Political Discussion Thread (With Rules)

[DShomshak]

4 hours ago, archer said:

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/515396-colorado-school-suspends-12-year-old-called-police-for-welfare

 

The kid and his family are black.

 

Of course they are.

 

And Archer, you and your nephew and niece have my fullest and deepest sympathies. My mother taught preschool for a couple decades. She saw her share of "problem children." But she never found a child she couldn't reach, and teach, through love and patience. So (in contrast) my sympathies are limited when teachers and administrators say that some children are just too difficult and they can't be expected to deal with them.

[Pariah]

5 hours ago, archer said:

Colorado doesn't seem to have many state laws, at least which are enforced, which make school districts attempt to give problem students a decent education. Their family has had to fight like hell and switch schools and school districts several times in order to find a school which will attempt to deal with educating their problem kid (and that with my nephew often being a teacher in that school district) and has had to repeat those fights to get their foster girl educated.

 

State laws and local school district Shenanigans notwithstanding, Colorado, like all other states, is subject to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which is meant to guarantee a free and appropriate public education to all students, regardless of disability. If the schools are actively resisting that, they are in violation of federal law.

 

If you can look up who's in charge of your local Education Association NEA, CEA, whatever) I expect someone there would be interested in hearing about all this.

[Old Man]

It’d be worth checking in with the ACLU as well. They’d probably be interested in the “secretly recording kids in their homes” aspect of the case. 

[archer]

11 minutes ago, Old Man said:

It’d be worth checking in with the ACLU as well. They’d probably be interested in the “secretly recording kids in their homes” aspect of the case. 

 

Considering the uproar, I would expect the ACLU to be in the thick of it and to help hook the parents up with whatever paperwork/bureaucracy experts needed to make sure their kid gets the appropriate help in his new school district.

 

I don't agree with every case a local chapter of the ACLU takes on, but I REALLY admire the organization as a whole.

[Starlord]

Trump acknowledges intentionally downplaying virus

[unclevlad]

4 hours ago, Starlord said:

Trump acknowledges intentionally downplaying virus

 

As vile as this has been...and pushing policy *known* to be inadequate is prima facie impeachable, IMO, if not outright treason...I still don't think it will change that many peoples' minds.  At this point, is anyone really listening?  

[DShomshak]

Reprehensible, but not impeachable; morally treacherous, but not legally treasonous.

 

What I find most infuriating is that Trump apparently thinks he did the right thing. That he thinks his job is to look confident no matter what, to give cheerleader happy talk no matter what. That only image matters, that only feelings of the moment matter. (Especially his own image.) And apparently it never occurred to him that useful things could be done to reduce the damage, beyond his pull-up-the-drawbridge reflex travel ban (which was already too late -- the virus was already here).

 

A competent, responsible president would have quickly told the American people that they faced a great danger -- but here's what the government was doing to protect them, and here's what they could do individually to protect themselves and each other. It would be hard, but the American people had done hard things before and could do so again.

 

Dean Shomshak

[TrickstaPriest]

18 minutes ago, unclevlad said:

As vile as this has been...and pushing policy *known* to be inadequate is prima facie impeachable, IMO, if not outright treason...I still don't think it will change that many peoples' minds.  At this point, is anyone really listening?  

 

If he was interested in just preventing a (non stock market) panic, there's a million ways to acquire and push masks, and then encourage people to wear masks.  Because of the nature of a growth of a pandemic, it would have been almost trivial to save a third of the lives lost so far, if not half.

 

The literal 'anti mask movement' that exists in this country has been fanned by Trump and Fox.  When I literally heard Trump on TV talking that this pandemic was a 'hoax' I thought it would be the literal death of his party.  I can't understand politics in this country anymore. 

 

People can blame politicization, but Trump went above, beyond, and probably destroyed the economy of this country for a generation and ended more citizen's lives than any event in my entire lifetime.  People are angry at a lockdown, and I agree making sure people don't end up homeless and starving is vital (and literally the responsibility of our government right now), but this lockdown would have been lightened months ago if the pandemic was treated appropriately. 

