Politics

Terraformer · 2017-07-27 15:01:55

SpaceNut wrote:

$1.6 billion for the wall, but even that would only cover 60 miles in Texas

At $27 million per mile, I expect the wall to have a quadruple track railway on top of it. Seriously, where have these ridiculously inflated numbers come from for building a mere wall?

On healthcare, I'd like the government to start by focusing on areas where they are increasing costs, before trying anything new (inb4 someone talks about Canada, or Australia, or Germany, or any other country - new in the context of the United States). For example, generic drug prices that are kept high by FDA regulations - if it's allowed in Canada, or any other developed country that's low on corruption, let people import them into the US. Also, allow medicare to negotiate prices? Later, look at having some kind of income-based sliding scale (obviously adjusting for dependants) where the government will cover some of the costs (all for those on low income, none for those on high income) and people can add in extra for treatment that's not covered (yeah, that's probably the system already used in some countries, but I don't know which).

How does the system of general practitioners work in the US? Do some states and local governments provide it for free, with or without a co-pay to see a doctor? Is it linked to medical insurance? Do people sign up to pay a set fee each month (which would be less than $20, if it costs only slightly more to run than the UK system), and then see the doctor whenever?

I can see the argument for having Accident and Emergency government run. They (usually) run the other emergency services, after all. Is it run by the government in the US? If so, on what level - local or state?

SpaceNut · 2017-07-27 16:40:31

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/tru … ns-n396551

Experts estimate that building and maintaining such a wall on the 1,954-mile border, which snakes along four huge states, would cost tens of billions of dollars. And the 21,000 border patrol agents currently on duty would be "nowhere near sufficient" to keep close surveillance on all of it,

Trump’s dubious claim that his border wall would cost $8 billion

kbd512 · 2017-07-27 17:02:05

A wall should cost about $1M per mile, much like a highway. Video cameras atop a 20 foot concrete wall will suffice. Border Patrol agents can be stationed every two miles or so in guard shacks and they can use electric scooters to patrol the wall. Buses can deliver our Boder Patrol agents to the wall. The border is only 1,989 miles long, so a pair of agents for every two miles equates to 1,989 Border Patrol agents.

kbd512 · 2017-07-27 21:48:11

GW,

Actually, I think we'll just go ahead and build that wall. Nobody asked me if I wanted my insurance premiums tripled before Obamacare was implemented, so I'm sure liberals will understand if they pay a few more pennies in taxes to fund a properly enforced border for the US. Maybe we could shut down some of those insanely expensive overseas military bases to cover the cost of the wall and we could also use our military to assist our Border Patrol agents by providing logistical support. Our Corps of Engineers can help build the wall, too.

I like how you say "I'm not talking about a path to citizenship" in one paragraph and then starting talking about making immigrants citizens in the next paragraph. At least your sense of humor hasn't been dulled by all the political nonsense. Anyone who comes here legally is welcome to become a citizen. Anyone who comes here illegally is welcome to go back to wherever they came from. We'll even provide the transportation to take them back to where they belong.

Those migrant worker jobs are going away soon. We're now starting to use robots to pick fruits and vegetables since impoverished Mexican immigrants can no longer be exploited by unscrupulous employers. The robots don't understand what racism means, much less how to practice it. Now that we've covered what migrant workers won't be doing for a living, what do you suppose they'll do here instead?

SpaceNut · 2017-07-29 10:20:58

The Trumpcare vs Obamacare tug of war to repeal vs fixing... here is the poll

How would you characterize the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare?

17% It works well for the most part
40% Good overall but needs a lot of work
20% Mostly bad
23% It has failed completely

We need to define the responses as to what they mean since there is a broad meaning for many....

What is wrong with the Presidents thinking... as Trump threatens to end ObamaCare payments unless repeal passes

"If a new HealthCare Bill is not approved quickly, BAILOUTS for Insurance Companies and BAILOUTS for Members of Congress will end very soon!" he added.

