Political Digression Thread -- Save UP! Move the politically focused stuff here

[cltbwimob]

1 hour ago, kermit said:

 

To paraphase, you said the left isn't trying to push for any freedom worth having. Then you gave the example of free speech (for a specific group of people) as one of those things that is not worth having. I was surprised by  that, and thought I may have misinterpreted your post -- thus my question.

Am I correct in thinking that you don't believe that free speech for all is a constitutional right worth having?

Here is what I actually said:

“Or perhaps a better question is what freedoms is the left trying to imbue us with that are really worth having?  The only freedoms that the left seems to espouse these days is the freedom for a bunch of angry and often privileged white kids to scream and shout at people, tear down statues, and riot...”

You paraphrased the above statement as:

“...the left isn't trying to push for any freedom worth having. Then you gave the example of free speech (for a specific group of people) as one of those things that is not worth having.”

You are conflating what I was talking about in my original post- rioting, the wanton destruction of property, and harassment-with the concept of free speech.    So either a) you actually didn’t understand what I was saying and truly did want clarification, or b) you were beginning to build a straw man.   I have a feeling it was the latter, but I will leave open the possibility that it was the former.  
 

To answer your question, I do believe in free speech under the Constitution, but l do not believe the right to riot, the right to destroy property that does not belong to you, and the right to harass people are Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms protected by the First Ammendment.

Edited August 20, 2020 by cltbwimob

[urbanlover568]

4 minutes ago, cltbwimob said:

Here is what I actually said:

“Or perhaps a better question is what freedoms is the left trying to imbue us with that are really worth having?  The only freedoms that the left seems to espouse these days is the freedom for a bunch of angry and often privileged white kids to scream and shout at people, tear down statues, and riot...”

You paraphrased the above statement as:

“...the left isn't trying to push for any freedom worth having. Then you gave the example of free speech (for a specific group of people) as one of those things that is not worth having.”

You are conflating what I was talking about in my original post- rioting, the wanton destruction of property, and harassment-with the concept of free speech.    So either a) you actually didn’t understand what I was saying and truly did want clarification, or b) you were beginning to build a straw man.   I have a feeling it was the latter, but I will, leave open the possibility that it was the former.  
 

To answer your question, I do believe in free speech under the Constitution, but l do not believe the right to riot, the right to destroy property that does not belong to you, and the right to harass people are Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms protected by the First Ammendment.

It's honestly horrifying to see these businesses getting looted, burned, and sometimes looted repeatedly. Some of these small businesses are minority owned and say they might not be able to reopen. Really sad situation. Many families won't have food on the table with their businesses closed. 

[kermit]

21 minutes ago, cltbwimob said:

Here is what I actually said:

“Or perhaps a better question is what freedoms is the left trying to imbue us with that are really worth having?  The only freedoms that the left seems to espouse these days is the freedom for a bunch of angry and often privileged white kids to scream and shout at people, tear down statues, and riot...”

You paraphrased the above statement as:

“...the left isn't trying to push for any freedom worth having. Then you gave the example of free speech (for a specific group of people) as one of those things that is not worth having.”

You are conflating what I was talking about in my original post- rioting, the wanton destruction of property, and harassment-with the concept of free speech.    So either a) you actually didn’t understand what I was saying and truly did want clarification, or b) you were beginning to build a straw man.   I have a feeling it was the latter, but I will, leave open the possibility that it was the former.  
 

To answer your question, I do believe in free speech under the Constitution, but l do not believe the right to riot, the right to destroy property that does not belong to you, and the right to harass people are Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms protected by the First Ammendment.

Thanks for the clarification. I did quote you accurately on the previous page, the paraphrasing above was an effort to illustrate how I read it, it was not intended to change your statement. 

I understand your logic on rioting, but a portion of your original statement (copied below) was focused specifically on speech, and that was what confused me.

Quote

is the freedom for a bunch of angry and often privileged white kids to scream and shout at people

IMO the right of all people to "scream and shout" is a right worth maintaining.

Edited August 20, 2020 by kermit

[cltbwimob]

8 minutes ago, kermit said:

Thanks for the clarification. I did quote you accurately on the previous page, the paraphrasing above was an effort to illustrate how I read it, it was not intended to change your statement. 

I understand your logic on rioting, but a portion of your original statement (copied below) was focused specifically on speech, and that was what confused me.

 

Very well, I can see how that would be confusing 

[Cityplanner]

If I understand correctly, the freedoms that people on the left want are:

1. Freedom of marriage (same-gender marriage)

2. Reproductive freedom (abortion rights)

3. Freedom from want (i.e., not having to worry about material things)

4. Freedom from offense (i.e., not having to hear racist and other offensive ideas)

If I'm understanding correctly, I see why people would want those things, but the solution to me would be to just (1) lift restrictions on most activities so that everyone can do what s/he wants (within reason) and (2) work hard and make wise life choices that lead to sustainable financial outcomes.

