Race riots in the US

Icewolf

Est. Contributor
Messages
461
Age
35
Role
Babyfur, Carer
It seems kind of racist to suggest I "keep in mind" that the bill was at least partly written by a black Republican, as if skin color should be a determining factor in deciding the merits of the bill.
It likely is a little bit racist, but in some cases it might be trying to head off "all of them are white" or point out the racists on the other side, ones that would make comments like he is an Oreo (more or less calling a black person white on the inside) or pull a Biden like comment (You ain't Black). There are many ways either side could put politics ahead of the other matters.

The Democrats' desire to draft a bipartisan bill, instead of voting on a Republican only bill, is the only thing that makes sense.
Sadly, it has gotten to the point where "Bipartisan" from the Democrats appears to mean more "we get what we want, you get little, if anything, of what you want." Even just a simple, we'll let the states decide on the banning of choke holds would go a long way to getting such a bill passed.

I have a good opinion of Nancy Pelosi
She has likely done good things for her state, and a fair job in the House, but to put a bit of light on her, and not trying for false equivalence here, she is one of those that has been in office too dang long and is one of those that those of us on the right that don't like Trump look at on the left and up seeing are like "uh, these are my choices? ugh.". It has been mentioned before that there are things that either side could do that would help relations with the other. Well, politician wise, it could be something like "you want us to dump Trump? get rid of Pelosi".

This is the state of politics in the US anymore, both parties are so entrenched that everything seems to have a politics first approach, and most of the people of the US are sick and tired of it.
 

Drifter

Contributor
Messages
3,035
Role
Private
Sadly, it has gotten to the point where "Bipartisan" from the Democrats appears to mean more "we get what we want, you get little, if anything, of what you want." Even just a simple, we'll let the states decide on the banning of choke holds would go a long way to getting such a bill passed.
I disagree on both points.
1. No matter which party any particular bill favors, all parties' votes count when it comes to passing a bill. A bill drafted by the majority party alone is pretty much guaranteed to be passed in the senate just on the votes of that party alone, barring a filibuster.

2. States have always had the authority to ban choke holds, but they haven't consistently banned them. Allowing chokeholds to remain legal has a direct impact on one of the more complex and contentious issues: Qualified Immunity. As far as I'm concerned, qualified immunity laws are ok as they stand since they don't protect people committing criminal acts, but we have to specify which acts are criminal.
 

Icewolf

Est. Contributor
Messages
461
Age
35
Role
Babyfur, Carer
. No matter which party any particular bill favors, all parties' votes count when it comes to passing a bill. A bill drafted by the majority party alone is pretty much guaranteed to be passed in the senate just on the votes of that party alone, barring a filibuster.
Somewhat disagree, all votes do count but even a single party bill, unless the majority of one party is big enough, is not a guaranteed pass. Like in the senate right now, if 4 republicans vote with the Democrats, the bill is dead. Also, the Democrats are the majority party in the House so they can technically do the same as the Republicans can do in the Senate. In this case though, it is the Democrats being able to say "look, we are trying to do something yet the Republicans are blocking us" and the Republicans can be like "The Democrats are sending us bills that have no chance of passing the Senate, let alone being signed into law by the President".

States have always had the authority to ban choke holds, but they haven't consistently banned them. Allowing chokeholds to remain legal has a direct impact on one of the more complex and contentious issues:
Agreed, but there are those of us that know or figure that if used properly, choke holds (also sometimes referred to as submission holds) are an easy way to subdue problematic suspects without killing them. This is another area where changes in training could help, as well as things like you said, some of what we need might not be police reform as much as Law reform.

Here is an article on the nature of 2 kinds of choke holds, and what is actually needed when deciding to use one or not: https://www.policemag.com/506561/unlocking-the-confusion-around-chokeholds

I'd say any police that use such indiscriminately or as a initial resort could easily be charged with manslaughter if not murder, but with others who use them as more last resorts, or at least last before reaching or trying the more dangerous methods (gun for instance) and do at least try to analyze the situation what is the best way to handle such?
 