So putting people well being into peril as they feel that they can not pay for the bill once they attempt to use the insurance by removal of the insurance subsidy....wow nothing like committing them to dead without doing a crime....as they will be turned away from care due to not having insurance.....

Insurance CEO Lets America Know Trump is Sabotaging Plans on Purpose

There’s no question this is happening, because now even the insurance companies themselves are blaming the sabotage for their increasing cost in premiums.
Specifically, the Trump administration is threatening to withhold federal subsidies to the insurers that make up the Obamacare marketplaces, which would obviously crush those markets and force the insurance companies to pull out, leaving Americas uninsured.
This clown show of a congress and a presidential administration just gets more infuriating by the day. They’re all going down, and they know it, so they’re all going to start blaming each other. It’s a Republican Civil War, and if the Republican Party is destroyed in the war, the only winner is, well, America.

Terraformer · 2017-08-01 04:27:26

I thought one of the President's jobs was to play golf? The previous guy played it an awful lot, after all. Or does he get a pass, on account of Not Being Trump?

SpaceNut · 2017-08-01 16:54:52

One thing that I dislike is the TV news broadcasting a race that has not had there polls all closed across the entire country as it allows for a swaying of the votes. If we are counting by hand for days then allowing several voting days as well non TV declared as well would allow for a more acurate vote as well.

Golfing and going to property owned by Trump is the issue as Obama did not do this as he did not own anything to which he golfed at....

SpaceNut · 2017-08-01 19:26:18

The continual Trumpcare push has lead to threats of funding removal ect... 3 states proved that one move from Trump could send healthcare costs skyrocketing for millions of Americans

insurance groups in Idaho, California, and Arizona have shown that Trump's actions could be the biggest source of soaring healthcare costs in Obamacare markets next year.

With the possible solution being As Democratic Leaders Seek Bipartisan Obamacare Fix, Progressives Elevate Single Payer

creation of a public health insurance option, lowering the Medicare eligibility age and expanding Medicaid.

GW Johnson · 2017-08-04 10:16:33

A lot of presidents play golf. Some of them play a lot of golf. Eisenhower was one. There's nothing wrong with that.

The conflict of interest arises when the president plays golf at courses he owns, thus effectively requiring the government to pay him more. That is new with Trump. It is the reason for the conflict-of-interest requirements that Trump has ignored.

GW

SpaceNut · 2017-08-09 19:03:42

Where there is one there will be more allowed under the Treaty of Open Skies as an unarmed Russian Air Force reconnaissance jet flew over several government buildings and landmarks in the nation's capital Wednesday, including the Pentagon, U.S. Capitol, National Mall and even the White House to take aerial imagery anywhere over a participating country's territory to promote transparency about military activities.

SpaceNut · 2017-08-13 17:05:13

Charlottesville, Virginia
Date of attack: August 12, 2017
Number of casualties: A 32-year-old woman was killed, and 19 people were injured.

170813002022-34-charlottesville-white-nationalist-protest-0812-exlarge-169.jpg

Charlottesville spotlights Trump's toxic failure to lead as roiling spectacle of racial violence that unfolded in Charlottesville, Virginia, on Saturday leaving three people dead -- one killed when a car plowed into a crowd and two Virginia State Police officers who died in a helicopter crash --

Trump silent as aides look to explain his vague Charlottesville statement

A White House official, who requested anonymity and ignored attempts to go on the record, told reporters Sunday that it was obvious the President condemned "white supremacists, KKK, neo-Nazi and all extremist groups" despite Trump not mentioning those groups during an event at his private golf club Saturday and instead blaming the violence on "many sides."
"The President said very strongly in his statement yesterday that he condemns all forms of violence, bigotry and hatred, and, of course, that includes white supremacists, KKK, neo-Nazi and all extremist groups," the official said. "He called for national unity and bringing all Americans together."

Republicans from House Speaker Paul Ryan to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell shed similar crocodile tears, calling the hate march in Charlottesville repugnant even as they embraced President Trump -- in all of his racially offensive intolerance -- as the political and moral leader of the Republican Party and the nation.