[urbanlover568]

57 minutes ago, Cityplanner said:

If I understand correctly, the freedoms that people on the left want are:

1. Freedom of marriage (same-gender marriage)

2. Reproductive freedom (abortion rights)

3. Freedom from want (i.e., not having to worry about material things)

4. Freedom from offense (i.e., not having to hear racist and other offensive ideas)

If I'm understanding correctly, I see why people would want those things, but the solution to me would be to just (1) lift restrictions on most activities so that everyone can do what s/he wants (within reason) and (2) work hard and make wise life choices that lead to sustainable financial outcomes.

1. My family is Republican and they don't have a issue with me and my husband. 
2. I agree abortion should be the mothers choice and not the state/government to make
3. Are you saying we should give our houses, land, and belongings for the community to use? 
4. I welcome the first amendment.

 

Here is a clip from Tucker showing DNC clips. The list below is not from his words, they are from the DNC. 

So far the list is:

1. Rewrite Pledge of Allegiance 
2. Eliminate bail
3. Eliminate the police department, replace them with "social workers"/"community care"
4. Closing jails
5. Eliminate ICE
6. No more "women" or "men" sports, they will be combined
7. Destruction of capitalism 

 

 

Edited August 20, 2020 by urbanlover568

[kermit]

28 minutes ago, urbanlover568 said:

Here is a clip from Tucker showing DNC clips. The list below is not from his words, they are from the DNC. 

So far the list is:

1. Rewrite Pledge of Allegiance 
2. Eliminate bail
3. Eliminate the police department, replace them with "social workers"/"community care"
4. Closing jails
5. Eliminate ICE
6. No more "women" or "men" sports, they will be combined
7. Destruction of capitalism 

These are such gross mischaracterizations of the party platform that I will simply say Strawman Bullsh1t and leave it at that.

I eagerly await your "watch the video" whine or tinfoil hat gif retort.

Edited August 20, 2020 by kermit

[Cityplanner]

54 minutes ago, urbanlover568 said:

1. My family is Republican and they don't have a issue with me and my husband. 
2. I agree abortion should be the mothers choice and not the state/government to make
3. Are you saying we should give our houses, land, and belongings for the community to use? 
4. I welcome the first amendment.

 

Here is a clip from Tucker showing DNC clips. The list below is not from his words, they are from the DNC. 

So far the list is:

1. Rewrite Pledge of Allegiance 
2. Eliminate bail
3. Eliminate the police department, replace them with "social workers"/"community care"
4. Closing jails
5. Eliminate ICE
6. No more "women" or "men" sports, they will be combined
7. Destruction of capitalism 

 

 

For point 3, I am not saying that.  I’m not a Democrat.  I assume that it would be racist/sexist/classist/etc. of me to try to view things from a Democratic perspective.

[elrodvt]

57 minutes ago, urbanlover568 said:

1. My family is Republican and they don't have a issue with me and my husband. 
2. I agree abortion should be the mothers choice and not the state/government to make
3. Are you saying we should give our houses, land, and belongings for the community to use? 
4. I welcome the first amendment.

 

Here is a clip from Tucker showing DNC clips. The list below is not from his words, they are from the DNC. 

So far the list is:

1. Rewrite Pledge of Allegiance 
2. Eliminate bail
3. Eliminate the police department, replace them with "social workers"/"community care"
4. Closing jails
5. Eliminate ICE
6. No more "women" or "men" sports, they will be combined
7. Destruction of capitalism 

 

 

Quoting Carlson, an ENTERTAINER, on Fox destroys what little credibility you had left. Unbelievable.

[urbanlover568]

1 hour ago, urbanlover568 said:

 

 

Here is a clip from Tucker showing DNC clips. The list below is not from Tuckers words, they are from the DNC. 

So far the list is:

1. Rewrite Pledge of Allegiance - Linda Labeija 
2. Eliminate bail - J Mai
3. Eliminate the police department, replace them with "social workers"/"community care" - J Mai
4. Closing jails - J Mai
5. Eliminate ICE -J Mai
6. No more "women" or "men" sports, they will be combined - marisa richmond
7. Destruction of capitalism -  ashley nicole mccray

[elrodvt]

And on the other side we have Q and other whacky crap. I don't know if any of that was taken in context, generally he plays games with clips, but I've never heard of those people and they're not driving agendas. I assume your equally scared by the Q people, idiots like Gohmert in texas and so on?

This is silly we know to ignore the extremists on each side. If you really want to go there the Republicans give us a lot to work with.