 

Yet people are blaming the situation on treating the pandemic as serious.  It's the rationale of 'How dare you tell me to treat this minor cancer as something to be treated.  Well, I ignored you and then put it off and now I have to get chemotherapy!  Don't you dare tell me that I should treat it seriously, it's your fault its stage 3 now.'

[archer]

50 minutes ago, DShomshak said:

Reprehensible, but not impeachable; morally treacherous, but not legally treasonous.

 

 

Trump has publicly stated that the struggle against coronavirus is a war and has at various times referred to the virus as an enemy.

 

The Constitution states "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."

 

I would certainly argue that the president's conduct has been knowingly treasonous and that we have him on tape.

 

If I were in court arguing that charge, I would also argue this one:

 

18 U.S. Code § 1091. Genocide

 

(a)Basic Offense.—Whoever, whether in time of peace or in time of war and with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in substantial part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group as such—

(1) kills members of that group;

(2) causes serious bodily injury to members of that group;

(3) causes the permanent impairment of the mental faculties of members of the group through drugs, torture, or similar techniques;

(4) subjects the group to conditions of life that are intended to cause the physical destruction of the group in whole or in part;

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1091

 

 

Additionally, the US in 1988 signed the UN's Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide which means someone committing genocide in the US can be tried in international court. The international definition of genocide is almost word for word the same as it is in US law. https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide-convention.shtml

 

 

[TrickstaPriest]

40 minutes ago, archer said:

I would certainly argue that the president's conduct has been knowingly treasonous and that we have him on tape.

 

But the situation for that moving forwards is unlikely.  We have justices (vying for Supreme Court) literally suggesting we use the army (not the NG) against protesting cities, and that we 'give no quarter' - Tom Cotton, in this case.  This is the literal argument for someone, vying for the highest position in Justice, that's being actively considered for it (among others).  Because the one thing that'll make our country safe again is millions upon millions of dead, murdered citizens, many of them desperate and/or homeless (I can't imagine why).

 

This will never happen.  People have to actually admit to themselves that, despite all the political chicanery against their loved politician, he's still actually not good.  That someone can slander their favorite and be wrong, but their favorite still be terrible.  That their 'hated enemy', hated even more than foreign countries, is their own countrymen, and the primary reason they hate them is the people on the radio/TV told them to hate them.

 

This is the state of politics in this country and why I always hammer at the people on TV/radio.  They've singlehandedly brought this country to ruin.

 

There are people who want to be reasonable but are just angered at being argued with.  Like, the common complaint is 'well X is just as bad', or 'don't try and push your anger/politics on me'.  But there will be a quarter million dead by the end of the year, numerous bankrupt/starving/homeless, tens of millions probably, and nearly a catastrophically broken economy, because our administration at every level is desperately advocating all of its responsibility.  It doesn't want to do -anything- but run for re-election.  That's not politics, that's dysfunction. 

 

That doesn't mean I care about your vote and am trying to hijack it, it means people's suspicion and loyalty is so great that our citizenry are willingly overlooking the mishandling of an incident until it became probably the greatest catastrophe our country has had since the literal civil war.  It means people hate being argued against (and indeed, sometimes by idiots or asshats on 'the other side') so much that they are willing to tear apart or let their country literally collapse... rather than admit that those asshats might have a real point right now.

 

That's literally why this country won't recover from this pandemic, and will effectively go from the strongest country in the world into one of the poorest, ruined, 1st world nations.  While clinging to their idols all the way down.

[Lord Liaden]

2 hours ago, DShomshak said:

Reprehensible, but not impeachable; morally treacherous, but not legally treasonous.