Last edited:

DylanLewis

Est. Contributor
Messages
250
Role
Adult Baby
"you want us to dump Trump? get rid of Pelosi"
Icewolf

False equivalence (again). Trump took his party far to the racist, demogogic right. His legacy will be to discredit much of conservatism for a generation. Every time a conservative objects to a leftish policy in the future, the rejoinder will be "and where was your public objection" to the most egregious and cynical abuses of power by Trump.

None of the genuinely values based, genuinely patriotic conservatives or their leaders in the Republican party (such as Mitt Romney, John Bolton, or even Marco Rubio and their like [though I don't like the latter two) were able to stop Trump taking their party hostage and overturning most of the key values-based tenets of conservatism - fiscal probity; rule of law; genuine (not feigned) personal faith; respect for constitutional norms; meritocrasy in public administration; respect for a free press; free trade; the alliance of western democrasies; repudiation of vile dictators. Essentially they were powerless in the face of Trump's Faustian compact with the racist, xenophobic elements amongst the Republican base.

By contrast Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden have achieved what none of the Republican leaders could - they have held their party to the middle ground, and successfully resisted the temptation to respond to Trumpist extremism with extremism on the left. Under Trump's leadership the Republicans have forfeited the middle ground of politics and will pay the price for it. Now its time for Republicans to pay for their Faustian accommodation with Trumpism. You sold your souls and now the devil is coming to collect.

No deal. You keep Trump (your welcome to him) and the Democrats will keep Pelosi. We'll see how it pans out at the ballot box in November.

Regards. Dylan.
 
Last edited:

Icewolf

Est. Contributor
Messages
461
Age
35
Role
Babyfur, Carer
Dylan,
No deal. You keep Trump (your welcome to him) and the Democrats will keep Pelosi. We'll see how it pans out at the ballot box in November.
Fair enough, I was just using that as an example. Really one of the biggest issues I actually have with Pelosi is how long she has been in office. It really is time for her to at least pass the torch to one who has similar views but might be better at communicating them. It actually might be due to how long she has been in office/her age that explains at least some of her gaffs, like the accusation even you admitted was not a constructive contribution.

There are likely as many republicans, like McConnell, that could also be pointed at as reasons for term limits, point I was trying to make was there are those on both sides that the other side, for one reason or another, absolutely hates and are seen more as blocks to what needs to be done, only reason I used Trump in the example is because I have no say in if McConnell gets reelected or not.

Remember, I have even stated that I am in favor of breaking the parties up, things like what Trump has done are the reason why. It would not surprise me if there were democrats that were not happy with their leadership and wanted to break away from the Democratic party but not join the Republicans. This year could be the end of one, or both, parties as we know them, I just hope that whatever happens in November, the country, and possibly the world, are ready for it.
 
Last edited:

DylanLewis

Est. Contributor
Messages
250
Role
Adult Baby
Dylan,


Fair enough, I was just using that as an example. Really one of the biggest issues I actually have with Pelosi is how long she has been in office. It really is time for her to at least pass the torch to one who has similar views but might be better at communicating them. It actually might be due to how long she has been in office/her age that explains at least some of her gaffs, like the accusation even you admitted was not a constructive contribution.

There are likely as many republicans, like McConnell, that could also be pointed at as reasons for term limits, point I was trying to make was there are those on both sides that the other side, for one reason or another, absolutely hates and are seen more as blocks to what needs to be done, only reason I used Trump in the example is because I have no say in if McConnell gets reelected or not.
Icewolf

I kind of understand and support your sentiment, in as much as it expresses a laudable desire for people of either side to go beyond partisanship.

But I disagree with your view about how that desire is best translated into action. I don't support term limits for elected officials (with the exception of the US President). Government, especially in a country as large, diverse and powerful as the USA is a complex business. It terms of the skills, knowledge and commitment required, it is a profession - in the best sense of the term, a vocation. It should be a profession/vocation subject to the electoral process and meritocrasy within party structures, recruited from people with diverse backgrounds, and open to renewal as circumstances and public opinion require and permit. Without prescribing such, some form of apprenticeship is essential for those who reach higher office. One of the worst things to happen in US politics is the deriding of the virtue and necessity of experience in government (both sides did it, with the Tea Party on the right, and the insurgent Bernie-AOC wing for the left). That is a sign of a self defeating populism and demogogues.