People who take anything said by Carlson, Hannity, Alex Jones, Moher, MSNBC etc seriously have really poor judgement. What's next quoting Justin Bieber? ;-)

[urbanlover568]

Just now, elrodvt said:

And on the other side we have Q and other whacky crap. I don't know if any of that was taken in context, generally he plays games with clips, but I've never heard of those people and they're not driving agendas. I assume your equally scared by the Q people, idiots like Gohmert in texas and so on?

This is silly we know to ignore the extremists on each side. If you really want to go there the Republicans give us a lot to work with.

People who take anything said by Carlson, Hannity, Alex Jones, Moher, MSNBC etc seriously have really poor judgement. What's next quoting Justin Bieber? ;-)

Here is the people who said it. 

1. Rewrite Pledge of Allegiance - Linda Labeija 
2. Eliminate bail - J Mai
3. Eliminate the police department, replace them with "social workers"/"community care" - J Mai
4. Closing jails - J Mai
5. Eliminate ICE -J Mai
6. No more "women" or "men" sports, they will be combined - marisa richmond
7. Destruction of capitalism -  ashley nicole mccray

 

Also Austin, New York City, Los Angeles, Seattle have all cut their police budgets. Democrat leads said it wasn't going to happen and here we are. Seattle's cuts forced their Chief to quit. Guess being able to call the cops comes from a place of "privilege". 

 

 

[elrodvt]

I guess you're not going to address the point I made about extremest elements in each party? Or do you believe in Q and don't mind the open racism we hear from the extremes on the right? I'm sure you don't (at least I sure hope not) so why avoid the question?

I actually am familiar with the Governor of NM and saw her speech last night which said nothing about the pledge. Not that the pledge is a sacred tome or something that can't be improved on.

Man his intro paints him as a rabid dog. Whatever it takes to get ratings I guess.

Btw, changing the subject, most top campaign officials in the 2016 election have been charged with crimes as was the national security advisor. What a squeaky clean administration. How could anyone believe they would try and mess with a fair election?

[urbanlover568]

2 minutes ago, elrodvt said:

I guess you're not going to address the point I made about extremest elements in each party? Or do you believe in Q and don't mind the open racism we hear from the extremes on the right? I'm sure you don't (at least I sure hope not) so why avoid the question?

I actually am familiar with the Governor of NM and saw her speech last night which said nothing about the pledge. Not that the pledge is a sacred tome or something that can't be improved on.

Man his intro paints him as a rabid dog. Whatever it takes to get ratings I guess.

Btw, changing the subject, most top campaign officials in the 2016 election have been charged with crimes as was the national security advisor. What a squeaky clean administration. How could anyone believe they would try and mess with a fair election?

If your going to insinuate I believe in Q, get lost. I never said that I believe in Q. 

[elrodvt]

What I wrote was a question and I said I don't think you would believe that. However, you again avoid a direct question. Do you agree each party has extremes and they should be ignored. Thus pretty much the entire rant by Carlson is just meaningless bullcrap to fire up the base. So I wonder why you would post it?

Do we agree or not?

[urbanlover568]

35 minutes ago, elrodvt said:

do you believe in Q and don't mind the open racism we hear from the extremes on the right? I'm sure you don't (at least I sure hope not) so why avoid the question?

 

Again, don't care or believe in Q. I think for myself, not by party or group. 

4 minutes ago, elrodvt said:

What I wrote was a question and I said I don't think you would believe that. However, you again avoid a direct question. Do you agree each party has extremes and they should be ignored. Thus pretty much the entire rant by Carlson is just meaningless bullcrap to fire up the base. So I wonder why you would post it?

Do we agree or not?

FACTS:

50 minutes ago, urbanlover568 said:

Here is the people who said it. 

1. Rewrite Pledge of Allegiance - Linda Labeija 
2. Eliminate bail - J Mai
3. Eliminate the police department, replace them with "social workers"/"community care" - J Mai
4. Closing jails - J Mai
5. Eliminate ICE -J Mai
6. No more "women" or "men" sports, they will be combined - marisa richmond
7. Destruction of capitalism -  ashley nicole mccray

 

Also Austin, New York City, Los Angeles, Seattle have all cut their police budgets. Democrat leads said it wasn't going to happen and here we are. Seattle's cuts forced their Chief to quit. Guess being able to call the cops comes from a place of "privilege". 

 

 

 

[elrodvt]

Again a refusal to answer direct questions. This is a waste of time. 

[southslider]

14 hours ago, urbanlover568 said:

Did the dates for the absentee ballot change from 2016 to 2020? No. More hysteria I guess. 

You're avoiding the question-- why can't voting be as easy as paying taxes?

[urbanlover568]

13 minutes ago, elrodvt said:

Again a refusal to answer direct questions. This is a waste of time. 