This represents the culmination of naked appeals by an American president and a major political party to the most shameful aspects of our nation's history.
The sight of white supremacist demonstrators waving tiki torches in a postmodern display of racial terror on the University of Virginia campus on Friday foreshadowed Saturday's demonstrations, where hundreds of so-called alt-right demonstrators, white supremacist militia groups and counter-protesters engaged in intermittent melees, verbal recriminations and raucous shoving matches.

SpaceNut · 2017-08-13 17:23:10

Maxine Waters to Trump: Blame for Charlottesville is on your side, not 'many' and She went on to name several White House aides as white supremacists, including Stephen Bannon and Sebastian Gorka. Trump defined himself during campaign. He encouraged violence against protesters at rallies. We should not be surprised. Trump refuses to condemn white supremacists & terrorists who showed up in Charlottesville. Is he sending a signal? Everyone must be careful.

One group loved Trump’s remarks about Charlottesville: White supremacists as he did not single the out in his insufficient and vague President Trump’s public remarks on the violence in Charlottesville.

Unite the right was the supremists views:
AApW5yL.img?h=416&w=624&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f

Only the daughter and wife got it right with condemmimg and stating that there is no place for them in america....

Terraformer · 2017-08-14 13:22:51

Is this one of your guys, SpaceNut?

But I suppose trying to bludgeon someone to death isn't as bad as running them over. Or is it the politics that change whether it's bad or not? The left are right, the right are wrong?

SpaceNut · 2017-08-14 18:57:05

No Terraformer she is a nut job,

Video of one of the attacks during an April 15 demonstration at Civic Center Park in Berkeley, showing a man gushing blood from a strike to the head, went viral in the days following clashes between Trump supporters and so-called anti-fascists.

Sort of like cut off brass nuks, can be seen in the hand of the woman with green coat.

The other problem is eric clanton is a man's name and its a woman that has the item which is a weapon....

another article but I am not able to watch the embedded video...
http://www.inquisitr.com/4162691/profes … be-guilty/

Still an assault is a crime so put him on trial for the crime....

RobertDyck · 2017-08-14 19:59:16

I saw an American political talk show Sunday. They talked about riots over removing Confederate statues. One black lady claimed the Civil War was over slavery, and she claimed Confederates were traitors who took up arms against their own country. I've heard that before. However, in 1996 I lived in a suburb of Richmond Virginia, I got a lecture from one of the locals. The Civil War was not over slavery. Congress and President Lincoln signed a law allowing slavery to continue. It was outlawed in northern states, California and Oregon, all territories, and any new states that came after. However, southern states that had it would be allowed to continue. The real issue was every president before Lincoln was from the South, and the South dominated Congress before that. This was the first time the North had control. The North created new taxes on goods only produced in the South. It was about power and money. Wars are always about power and money, not ideology.

The Confederacy brought an action before the Supreme Court to peacefully succeed from the Union. However, there was dispute over who would own Fort Sumter. The South said it would belong to the Confederacy, but the North said it would remain theirs. All weapons from other nearby forts were concentrated into Fort Sumter, and additional troops were sent from the North to reinforce it. Soldiers on both sides argued strenuously, then shots were fired. Some hot-head started shooting. Once blood was drawn, it escalated quickly. That started the war.

You can't claim the Confederacy was "traitors" taking up arms against America. States of the Confederacy included half the land area of all the states that existed at that time, and half the population. It was really a war between the southern half of USA vs the northern half. Neither side could claim to be the "real" America.

The couple I spoke with in Virginia spoke as if they felt their state/country had been conquered/subjugated. Even though the Civil War occurred long before any of us were born. They accepted that slavery was over, and racial equality. In fact I found there was more racial bigotry in New Jersey than there was in Chesterfield county, or the parts of Richmond that I visited. I worked in Colonial Heights, my apartment was in the town of Chester in Chesterfield county, a suburb of Richmond, but corporate head office was in Elizabeth New Jersey. The couple lived in a Chesterfield county, closer to Richmond.