 

What I find most infuriating is that Trump apparently thinks he did the right thing. That he thinks his job is to look confident no matter what, to give cheerleader happy talk no matter what. That only image matters, that only feelings of the moment matter. (Especially his own image.) And apparently it never occurred to him that useful things could be done to reduce the damage, beyond his pull-up-the-drawbridge reflex travel ban (which was already too late -- the virus was already here).

 

A competent, responsible president would have quickly told the American people that they faced a great danger -- but here's what the government was doing to protect them, and here's what they could do individually to protect themselves and each other. It would be hard, but the American people had done hard things before and could do so again.

 

Dean Shomshak

 

I absolutely agree that Trump has behaved incompetently and irresponsibly. He clearly is not a leader. I also agree that he only values image, not substance. But Trump has shown he's a cheerleader for no one but himself. According to him, the country was in a terrible state before his arrival, and all the problems it still has or has gained are not his fault. His protest that he didn't want to cause panic over coronavirus rings hollow. He's more than happy to proclaim impending doom -- caravans of rapists and murderers from Latin America, "leftists" causing rampant lawless chaos, Democrats planning to dismantle the "American way of life" -- if he sees that to his advantage.

 

Trump failed to deal with coronavirus because he didn't know what to do that would make himself look good. So he did nothing and looked for scapegoats, as always.

 

And on that issue, I have never before seen and heard Beau of the Fifth Column display such full-on disgust and contempt.

 

 

[ScottishFox]

37 minutes ago, archer said:

with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in substantial part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group

 

You'd never successfully sell the idea that Trump was intentionally trying to kill - in whole or substantial part - America.

 

Bad judgement call?  Yes.  Attempting to kill off all of America?  Come on, guys, nobody actually believes that. 

 

As an old, fat guy Trump is in the most likely to die demographic for the illness.  Generally the type of villains that commit genocide don't include themselves in the target group.

 

Easily one of the most unpleasant politicians in recent history, but this is WAY over the top. 

 

Will we throw Dr. Fauci in front of the court as well for saying things such as the Trump Administration's response being impressive and that he couldn't imagine anybody could be doing more?  Everyone on the task force?

 

How about Pelosi and her dancing in the streets of China town recommendation? 

 

How about everyone supporting protests with hundreds and thousands of people chanting in the streets together night after night?

 

Just vote him out of office and be done with it.

[TrickstaPriest]

I had a response here, but I've deleted it.  I don't feel comfortable ranting at someone, even if they don't fully understand where I am coming from.

[archer]

27 minutes ago, ScottishFox said:

 

You'd never successfully sell the idea that Trump was intentionally trying to kill - in whole or substantial part - America.

 

Bad judgement call?  Yes.  Attempting to kill off all of America?  Come on, guys, nobody actually believes that. 

 

 

Please don't attempt to tell me what "nobody" believes. At best, it is insulting.

 

And I can prove you wrong if you are asserting that nobody believes that Trump was intentionally trying to kill a substantial part of America.

 

[Old Man]

1 hour ago, archer said:

 

Please don't attempt to tell me what "nobody" believes. At best, it is insulting.

 

And I can prove you wrong if you are asserting that nobody believes that Trump was intentionally trying to kill a substantial part of America.

 

Is this a good time to remind everyone that Trump’s coronavirus team literally killed its national testing plan because the virus was only killing people in blue states at the time?

[ScottishFox]

On 9/8/2020 at 6:51 AM, archer said:

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/515396-colorado-school-suspends-12-year-old-called-police-for-welfare

 

...

 

The kid and his family are black.

 

On 9/8/2020 at 6:51 AM, archer said:

Like HELL the school district isn't treating this kid differently because he's black and has ADHD. Where's my "really ticked off" emoji?

 

I saw that one when it first popped up and it really is infuriating.  The school is so cavalier in its abuse of students and civil rights it frightens me to think of what they'd try to pull if private schools and home schooling weren't options.

Combined with the Coronavirus threat I really see homeschooling picking up steam over the next year.

