General US Politics Discussion

[ṼirulenⱦEqừinox]

 

So their justification for saying they are protesting the shooting of all the innocent blacks is nothing more then a fad so they act as if they are current when they aren't

Yeah no, don't go trying to refute points no one is making.

Actually that is the point people are making and claiming why they are protesting, They are protesting the killing of innocent people by Police because of a few high profiled incidents this year they are focusing on a few with tunnel vision instead of looking at the this as a whole

[Clem Fandango]

Exactly how many innocent black people have to be killed before it becomes worth protesting? At any rate, it's not the killings themselves, it's more that the killings are symtomatic of deeper problems you guys have with interacting with black people and black communities. Which is IMO just a more extreme expression of the police's inability to function as anything more than a ragtag band of enforcers.

 

And again, you think Black Lives Matter is ridiculous because only a few dozen black people have been murdered by police, but Blue Lives Matter is in response to like literally nothing. Politicians saying you should chill the f*ck out? Better create your own flag and form a 'movement' based around hostility to everyone that isn't a cop. Most cops aren't killing people, but most cops support the killings after the fact and take to social media ranting about "if I'd'a been there!"

 

And yeah, 700 people a year is f*cking insane and only 'justified' by American law. A great deal of those killings would not pass muster in other countries, where the police shoot between zero and ten people a year.

[Eutyphro]

Compare the ratio of black people killed to white people, and you see a problem.

Well, 12% of the country is responsible for over half of all murders.

 

I mean, would you say that the fact that crime statistics are overwhelmingly dominated by men, that it's generally men who are fatally shot by police, and generally men who end up in jail, indicates discrimination against men? You wouldn't, and no sane person would. The mere fact of a different outcome doesn't self evidently imply discrimination.

[Clem Fandango]

 

Compare the ratio of black people killed to white people, and you see a problem.

Well, 12% of the country is responsible for over half of all murders.

Yeah because black gangs control the drug trade and the drug trade is the most violently competitive criminal enterprise. It's pretty easy to explain, as is the prevalence of police shooting black people: they view it as their job to corral black people and view them as a permanent threat to 'respectable people.'

 

I mean are you denying that American police shoot black people all the time on flimsy grounds? What point are you making?

[Eutyphro]

What point are you making?

The point I'm making is clear. If you fail to grasp it you should try harder.

 

It's not unlikely dubious cases of racial profiling are practised, but it's not self evident from statistics that the police in its entirety as an organization is racist. Furthermore, noone is helped by undermining the police through the sort of stupid fact free rhetoric you and others throw out. Murder rates in many cities have shot through the roof since BLM became prominent. As it turns out, if you stop policing young black men won't suddenly stop shooting each other.

 

BLM have completely failed to achieve anything positive whatsoever. I understand such a movement exists, considering the disparities and issues that exist. But they fail being honest about the obvious excessive crime problems in their community, and blame it all on the status quo.

[Clem Fandango]

Shootings unarmed black people for no reason = dubious racial profiling? But like I said, the murders are just a springboard for broader issues facing the black community.

 

How are black activists not honest about the crime in their communities, as well? If there's a conference about gang violence you can bet the farm that it's full of black activists- the same sort that make up BLM- and not concern trolling white people from across town. To the extent that there's a movement against gang violence, it's a black movement of black activists and is an arm of their overall activist community.

 

I have no idea how BLM are responsible for increased murder rates. Because police don't want to be video taped knocking peoples' teeth out with their truncheons so they don't do their jobs? It's their problem if they can't do their job while under scrutiny. Maybe they should try behaving themselves?

[Piggsy pls]

 

What point are you making?

The point I'm making is clear. If you fail to grasp it you should try harder.

 

It's not unlikely dubious cases of racial profiling are practised, but it's not self evident from statistics that the police in its entirety as an organization is racist. Furthermore, noone is helped by undermining the police through the sort of stupid fact free rhetoric you and others throw out. Murder rates in many cities have shot through the roof since BLM became prominent. As it turns out, if you stop policing young black men won't suddenly stop shooting each other.