I suspect this is a backlash by those who still feel conquered and subjugated in their own country. How do we make them feel empowered, at home in their own country, without bringing back racism?

kbd512 · 2017-08-15 02:08:54

The kkk and nazis are disgusting bigoted street thugs, but then so are the disgusting bigoted antifa and blm street thugs.

August 14th, 2017, CNN Reports:

Protesters pull down Confederate statue in North Carolina

A group of fascists/communists/leftists (all fascists and communists are leftists, but I repeat myself) street thugs decided to destroy a statue in downtown Durham, North Carolina. After the street thugs destroyed the statute, they proceeded to spit on and kick the statue.

They sure are proud of themselves, too...

images%2F1502761308518-1502761136300-durham2.jpg

virginia-protests-statues.jpg

I've seen this sort of behavior before in the very recent past:

ISIS destroy statues and shrines of 2,000-year-old Iraq city in latest sickening act of war on culture

And the same CNN questioned whether or not these ISIS thugs actually destroyed cultural history:

ISIS destroyed antiquities ... or did it?

These same antifa and blm street thugs have also decided to vandalize war memorials and the graves of confederate soldiers.

Confederate graves, Gov. Aycock marker vandalized at Oakwood Cemetery

More states seeing Confederate statues defaced

Does anyone here ever worry that after those street thugs finish destroying all the American history they don't agree with and desecrating the graves of people they've never met, that they just might turn their anger and violence on other people or their personal property?

Sooner or later, the Hillary supporters should have a good 'ole fashion book burning to commemorate their descent into violence and chaos.

Oh, wait...

In the Ultimate Display of Irony, Leftists Burn Books to Protest Fascism

GW Johnson · 2017-08-15 12:41:16

Well, I’ve seen this race hatred crap at one or another level all my life. It is a leftover still simmering from the Civil War. Too many fools thought this was all behind us. It is not. It never was addressed.

That war was fought over “states rights” from the southern viewpoint, and over “preserve the union” from the northern viewpoint, until it looked like the south might win in 1863. Then it became the “war over slavery” from the northern viewpoint. That change dates from the Emancipation Proclamation.

The southern viewpoint is complicated: the only significant “states rights” issue really was slavery. Yet the north had finally dominated politically, and was beginning to pass laws to dominate economically. That fed the generalized “states rights” argument. Too many latch onto that, and forget that in the 1840’s and 1850’s, the only real issue was slavery.

The attitudes that permitted slavery were rife in both the north and the south. Why else were runaway slaves caught in the north returned to the south? The only real refuge was Canada. Those attitudes are why Reconstruction was terminated, and why slavery reappeared in a new covert form: segregation and discrimination, instead of overt ownership.

Those attitudes are still with us today, but are more virulent in the north than the south, actually. You can make these things illegal, but laws do not change human attitudes. If the parents themselves do not change, they teach these attitudes to their children either overtly or by example (children are not born to hate, they must be taught).

That cultural lack is why covert slavery persisted into the 1960’s and 1970’s, and is still a problem today. It is where these “white nationalist” and “neo-nazi” (read “racist”) groups come from. They have been with us in one form or another since Reconstruction. The KKK is but the most egregious example.

Those groups are suddenly resurgent today, and emboldened enough not to wear masks and hoods, because of the election of Donald Trump as president. One of their “echo chambers” for fake news was Steve Bannon’s Breitbart News, which caters to, and inflames, such groups, for profit. So there is at least one overt racist in the White House, and probably more. And they know it.

These groups are a big chunk of Trump’s core support, what he caters to. Why would it surprise anyone that he is reluctant to denounce them when an incident like Charlottesville happens? It took him 3 days of pressure to say that racists and Nazis are bad. And if you don’t believe it took all the public pressure to get him to say that, you’re dumber than I fear.

What that really goes to prove is that Trump is at least sympathetic to such evil beliefs. Whether that’s because of the echo chamber that Bannon and the rest of his original staff provided, or it’s really part of Trump’s character, is irrelevant now. Point is, it is there.