 

There's no reason they couldn't gently remind the child to put away his toy or that the school has some major issue with blue and orange plastic gun shaped toys that pose no threat to anyone.

 

Still, this kind of stupidity in schools is rampant everywhere.

 

My daughter is already bellyaching about the White Privilege sessions she has in class.  Firstly, her mother is full blood Spanish-was-her-first-language Mexican.  Secondly the racial breakdown of the students and thus the society she will grow up into looks like this:

 

 

She's in the second to last group.  Maybe you could fudge her into the White group if you're not paying too much attention.  She's fair. 

If we don't move it's very clear the group enjoying the privilege in these parts will be (if its not already) "Asian".

 

It's been fifty-seven years since Martin Luther King, Jr.'s speech and we're still failing to grasp the concept of "content of their character".

It's like society was making great progress in that direction; decided they didn't like where it was going and put the car in reverse.

 

Morgan Freeman already solved this problem, but I doubt we'll listen to him either.  He just nails it in a single minute of video.

 

 

[TrickstaPriest]

2 hours ago, ScottishFox said:

My daughter is already bellyaching about the White Privilege sessions she has in class.  Firstly, her mother is full blood Spanish-was-her-first-language Mexican.  Secondly the racial breakdown of the students and thus the society she will grow up into looks like this:

 

 

White Privilege sessions?  In which class?

 

I went to school in Canada, so this is completely alien to me.

[BoneDaddy]

50 minutes ago, TrickstaPriest said:

 

White Privilege sessions?  In which class?

 

I went to school in Canada, so this is completely alien to me.

I’m an American, and this is news to me too.  
 

I think the massive weight of historical legalized and codified white supremacy will continue to have an impact on our culture and individual outcomes for a long time.  There is a lot of litter, we have to work together to clean it up. No blame, no guilt, just a mess that needs cleaning. We need to keep the conversation focused and refocused on that. 
 

I would also humbly submit that one reason we continue to talk on and on about white privilege is so we don’t talk about class privilege, which is to my (admittedly white) mind a greater problem, and one that White Privilege is used to obfuscate. 

[TrickstaPriest]

29 minutes ago, BoneDaddy said:

I would also humbly submit that one reason we continue to talk on and on about white privilege is so we don’t talk about class privilege, which is to my (admittedly white) mind a greater problem, and one that White Privilege is used to obfuscate. 

 

I mean... in terms of laws, class privilege is key.  In terms of societal treatment, you can hide your class and background and accent and more... but not your skin.  So it depends on topic

[unclevlad]

7 hours ago, ScottishFox said:

 

You'd never successfully sell the idea that Trump was intentionally trying to kill - in whole or substantial part - America.

 

Bad judgement call?  Yes.  Attempting to kill off all of America?  Come on, guys, nobody actually believes that. 

 

As an old, fat guy Trump is in the most likely to die demographic for the illness.  Generally the type of villains that commit genocide don't include themselves in the target group.

 

As others have said...I can believe that.  In addition, to strengthen big corporations by destroying small, local businesses.  It's not hard to find critics saying that's all the Dow Jones represents...it's got nothing to do with the general economic picture and everything to do with the megacorps.

 

Also, it need not be deliberately intended to cost lives.  The loss of life was CLEARLY, BLATANTLY obvious;  it's fundamentally implicit if you acknowledge the severity of the disease.  So it becomes willful negligence leading to death;  another spin could well be accessory before the fact.  He is morally, ethically, and LEGALLY responsible for his inaction, IMO.  The grounds for impeachment are unquestionable, IMO;  he clearly and willfully failed to discharge his oath of office. 

 

Trump also has enormous insulation, and a practically unparalleled access to health care.  The whole notion that he's in the same demographic group isn't even a surface analysis. 