 

BLM have completely failed to achieve anything positive whatsoever. I understand such a movement exists, considering the disparities and issues that exist. But they fail being honest about the obvious excessive crime problems in their community, and blame it all on the status quo.

The issue is also that cops who do shoot innocent black people go largely unpunished for it. You can complain about black people shooting other black people all day, but at least you can be guaranteed they'll go to jail for doing it.

[Eutyphro]

Shootings unarmed black people for no reason = dubious racial profiling?

Not necessarily. ​The Washington Post had an article where they mentioned a range of cases of unarmed white offenders being shot, that received no media attention. It's not obvious that when the police shoot completely unprovoked they do so on the basis of race. That generally remains contentious.

 

'Dubious racial profiling' is complex, and generally not discussed openly, but there have been instances where police practice it. The example where police targeted groups of North African men on new years eve in Germany a year after the sexual assaults is such a case. It's highly dubious, but it did succeed in preventing repeating what happened the previous year.

 

Profiling is also sometimes necessary. When the police is looking for a suspect of a certain race, they will not stop and question people who do not conform to the profile of the suspect they look for. This causes non-whites ('minorities' is a stupid term) to be questioned by police a lot, which has a damaging and stigmatizing effect. Policing is not an exact science really, obviously. Do you think the police should target old ladies as often as young men? Well, you seem to think the police should disappear, but that's a whole different issue.

 

I have no idea how BLM are responsible for increased murder rates.

They could be responsible, as in, an unwilling influence. If the reputation of the police becomes so terrible due to mainstream media reporting, that they're unable to police certain communities, then rising murder rates seem to be a logical consequence.

 

The issue is also that cops who do shoot innocent black people go largely unpunished for it. You can complain about black people shooting other black people all day, but at least you can be guaranteed they'll go to jail for doing it.

Sure, and especially the Philando Castile case seemed to me such a case, where it was disgraceful how conservative media handled the case. I don't disagree with that.

 

But at the same time, and this may sound controversial, it is hard to expect a police force to consistently enforce the highest moral standards possible, if citizens in that society fail to uphold those standards. The police are a result of the society they live in. If it is a society with large amounts of cynical crime, where guns are abundant, and officers themselves are often shot, then in practice this will compromise the moral standards of the police. And that does not mean that we should defend completely unprovoked police murder, or any other type of misconduct, obviously. But it's merely a sense of realism. Policing is a difficult job. And the fact that it is a job with such low social status and pay, and in many cases so challenging, almost logically results in incompetence.

Edited September 30, 2017 by Eutyphro

[Tchuck]

You hit the nail on the head with this:

 

 

The police are a result of the society they live in

 

And this is the issue that movements like BLM and the kneeling protests are trying to bring to the forefront. Police brutality against minorities is just a symptom of a deeper issue that is going on with society. It is arguably the most visible symptom, since everyone can directly see the results of it. America has deep issues based on race, which further creates inequality and division.

[Eutyphro]

Police brutality against minorities is just a symptom of a deeper issue that is going on with society. It is arguably the most visible symptom,

I don't intend to be pedantic, but it's not. Compared to other forms of criminal practices it is vanishingly rare. It's the most visible symptom in mainstream news reporting, maybe.

[Tchuck]

Well yeah, that's what I meant. It's the one that white folks will be more exposed to, since it'll get the most air time. They aren't in touch with the conditions of public schools with a black majority, with the business difficulties faced by minorities etc.

[sivispacem]

 

Compare the ratio of black people killed to white people, and you see a problem.

Well, 12% of the country is responsible for over half of all murders.I still have yet to discern why this assertion is at all relevant when questioning the ethnic/racial disparity of victims of officer involved killings. As far as I can determine it's a complete non sequitur.

[Eutyphro]

And yet you don't think the idea that disparity in outcome necessarily implies discrimination is questionable, or in need of evidence. Because your analysis isn't really informed by logic. The idea that issues of criminal justice can be understood with logical necessity is silly anyway.