Bless your heart 

3 minutes ago, southslider said:

You're avoiding the question-- why can't voting be as easy as paying taxes?

When can I vote by mail?

You can begin the process to vote by mail right now. Play it safe: don’t wait until the deadline to request or return your ballot. Request your ballot now, and vote and return your ballot as soon as you receive it.
Deadline to request your ballot: 5 PM on Tuesday, October 27
Deadline to submit your ballot: 5 PM on Tuesday, November 3, 2020

 

https://www.ncvoter.org/absentee-ballots/

[southslider]

6 hours ago, urbanlover568 said:

Bless your heart 

When can I vote by mail?

You can begin the process to vote by mail right now. Play it safe: don’t wait until the deadline to request or return your ballot. Request your ballot now, and vote and return your ballot as soon as you receive it.
Deadline to request your ballot: 5 PM on Tuesday, October 27
Deadline to submit your ballot: 5 PM on Tuesday, November 3, 2020

 

https://www.ncvoter.org/absentee-ballots/

Correct, mail-in voting is allowed, and should be encouraged.  I mean if it's good enough for the current occupant of the White House to use, it should be good enough for everyone.

My earlier point was that in-person voting is even more archaic than waiting to pay your taxes on the final day, since at least the latter allows from any location, while the former only your polling place. A nation created to escape living under taxation without representation as former colonies should never accept voting having more difficulty or restrictions than paying taxes.

[Durhamite]

No one does fear mongering better than the GOP and now little school boy Tuck has become their poster child.

Wait a minute.  So we can have welform reform,  usps reform, etc etc but can't reform the police?  It's quite obvious many of those organizations need a reset/pause button and doing more with less is kind of the GOP way isn't it....say, like a K-12 public school teacher.  I thought small gubment was a good thing?

I respect law enforcement officers and it can be dangerous job.  However, many have confused the protect and serve portion with bullying and authoritarianism.....flat out damn dangerous and should never have been given a damn badge or a gun.  Has it even occurred to anyone with an ounce of rational thought that when  a certain community doesn't want you around it's usually for a reason....not some conspiracy theory because people who live it really know the situation.

Somethings awry and if the current model isn't working, sht needs to transformed, reformed, defunded or whatever the hell you wanna call it.    And a SORRY ASS police chief should be first to go if they can't deal with...get to stepping so people who wanna do the job will do it.   Hopefully this is applicable for another high post gubment  gig  in a few months.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/06/12/camden-policing-reforms-313750

[urbanlover568]

2 hours ago, Durhamite said:

No one does fear mongering better than the GOP and now little school boy Tuck has become their poster child.

Wait a minute.  So we can have welform reform,  usps reform, etc etc but can't reform the police?  It's quite obvious many of those organizations need a reset/pause button and doing more with less is kind of the GOP way isn't it....say, like a K-12 public school teacher.  I thought small gubment was a good thing?

I respect law enforcement officers and it can be dangerous job.  However, many have confused the protect and serve portion with bullying and authoritarianism.....flat out damn dangerous and should never have been given a damn badge or a gun.  Has it even occurred to anyone with an ounce of rational thought that when  a certain community doesn't want you around it's usually for a reason....not some conspiracy theory because people who live it really know the situation.

Somethings awry and if the current model isn't working, sht needs to transformed, reformed, defunded or whatever the hell you wanna call it.    And a SORRY ASS police chief should be first to go if they can't deal with...get to stepping so people who wanna do the job will do it.   Hopefully this is applicable for another high post gubment  gig  in a few months.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/06/12/camden-policing-reforms-313750

 

[videtur quam contuor]

What the past few years of experience has taught me is that I should think before I make a call for the police. If this is a bona fide, serious, criminal issue needing immediate intervention, likely yes. Is this a neighbor or family member with mental or emotional issues? Is this a contravention of social or community norms? Is it something a slow cautious withdrawal would render moot? Am I part of the event myself? Could I enlist the help of others? Is there another way to deal with the issue? If yes, then leave 911 out of it.

Power dynamics requires that once an appeal to the power higher in the hierarchy is requested then the higher position owns the situation. I am no longer an intervenor. The police may (will) act as they wish without answer to my interests or desires. Same system as in an office, workplace, or elsewhere. When one asks for assistance from one in higher position then you thus cede all power to that person. That is implicit in power structures.

[urbanlover568]

Very sad

Very bizarre: 

 

Edited August 22, 2020 by urbanlover568

[kermit]

As we listen to fear mongering from the right it is important to keep in mind that violent crime is at generational lows and has been declining steadily since the early 1990s. This has been a demographically driven trend. 
 

Unfortunately our political environment and the media have caused the public to perceive that crime is increasing rather than declining. 

 https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/10/17/facts-about-crime-in-the-u-s/