 

On Beau...I'm not sure I buy the "he froze"...but I don't really think it matters, as any explanation I can construct is equally revolting.  The major point...that Trump is about the last person on the planet who can claim an "I was trying to avoid a panic" argument...is absolutely dead-on.  He's not the only fear-monger in the Republican camp;  it goes back rather farther than that.  But he's been more aggressive in using it than anyone at the national level, because he's never stopped using it even in office.

[ScottishFox]

2 hours ago, unclevlad said:

The grounds for impeachment are unquestionable, IMO;

 

If we're talking grounds for another impeachment run I could see that. 

 

But others were discussing charges of GENOCIDE in international court which requires "with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in substantial part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group" and that I, respectfully, cannot see ever happening.  He just got nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize and unlike many nominees actually worked toward some significant peace deals (Israel & UAE; Serbia and Kosovo economic normalization).  I think maybe the first president since Jimmy Carter to not start a war or new conflict?  That his ego hasn't forced him into something so far is just shy of miracle.

 

Agree those are good or disagree, but leaping to committing genocide on his own people is ..  I honestly don't know how to respond to that.  Trump is THE target group for the illness (over 70, fat, doesn't get enough rest).

 

4 hours ago, BoneDaddy said:

I would also humbly submit that one reason we continue to talk on and on about white privilege is so we don’t talk about class privilege, which is to my (admittedly white) mind a greater problem, and one that White Privilege is used to obfuscate. 

 

I think you can have a meaningful discussion about majority privilege within certain geographical and time boundaries and it can be beneficial.  Class privilege is a worthwhile discussion as well and, at least locally for me, especially relevant as we have a huge number of immigrants from India.  I have had jaw dropping conversations with tech working peers from India around class/caste and let's just say the views I've encountered so far are not what you'd call egalitarian.  A strong education system is a good counter-balance to class differences and something we should invest in heavily, but let's have the conversation.  It hurts all of humanity if the talents of the poor are not developed to the benefit of all.  Let's solve that problem.

 

But when we start ascribing traits to individuals based on their membership in the whole (say White Privilege) then we're just running down the racism road again and it's seemed like for decades we've understood that this is a terrible road to go down.  Even my not-really-white kid understands that its logically inconsistent to say don't be racist and then prejudge things about people based on race.

[Lord Liaden]

Trump Nobel Peace Prize nomination - what you need to know.  Pretty balanced and objective background to the history of the prize and the POTUS present and past.

 

I really have to question whether Donald Trump had much, if any, personal input on the negotiations leading to the Israel-UAE peace deal. He's barely mentioned the UAE over his presidency. It would certainly be his m.o. to claim credit for anything good which happens during his term in office, whether or not he had anything to do with it. The deal also would have required work, patience, and delicacy to achieve, none of which are his strong suits.

[Old Man]

The nomination is nothing more than a PR stunt whose purpose is to distract voters from the ongoing Trump scandals. Currently those are “Losergate”, and the negligent homicide of hundreds of thousands of Americans for political gain, and the sabotage of the Postal Service for political gain. (Bountygate is so last month.)

[unclevlad]

That article does rather take the shine off simply getting the nomination.  And please.  He may not have started a war, but he supports violent groups regularly in his tweets.  

 

12 hours ago, ScottishFox said:

But others were discussing charges of GENOCIDE in international court which requires "with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in substantial part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group"

 

I've never used genocide (I don't think);  it probably isn't technically correct, altho the aspect that blacks are more at risk may WELL be a part of his calculus.  (And doesn't a half million constitute a substantial part?  If most governors had not acted, how many Black-community deaths would there have been?)  That does suggest a genocidal link.  But that's also the weakest aspect...particularly as I *do* consider his failure to act as a crime against humanity.

[Sociotard]

How about a new scandal?

 

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-fdny-911-health-program-treasury-20200910-s7yam67j6vhmhbdzg6ordanfdm-story.html

 

The Trump Treasury Department siphoning congressionally appropriated funds meant to pay for 9/11 workers' healthcare, or so the article claims. Reading the article, I don't know if the funds were siphoned or just withheld.