[sivispacem]

And yet you don't think the idea that disparity in outcome necessarily implies discrimination is questionable

The degree to which it can be held directly or indirectly accountable is open to debate and somewhat circumstance dependent, but the notion itself of disparity being symptomatic of discrimination is difficult to dispute. This doesn't just apply to racial or religious discrimination, but social and economic discrimination too.

 

Because your analysis isn't really informed by logic.

Physician, heal thyself. Can't help but notice this sh*tty Segway-cum-tu-quoque-cum-ad-hominem doesn't really constitute a real response to my questioning of the validity of comparing murder rates amongst ethnic groups to fatal police shooting rates, which is frankly silly.

 

The idea that issues of criminal justice can be understood with logical necessity is silly anyway.

Nice straw man.

[Triple Vacuum Seal]

they are disrespecting the military not the police, not the "racist" but those who fought and died for them to have the freedom to kneel.

 

Lol. That is not why they die. The humor is appreciated nonetheless.

 

 

The police may take a lot of sh*t indeed. But it's a symptom of the legal system's mistreatment of African Americans and the poor. Perhaps the interests of individual policemen and the African-American public can actually converge. Many of the laws they are enforcing disproportionately impact blacks and the poor. So of course black people frown on their presence. Being the men of such bravery and fortitude that they claim to be, perhaps cops will grow the political spine necessary to actively criticize their unions' efforts expand the drug war and militarize their forces. They should otherwise grow accustomed to this lack of public trust.

[Creed Bratton]

For those of you who think that Russia isn't trying to destroy the US from within:

 

[Spaghetti Cat]

Literally have no clue what you're trying to say there. Boo Russia I guess?

 

 

 

 

Anywho, some major damage done to Puerto Rico, St. Thomas, and St. Croix from Hurricane Maria. There's probably some Hurricane fatigue going around, but if you can give please do so. We did this for Hurricane Harvey, so if you're looking for a good charity FEMA has some good resources:

 

https://www.fema.gov/news-release/2017/09/22/how-help-after-hurricane-maria

 

and

 

https://www.nvoad.org/howtohelp/donate/

 

Sending my best to those down there and a big thanks to those helping out.

[make total destroy]

For those of you who think that Russia isn't trying to destroy the US from within:

 

The 'Boston Antifa' trolls are from Oregon, though.

[Creed Bratton]

Literally have no clue what you're trying to say there. Boo Russia I guess?

There have been stories and theories that Russia is the driving force behind the rise of the alt-right and the AntiFa. They're the ones sowing chaos and dividing your country socially and racially. This tweet demonstrates that at least a part of that is true.

 

Also: http://www.thedailybeast.com/exclusive-russians-impersonated-real-american-muslims-to-stir-chaos-on-facebook-and-instagram

 

And isn't it funny how Trump seems to be doing exactly what Russia wants?

Edited September 28, 2017 by The Yokel

[Clem Fandango]

 

Literally have no clue what you're trying to say there. Boo Russia I guess?

There have been stories and theories that Russia is the driving force behind the rise of the alt-right and the AntiFa. They're the ones sowing chaos and dividing your country socially and racially. This tweet demonstrates that at least a part of that is true.

The development of the alt-right is pretty well understood from what I've seen. So is the rise of Trump for that matter, so I don't know what it is with the Russian conspiracy theories. I mean I do know, it's an attempt to shift blame away from the DNC, but I don't know why you're parroting them.

[Creed Bratton]

 

 

Literally have no clue what you're trying to say there. Boo Russia I guess?

There have been stories and theories that Russia is the driving force behind the rise of the alt-right and the AntiFa. They're the ones sowing chaos and dividing your country socially and racially. This tweet demonstrates that at least a part of that is true.

The development of the alt-right is pretty well understood from what I've seen. So is the rise of Trump for that matter, so I don't know what it is with the Russian conspiracy theories. I mean I do know, it's an attempt to shift blame away from the DNC, but I don't know why you're parroting them.

I'm not saying that Russians created the alt-right, or that the DNC is innocent. The thing is, Russia definitely assisted the alt-right and it helped to bring them to the mainstream. Everybody knows that r/The_Donald, Twitter and Facebook were full of Russian bots during the election.