The leaders of the House and Senate would be incredibly demanding positions, requiring years of a preparatory career in government to successfully fulfill. This is a time of national crisis for the USA. Especially now, the first requirement in those jobs is competence. Trump is the embodiment of what happens when that requirement is not observed. Everything else fails for want of competence. As a progressive I (really, really) revile McConnell for his intransigent partisanship. But I don't doubt his mastery of his job. If it wasn't McConnell it would have to be someone like him. And as a self interested realist McConnell will respond to changes in the public climate. Changing the climate (towards something less partisan and more constructive) will change McConnells behaviour. Changing the person in McConnell's job without the change in the public climate won't produce anything. (And in the battle within the post Trump Republican Party between the racist, xenophobic alt right and values based conservatism, McConnell will line up - pragmatically - with the latter.)

Similarly, holding the Democrat coalition together and not letting the ultra-progressives blow themselves and the Party up, is not a job for the well meaning neophyte.

In crisis, the first requirement is competence. And this is a time of crisis with a capital 'C'. Right now, both sides need their competent experienced leaders. Hopefully they will be responding to a changed public climate.

So, long story short, I endorse your impetus towards less partisanship, just have a different view on how that plays out.

Regards. Dylan.
 

Icewolf

Est. Contributor
Messages
461
Age
35
Role
Babyfur, Carer
Dylan,
Right now, both sides need their competent experienced leaders. Hopefully they will be responding to a changed public climate.
Agreed, however there is the issue with things like senility and being jaded. Both of these things can have an affect on perceived competence. Add to that the idea that after so long, they should at least take a term or 2 break and reconnect with the people they are representing. Like with the crisis going on, if they had that, they might have had a better view of what was going on as far as racial relations in their own states/areas.
 

Drifter

Contributor
Messages
3,035
Role
Private
Somewhat disagree, all votes do count but even a single party bill, unless the majority of one party is big enough, is not a guaranteed pass. Like in the senate right now, if 4 republicans vote with the Democrats, the bill is dead.
Democrats don't want a "dead" bill!

They want the bill presented by the house to be debated and passed in the senate. Compromises may have to be made, but the bill presented by senate Republicans isn't a compromise; it's a fundamentally altered version of the house bill that negates the intent of the original, which was to address the problem of law enforcement officers abusing their authority through tactics that are currently legal. A federal tracking system for offenders, as proposed in both Republican and Democrat versions, can only be effective if we give the laws some teeth, which the Republican version fails to do. Without laws making specific acts illegal, a tracking system would be useless. At the very least it would have to be made illegal to hire a law enforcement officer who's name was in the system, and anyone convicted of hiring an offender would not only lose their job, but also have their name added to the system to prevent them from ever working in law enforcement again.

If we don't make laws making specific behaviors illegal, exactly what would a such tracking system track? Do we base it on the number of complaints received for an individual officer? Would it be fair to all law enforcement officers that they may forfeit their entire careers based only on complaints that were not investigated to the extent they would have been if investigators were looking for specific evidence of specific crimes? The Democrat version is all about legal accountability. Without that the system would be no more effective than the system many church authorities used for dealing with pedophiles.

If senate Republicans do the right thing, they will pass the house bill pretty much as it is, and override a presidential veto if necessary. Whether or not some specific methods involving chokeholds would be acceptable can be debated, and compromises can be made.
 
Last edited:

TB333

Est. Contributor
Messages
273
Role
Diaper Lover, Carer
Last edited:

SoCalIncon

Contributor
Messages
131
Role
Incontinent
Icewolf

False equivalence (again). Trump took his party far to the racist, demogogic right. His legacy will be to discredit much of conservatism for a generation. Every time a conservative objects to a leftish policy in the future, the rejoinder will be "and where was your public objection" to the most egregious and cynical abuses of power by Trump.