It shows up in hatred of all immigrants, legal or illegal. It shows up in hatred of the poor (“let Obamacare implode”, tantamount to “let them all die”), and it shows up in that wall-between-us-and-Mexico bullshit. When you compound that with his demonstrated disregard for truth, and couple that to the North Korean atomic weapons crisis, you have a recipe for fighting the wrong war in a very disastrous way.

The reaction against these hate groups has also extremized. We are seeing violence on both sides in these incidents. Amazing how irrationally people can act, when stirred up. This is nothing but lynch mob psychology playing out. And I utterly detest it. From either side.

As for whether to tear down Confederate memorials, I submit that’s an irrationally-hyped issue, meant only to inflame passions. When you look rationally at it, you do not have to agree with what these men fought for, to appreciate how well and how bravely they fought. That's the point of a war memorial.

Some of the best tactics and strategies, as well as the most determined will to win against impossible odds, came from the Confederates. Regardless of how evil slavery was, those other things are well worth remembering.

The big town near where I live has some Confederate memorials. It also has a Vietnam memorial. It's about the valor and bravery, more than anything else.

I'm a born southern boy, native Texan. But, some of my dearest friends do not look like me. I was taught the racist attitudes, but I rejected them. My life has been far better because of that choice. I made it long ago.

GW

SpaceNut · 2017-08-16 18:48:52

With the continued issues of ethics the ceo's of a advisory council have continued to jump ship...
Trump disbands two economic advisory councils after mass resignations of business leaders

louis · 2017-08-17 18:05:56

Not an American, so not really my fight but I will defend Trump on one point. If you are going to take down statues because people were defenders of slavery and racial inequality then you have to take down statues of most of the founding fathers, people like Jefferson and Washington.

Jefferson, a highly intelligent man, was very much an ideological racist and slavery advocate, not an unthinking accepter of current mores. He looked into racial abilities and was fascinated to learn about an African-American who could grasp mathematical concepts...but it didn't shake his overall belief in the inferiority of Black Africans. He was also an abuser of female Black slaves. So, overall, a complete shite as we say in the UK.

How can you defend having a statue of Jefferson if you want to take down one of a Civil War Confederate? You can't. On that Trump is completely right. So you have to decide. Either all statues of racists and slavers are fair game (including Socrates, all Roman Emperors, any Viking explorers - I could go on and on) or none are. The only alternative is to have some irrational equivalent of a statute of limitations..."all such statues are grossly reprehensible unless constructed prior to 1860".

GW Johnson wrote:

