-Trump Anti-Trump
Pro-Modi SomeProfile
Hellsangel
silvermani Vakavaka Pakapaka
southindian
Anti-Modi Idefix
MaxEntropy_Man
confuzzled dude
Merlot Daruwala
Please define 'liberal'
Liberal in the context of politics means someone who thinks freedom and equality are important values a society should strive for. This translates to beliefs in:

free speech, free press, religious freedom, political freedom
civil rights, equality of opportunity, nondiscrimination on classes like race, skin color, religion, gender, national origin, sexual orientation
separation of religion and state
law and order based on constitutional principles, not based on ancient traditions on religious laws
democracy with universal suffrage
government's role in protecting the naturally vulnerable from exploitation at the hands of the naturally powerful
free markets with adequate regulation (see the previous point)
international cooperation, opposition to elective war

I may have missed some things, but I think this has the gist of it.
Very nice. You think Modi and Trump supporters don't believe in the above? The one ideology that doesn't believe in the above is the one from the middle east. If that ideology is proliferating into the societies which follow the above, a real liberal minded person will be brave and honest enough to oppose it. Anyone who is blind to that is not a liberal, but a libretard aka libtard. The ones supporting Modi or Trump need not be 'conservatives' (however you define it). Trump himself is not a conservative. He may be a moron, but is not a conservative, nor is Modi. Hinduism is not a conservative religion, fyi. A true liberal endorses eastern religions, not the medieval, backward and barbaric religions.

Indeed!

by MaxEntropy_Man Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:10 pm

Adding to what I wrote above, Modi also seems to be genuinely committed to the Paris accord and is pushing India towards more green energy.

by Sponsored content

Hitskin.com