None of the genuinely values based, genuinely patriotic conservatives or their leaders in the Republican party (such as Mitt Romney, John Bolton, or even Marco Rubio and their like [though I don't like the latter two) were able to stop Trump taking their party hostage and overturning most of the key values-based tenets of conservatism - fiscal probity; rule of law; genuine (not feigned) personal faith; respect for constitutional norms; meritocrasy in public administration; respect for a free press; free trade; the alliance of western democrasies; repudiation of vile dictators. Essentially they were powerless in the face of Trump's Faustian compact with the racist, xenophobic elements amongst the Republican base.

By contrast Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden have achieved what none of the Republican leaders could - they have held their party to the middle ground, and successfully resisted the temptation to respond to Trumpist extremism with extremism on the left. Under Trump's leadership the Republicans have forfeited the middle ground of politics and will pay the price for it. Now its time for Republicans to pay for their Faustian accommodation with Trumpism. You sold your souls and now the devil is coming to collect.

No deal. You keep Trump (your welcome to him) and the Democrats will keep Pelosi. We'll see how it pans out at the ballot box in November.

Regards. Dylan.
Biden spent 40 years in govt and his biggest bill was the 3 strikes and you're out crime bill that led to the mass incarceration of blacks. He also called Obama a real articulate fella, as if being black and articulate is a surprising combination. He later said you need a slight Indian accent to go to 7/11.

Biden is every bit as racist and egotistical as trump. He's a big mouthed bully who faked his academic credentials and made a career as a habitual liar and and fraud.

Biden is much more racist than trump and you can excuse or ignore his actual record all you want. Your historical revisionism notwithstanding, to claim pelosi or Biden are "middle ground" rather than very far left is laughable.

It probably won't matter as Biden will be replaced as the Dems candidate since he clearly suffers from dementia....not something I'm making fun of as I've lost people I love to Alzheimer's. However he's very obviously not fit for office. I do not like him or his policies one but but I don't wish dementia on anyone or get any joy out of witnessing his suffering.
 

dogboy

Est. Contributor
Messages
20,832
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover
Biden doesn't suffer from Alzheimer's disease. He actually has a stuttering problem. This is why his speaking sometimes falters. That certainly doesn't disqualify him to be president. Perhaps Trump can make fun of his stuttering just as he made fun of the reporter's physical disability.

I've often thought that instead of having term limits (which we don't have) there should be a mandatory retirement age for politicians. A lot of businesses have that so it's not an alien idea. Of course, that would disqualify both Trump, Biden, Nancy Pelosi and many, many others.
 

quarktheory

Est. Contributor
Messages
88
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Incontinent
There is a lot wrong with police departments and governments that allow harm to their citizens.
i remember an incident that happened over 12 years ago, where a young man was shot in the back and murdered by local police. The officer saw the individual cutting across a field which the officer felt was suspicious , he stopped his vehicle,drew his gun , yelled at the young man to halt, and when he didn’t comply the officer shot him to death.
at face value it might seem iffy, but consider the young man was deaf and had his back to the officer the whole time.
both officer and the young man were white, the shooting was considered a good shoot and no charges were pursued.
i wonder why pull the gun first? , where is the threat? Why not use the radio that we as taxpayers provide.
 

SoCalIncon

Contributor
Messages
131
Role
Incontinent
Biden doesn't suffer from Alzheimer's disease. He actually has a stuttering problem. This is why his speaking sometimes falters. That certainly doesn't disqualify him to be president. Perhaps Trump can make fun of his stuttering just as he made fun of the reporter's physical disability.

I've often thought that instead of having term limits (which we don't have) there should be a mandatory retirement age for politicians. A lot of businesses have that so it's not an alien idea. Of course, that would disqualify both Trump, Biden, Nancy Pelosi and many, many others.
I'm not talking about his stuttering I'm talking about him not knowing what city he's in or who he's running against ...he recently went on about beating Joe Biden in the election. 38% of voters and 20% of Dem voters think he has dementia according to this poll.https://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2020/38_of_voters_think_biden_has_dementia

Which I'm sure you will dismiss bc it's Rasmussen even though they're the only pollsters that were anywhere near right in 2016....
 

SissyatHeart

Est. Contributor
Messages
91
Age
19
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Little
Biden doesn't suffer from Alzheimer's disease. He actually has a stuttering problem. This is why his speaking sometimes falters. That certainly doesn't disqualify him to be president. Perhaps Trump can make fun of his stuttering just as he made fun of the reporter's physical disability.