Well, I’ve seen this race hatred crap at one or another level all my life. It is a leftover still simmering from the Civil War. Too many fools thought this was all behind us. It is not. It never was addressed.
That war was fought over “states rights” from the southern viewpoint, and over “preserve the union” from the northern viewpoint, until it looked like the south might win in 1863. Then it became the “war over slavery” from the northern viewpoint. That change dates from the Emancipation Proclamation.
The southern viewpoint is complicated: the only significant “states rights” issue really was slavery. Yet the north had finally dominated politically, and was beginning to pass laws to dominate economically. That fed the generalized “states rights” argument. Too many latch onto that, and forget that in the 1840’s and 1850’s, the only real issue was slavery.
The attitudes that permitted slavery were rife in both the north and the south. Why else were runaway slaves caught in the north returned to the south? The only real refuge was Canada. Those attitudes are why Reconstruction was terminated, and why slavery reappeared in a new covert form: segregation and discrimination, instead of overt ownership.
Those attitudes are still with us today, but are more virulent in the north than the south, actually. You can make these things illegal, but laws do not change human attitudes. If the parents themselves do not change, they teach these attitudes to their children either overtly or by example (children are not born to hate, they must be taught).
That cultural lack is why covert slavery persisted into the 1960’s and 1970’s, and is still a problem today. It is where these “white nationalist” and “neo-nazi” (read “racist”) groups come from. They have been with us in one form or another since Reconstruction. The KKK is but the most egregious example.
Those groups are suddenly resurgent today, and emboldened enough not to wear masks and hoods, because of the election of Donald Trump as president. One of their “echo chambers” for fake news was Steve Bannon’s Breitbart News, which caters to, and inflames, such groups, for profit. So there is at least one overt racist in the White House, and probably more. And they know it.
These groups are a big chunk of Trump’s core support, what he caters to. Why would it surprise anyone that he is reluctant to denounce them when an incident like Charlottesville happens? It took him 3 days of pressure to say that racists and Nazis are bad. And if you don’t believe it took all the public pressure to get him to say that, you’re dumber than I fear.
What that really goes to prove is that Trump is at least sympathetic to such evil beliefs. Whether that’s because of the echo chamber that Bannon and the rest of his original staff provided, or it’s really part of Trump’s character, is irrelevant now. Point is, it is there.
It shows up in hatred of all immigrants, legal or illegal. It shows up in hatred of the poor (“let Obamacare implode”, tantamount to “let them all die”), and it shows up in that wall-between-us-and-Mexico bullshit. When you compound that with his demonstrated disregard for truth, and couple that to the North Korean atomic weapons crisis, you have a recipe for fighting the wrong war in a very disastrous way.
The reaction against these hate groups has also extremized. We are seeing violence on both sides in these incidents. Amazing how irrationally people can act, when stirred up. This is nothing but lynch mob psychology playing out. And I utterly detest it. From either side.
As for whether to tear down Confederate memorials, I submit that’s an irrationally-hyped issue, meant only to inflame passions. When you look rationally at it, you do not have to agree with what these men fought for, to appreciate how well and how bravely they fought. That's the point of a war memorial.
Some of the best tactics and strategies, as well as the most determined will to win against impossible odds, came from the Confederates. Regardless of how evil slavery was, those other things are well worth remembering.
The big town near where I live has some Confederate memorials. It also has a Vietnam memorial. It's about the valor and bravery, more than anything else.
I'm a born southern boy, native Texan. But, some of my dearest friends do not look like me. I was taught the racist attitudes, but I rejected them. My life has been far better because of that choice. I made it long ago.
GW

IanM · 2017-08-17 20:19:36

Regarding Louis's point, some of my friends (granted I am in college, so there is obviously quite a bit of leftism in my circle) do indeed want to tear down statues of Washington and Jefferson (one even proposed getting Jefferson off Mount Rushmore). Of course, that will probably never happen given that Washington and Jefferson are national heroes.

I think the main justification for the difference is that the Confederates were traitors, having seceded and fought against the Union. Though on the same token, one could argue that the Founding Fathers were themselves traitors to the British Crown, albeit ones ultimately victorious and glorified by their country. I guess this boils down to the simple "history is written by the winners", though if more justification is needed the Founding Fathers did fight for a nobler cause of independence from an unrepresentative empire rather than the maintenance of slavery and oppression of the lower classes for the benefit of a few plantation owners.

SpaceNut · 2017-08-18 18:05:07

The timing of the statue removals is poor at best and the reasons for them are not the same as the believers of these group would think for there placement in the first place as GW has meantioned.

Arts council members call for Trump to step down in their resignation letter as the group cites Trump's "un-American" comments on the violence in Charlottesville, Va., as the last straw for them, but they list multiple other controversies that the president has been involved in before the rally, including "undermining the Civil Rights Act" and his proposed cuts to arts funding.

The group cites Trump's "un-American" comments on the violence in Charlottesville, Va., as the last straw for them, but they list multiple other controversies that the president has been involved in before the rally, including "undermining the Civil Rights Act" and his proposed cuts to arts funding. "Elevating any group that threatens and discriminates on the basis of race, gender, ethnicity, disability, orientation background, or identity is un-American," Supremacy, discrimination, vitriol are not American values.

resignation letter

Terraformer · 2017-08-19 04:02:45

I can't believe the President is being attacked for criticising a violent group ("er no, that was a peaceful bike lock attack!"). But it's happening.