I've often thought that instead of having term limits (which we don't have) there should be a mandatory retirement age for politicians. A lot of businesses have that so it's not an alien idea. Of course, that would disqualify both Trump, Biden, Nancy Pelosi and many, many others.
I'm sorry, I really don't like to butt in because it never does anything productive, but your post is laughable. I don't think Biden believing he is running for Senate instead of the presidency is stuttering, its dementia. The man in his current state is a useless shell in comparison to whom he used to be. If you look back on the way Biden used to talk and articulate compared to the mumbo jumbo that he chokes on in the nowadays, it is very evident that his brain isn't ticking right.

And Trump didn't make fun of the disabled reporter. He has a history of doing that very same move to many different people including a general and Ted Cruz, neither of whom are disabled.
 

tiny

Est. Contributor
Messages
5,440
Role
Little
And Trump didn't make fun of the disabled reporter. He has a history of doing that very same move to many different people including a general and Ted Cruz, neither of whom are disabled.
That just makes it worse. Mocking cerebral palsy is a well-known trope.


In the primary schools of 1980s England, children insulted each other with the word "spastic", just like kids of the 1990s called each other "gay".

It's terrible enough to make fun of cerebral palsy and imply that "many different people including Ted Cruz" are "spastics"... But to do that to someone who actually has cerebral palsy is simply disgraceful.

It's not like Trump doesn't have a history of spreading hate and bigotry. Such consistency isn't an accident. That's the kind of person Trump is.
 

tiny

Est. Contributor
Messages
5,440
Role
Little
Biden will be replaced as the Dems candidate since he clearly suffers from dementia....not something I'm making fun of as I've lost people I love to Alzheimer's. However he's very obviously not fit for office.
Trump is obviously unfit for office, but that hasn't stopped him.

His latest achievements include drinking a glass of water with only one hand! No one thought he could do it after so many failures, but wow! The president drank from a real glass! Just like a big boy!

He's been slurring so badly in several press conferences that he appears to be under the influence of hard drugs. And he's been deluded with conspiracy theories, including bleach cures for Covid-19. He's regularly made racist Tweets and supported neo-Nazi groups. In the last two days, he's tweeted a video of one of his supporters shouting "white power" and another of his supporters pointing guns at peaceful protestors. Trump is a dangerous lunatic.

I know nothing about Biden, but if the only things against him is that he's got dementia and can't string a sentence together, then he'll be a lot more capable qualified and articulate than Trump is.
 

SissyatHeart

Est. Contributor
Messages
91
Age
19
Role
Adult Baby, Diaper Lover, Little
That just makes it worse. Mocking cerebral palsy is a well-known trope.


In the primary schools of 1980s England, children insulted each other with the word "spastic", just like kids of the 1990s called each other "gay".

It's terrible enough to make fun of cerebral palsy and imply that "many different people including Ted Cruz" are "spastics"... But to do that to someone who actually has cerebral palsy is simply disgraceful.

It's not like Trump doesn't have a history of spreading hate and bigotry. Such consistency isn't an accident. That's the kind of person Trump is.
I'm not saying Trump's disability trope is in good taste, I'm saying he didn't plan and perpetrate the trope against the reporter simply because he's handicapped like that lovely CNN video would like you to believe. He's been doing it for at least fifteen years if not longer.

Oh, and by the way, the reporter doesn't have cerebral palsy. Just thought you might like to know that since you obviously have a warped perception of the world and "evil orange man". You even said it yourself, you know nothing about Biden. That to me says that you really don't care to establish a comparison between view points and politicians to find middle ground. For that reason there is no point in arguing with you because you will never listen to or even consider the other side. Good day. Please do some homework besides reading "Orange Man Bad 101." It might do you some good. And remember folks,

"If you have a problem figuring out whether if you're for me or Trump then you ain't black."
-Sleepy Joe, 2020

In other news, liberal cities across America are falling apart: The police free zone has another shooting, New York justice system is imploding, businesses are fleeing the socialist Utopia of Seattle, and democrats are responsible for the countries most violent cities. But ya, those racist conservatives sure are problematic. If only that had segregated areas like those peaceful protesters do in chaz! Because that's not racist at all.