America is doomed.

louis · 2017-08-19 19:49:40

So you are saying there is no problem with having a statue of a racist - maybe a KKK guy - as long as they never were a Confederate secessionist...? Nope, sorry don't believe you. I don't think that's the dividing line. And even if YOU would like that to be the dividing line, it isn't the dividing line for Antifa. Going after the Confederate statues is stage one. Stage 2 is going after the Founding Fathers. That effectively undermines the US Constitution and destroys American culture, enabling the extreme Left mob to put in place what they want: the (unachievable) egalitarian state. We are in Alinksy-Clinton-Obama territory.

Well you are correct that history is written by the winners and this is what we see here...people are trying to write history in stone or absence of stone.

Just to avoid any misapprehension: I hate slavery and race-based ideology. Even if someone could show me there was excellent scientific basis for slavery and racism I would choose not support either as a political doctrine.

IanM wrote:

Regarding Louis's point, some of my friends (granted I am in college, so there is obviously quite a bit of leftism in my circle) do indeed want to tear down statues of Washington and Jefferson (one even proposed getting Jefferson off Mount Rushmore). Of course, that will probably never happen given that Washington and Jefferson are national heroes.
I think the main justification for the difference is that the Confederates were traitors, having seceded and fought against the Union. Though on the same token, one could argue that the Founding Fathers were themselves traitors to the British Crown, albeit ones ultimately victorious and glorified by their country. I guess this boils down to the simple "history is written by the winners", though if more justification is needed the Founding Fathers did fight for a nobler cause of independence from an unrepresentative empire rather than the maintenance of slavery and oppression of the lower classes for the benefit of a few plantation owners.

SpaceNut · 2017-08-20 08:37:06

Trade deals with what nation, as any chance to make improvements seem to mean we are at the back of the line as other nations are not dealing.

Allie dossier with now daming evidence of collusion sure puts a negative spin on the presidency.

Follow this up with In January, President Trump vowed to hire 5,000 new Border Patrol agents. It never happened.
A vow to make Mexico pay for a wall. Not happening. With more not happening. Not to mention that his continual posturing on issues have made even the Senate Republicans becoming fed up with Trump. Add to the the continual hiring and resigning of people that are meant to support Trumps lack of discipline and chaotic leadership style.

RobertDyck · 2017-08-20 13:36:10

With the trouble in Charlottesville, I'm reminded of a YouTube video by a Canadian comedian.

And we'll help you solve your race problem... as soon as we figure out why you still have a race problem.

As I write this I'm watching today's episode of "Face The Nation". The show had a white woman reporter who was embedded with the crowd in Charlottesville, a black woman who is president and director council of NAACP legal defence and education fund, and a white man who is a former self-identified skin-head and author of the book "Life after Hate". I had difficulty listening to statements by the black woman. Perhaps it's because she's a lawyer, but I found her statements highly offensive. She said...

The President... was combative, he was defensive of those who were white supremacists and those who were Nazis. He put on an equivalent moral plane those who were white supremacists and Nazis with those who came out understandably outraged by seeing flags with swastikas and confederate flags. And hearing the kind of homophobic antisemitism and racial slurs that Elle talked about. He put them on the same moral plane. And whenever he was pushed, what came out of him was such tremendous anger that we would even dare to expect him to call out what we thing any president, any modern president in this country should call out, which is Nazi-ism and white supremacist and antisemitism. He just wasn't able to do it. And so what he did this week is not only did he abdicate his role as a leader, as a leader of this entire country, not as a man speaking for himself, not as a man speaking for his political party, not as a man speaking for his voters or his base, but as the president of this entire country. He abdicated that responsibility. And then even worse, he gave aid and comfort to those white supremacists and neo-Nazis who were out in full force in Charlottesville on Friday night and Saturday.

Wow! Just, Wow! And she was allowed to speak on national TV.

A president has to speak for everyone, not just your special interest group. This woman claims the President "abdicated" because he "gave aid and comfort" to those she sees as her political opponents. She's wrong, obviously wrong. The president has to represent all Americans. Those you like, and those you don't.