1593492641087.png
 

TB333

Est. Contributor
Messages
273
Role
Diaper Lover, Carer
I'm not saying Trump's disability trope is in good taste, I'm saying he didn't plan and perpetrate the trope against the reporter simply because he's handicapped like that lovely CNN video would like you to believe. He's been doing it for at least fifteen years if not longer.

Oh, and by the way, the reporter doesn't have cerebral palsy. Just thought you might like to know that since you obviously have a warped perception of the world and "evil orange man". You even said it yourself, you know nothing about Biden. That to me says that you really don't care to establish a comparison between view points and politicians to find middle ground. For that reason there is no point in arguing with you because you will never listen to or even consider the other side. Good day. Please do some homework besides reading "Orange Man Bad 101." It might do you some good. And remember folks,

"If you have a problem figuring out whether if you're for me or Trump then you ain't black."
-Sleepy Joe, 2020

In other news, liberal cities across America are falling apart: The police free zone has another shooting, New York justice system is imploding, businesses are fleeing the socialist Utopia of Seattle, and democrats are responsible for the countries most violent cities. But ya, those racist conservatives sure are problematic. If only that had segregated areas like those peaceful protesters do in chaz! Because that's not racist at all.

View attachment 42454
Why would anyone want to debate you anyway? Your the first to accuse any left leaning poster of being a bad actor and seem to want to derail threads. Your only posts are conspiracy theories, lies and misconstrued data and statistics, most of it being stuff trump said. The irony of your accusing Tiny is your argument boils down to "orange man good, liberals bad"

And did you even read the article that pics from?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...-america-are-all-run-by-democrats-they-arent/
It disagrees with you.

This is a mature board for mature discussions not 4chan.
So why dont you respect this community more, regard facts and dont be so antagonistic.
 
Last edited:

OldeHoss

Est. Contributor
Messages
132
Role
Incontinent
Biden doesn't suffer from Alzheimer's disease. He actually has a stuttering problem. This is why his speaking sometimes falters. That certainly doesn't disqualify him to be president. Perhaps Trump can make fun of his stuttering just as he made fun of the reporter's physical disability.

I've often thought that instead of having term limits (which we don't have) there should be a mandatory retirement age for politicians. A lot of businesses have that so it's not an alien idea. Of course, that would disqualify both Trump, Biden, Nancy Pelosi and many, many others.
Stuttering is a mechanical, perhaps a neurologically-induced problem.
Biden's utter inability to formulate/articulate thoughts in a cohesive and rational manner, clearly indicates something far more dire going on with his brain housing group. Some sort of senility. Anyone who's been watching/listening to this man's orations, especially over the past two years, can't help but acknowledge the man has something very, very wrong going on.
I pity him at this point, for many reasons. I'm even more irritated that the Democratic Party continues promoting him as a POTUS Candidate. There's no doubt in my mind they're using him as a puppet, and whomever is chosen as the V.P. will truly be the one pulling the strings (if Biden is actually elected).
 

OldeHoss

Est. Contributor
Messages
132
Role
Incontinent
There is a lot wrong with police departments and governments that allow harm to their citizens.
i remember an incident that happened over 12 years ago, where a young man was shot in the back and murdered by local police. The officer saw the individual cutting across a field which the officer felt was suspicious , he stopped his vehicle,drew his gun , yelled at the young man to halt, and when he didn’t comply the officer shot him to death.
at face value it might seem iffy, but consider the young man was deaf and had his back to the officer the whole time.
both officer and the young man were white, the shooting was considered a good shoot and no charges were pursued.
i wonder why pull the gun first? , where is the threat? Why not use the radio that we as taxpayers provide.
I call that 'Murder-under-color-of-Authority' (having nothing to do with the LEO's or victim's skin color).
You don't bring lethal force into the engagement unless it's justified. Someone walking, not brandishing a weapon or threatening anyone/anything, is hardly justification for drawing a service weapon, much-less using it to kill the Citizen.
THIS is the reason society has such a level of distrust/disgust/outrage, against our inept Law Enforcement.
 
Top