What we're seeing is why racism still exists in America. This blatant prejudice for the other side. This woman is as bad as any white supremacist.

Listen to what the white supremacists were chanting: "You will not replace us!", "Whose streets? Our streets!", "White lives matter! Black lives matter!" Yes, they chanted "Black lives matter!" The black woman lawyer failed to acknowledge that. Obviously I left out Nazi chants, but these chants tell you what is really going on.

Here in Canada one issue we're currently dealing with is a past attempt to wipe out Aboriginal culture. It's been called "cultural genocide". I disagree with the term "genocide", because no one was killed. Something called "Residential school" where aboriginal children were taken from their parents as soon as they were old enough for grade 1, lived in a school where they were forced to speak English, not allowed to speak their native language ever. They were taught English cultural values and traditions. We're allowed back to their families until they were 18 years old. The federal government has issued a formal apology for this. But what is currently happening in the US is an attempt at "cultural genocide" of the Deep South. This isn't about white supremicists or neo-Nazis, that's just an extreme backlash. It's about an attempt to wipe out a culture that was a major part of the US.

I've posted before that every president of the US from George Washington until Abraham Lincoln was a Southerner. Lincoln was the first Northern president. Congress was dominated by the South from the first Continental Congress until election of Lincoln. Committing cultural genocide of the Deep South constitutes an attempt to wipe out what was USA from the Declaration of Independence until 1861. George Washington became president in 1789, if you count it from that date that's the first 72 years of America's existence.

I said before, you have to find a way to honour the Deep South without bringing back racism. This lawyer mentioned the Nazi flag and Confederate flag in the same sentence as if they're the same thing. They're not. Nazis were horrible movement in Germany. Nazis never won any election in Germany, Hitler gained 35% in the final election in 1932. That was more than most people in Germany expected, but he definitely didn't win. Hitler used various nasty techniques to gain power. The reason Nazis gained as much support as they did was oppression of Germany following World War 1. France blamed Germany for the war, in reality Germany was dragged in due to a military alliance. Economic devastation of Germany between the wars made the German people desperate for a way out. That's how Nazis gained power.

The more you try to suppress the Deep South, the more white supremacists and neo-Nazis will gain power. The way to take power from neo-Nazis is to honour and glorify the Deep South, without bringing back racism.

This lawyer for the NAACP is supporting the cause of white supremacists. She claims to be fighting against them, but she's doing everything to support their cause.

Last edited by RobertDyck (2017-08-20 16:36:42)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#701 2017-07-27 15:01:55

Re: Politics

#702 2017-07-27 16:40:31

Re: Politics

#703 2017-07-27 17:02:05

Re: Politics

#704 2017-07-27 21:48:11

Re: Politics

#705 2017-07-29 10:20:58

Re: Politics

#706 2017-08-01 04:27:26

Re: Politics

#707 2017-08-01 16:54:52

Re: Politics

#708 2017-08-01 19:26:18

Re: Politics

#709 2017-08-04 10:16:33

Re: Politics

#710 2017-08-09 19:03:42

Re: Politics

#711 2017-08-13 17:05:13

Re: Politics

#712 2017-08-13 17:23:10

Re: Politics

#713 2017-08-14 13:22:51

Re: Politics

#714 2017-08-14 18:57:05

Re: Politics

#715 2017-08-14 19:59:16

Re: Politics

#716 2017-08-15 02:08:54

Re: Politics

#717 2017-08-15 12:41:16

Re: Politics

#718 2017-08-16 18:48:52

Re: Politics

#719 2017-08-17 18:05:56

Re: Politics

#720 2017-08-17 20:19:36

Re: Politics

#721 2017-08-18 18:05:07

Re: Politics

#722 2017-08-19 04:02:45

Re: Politics

#723 2017-08-19 19:49:40

Re: Politics

#724 2017-08-20 08:37:06

Re: Politics

#725 2017-08-20 13:36:10

Re: Politics

Board footer