[Tchuck]

 

I'm not saying that Russians created the alt-right, or that the DNC is innocent. The thing is, Russia definitely assisted the alt-right and it helped to bring them to the mainstream. Everybody knows that r/The_Donald, Twitter and Facebook were full of Russian bots during the election.

 

I think you're giving Russian trolls/bots way too much credit. By and large, this election was the Democrat's to lose. Choosing Hillary made it easier to lose, but they really went for it by not campaigning properly and playing up to the social media, while Trump was there on the rust belt and other key areas telling people what they wanted to hear. No wonder he got most of the swing states, even if the margins were razor thin.

 

The rise of the alt-right is no surprise either. I think you and most other left-wing people were oblivious as to what had already been happening in the alt-right prior to the election. Breitbart, Stormfront, sections of Reddit/4chan were already pretty active and galvanized in their approach. What we're seeing now is just a result of having someone like Trump in power, who is legitimizing them by being less condemning of their actions. Russians had very little to do with it all. It was all America's own arrogance.

[Creed Bratton]

 

 

I'm not saying that Russians created the alt-right, or that the DNC is innocent. The thing is, Russia definitely assisted the alt-right and it helped to bring them to the mainstream. Everybody knows that r/The_Donald, Twitter and Facebook were full of Russian bots during the election.

 

I think you're giving Russian trolls/bots way too much credit. By and large, this election was the Democrat's to lose. Choosing Hillary made it easier to lose, but they really went for it by not campaigning properly and playing up to the social media, while Trump was there on the rust belt and other key areas telling people what they wanted to hear. No wonder he got most of the swing states, even if the margins were razor thin.

 

The rise of the alt-right is no surprise either. I think you and most other left-wing people were oblivious as to what had already been happening in the alt-right prior to the election. Breitbart, Stormfront, sections of Reddit/4chan were already pretty active and galvanized in their approach. What we're seeing now is just a result of having someone like Trump in power, who is legitimizing them by being less condemning of their actions. Russians had very little to do with it all. It was all America's own arrogance.

Not the point. It's not about the elections, it's about what Russia is STILL actively doing. They're waging a new kind of war against the US. A lot of Trump supporters think that Russia is their friend. And because Trump keeps denying Russia's involvement in US politics, they deny it too.

 

Now look at this: https://www.cnet.com/news/russian-linked-twitter-accounts-stoked-nfl-anthem-debate/

 

Like I said in the initial post on this subject, they're trying to sow chaos and to further divide the US. It seems to be working. And Trump is actively helping them by doing the exact same thing.

[Tchuck]

Right, but Twitter and Facebook is also full of people who already believed those things with or without alleged Russian intervention. Well before the elections, well before the scandals and whatnot. My point is that I think you are overestimating the effectiveness of these alleged Russian actions. No-one uses Twitter/Facebook to change their opinions.

 

The US already IS divided, and it divided itself without Russia's help. The social media is just a reflection of what the society already is. If anything, these "interventions" by Russia are just making America show its true colors.

Edited September 28, 2017 by Tchuck

[Creed Bratton]

I wouldn't underestimate them. We don't know how deep their efforts go. This is just surface level stuff.

[Triple Vacuum Seal]

The Kremlin is certainly fanning the flames on both sides of the political fringe but overwhelmingly on the alt-right by digitally spreading the alt-right narrative in any way that might overlap with Russia's interests (especially US isolationism). Most of the leftist agitation from the Kremlin is limited to undermining the US' moral image, especially in comparison to Russia, and generating doubts about our electoral process. So it's hardly leftist, just counter right or polarizimg in general. All of these efforts are merely pushing already existing trends and tensions. So I wouldn't give them much credit either. 'The Russians' are surely scapegoats for our failures, but their interventions are far from conspiracy theories because it's rather customary to agitate the political tensions in a rival nation. Everyone does it.

 

 

At any rate this manipulation of fringe rivals by the Kremlin is all more prevalent in Europe.

Edited September 29, 2017 by Triple Vacuum Seal

[Saggy]

And yeah, 700 people a year is f*cking insane and only 'justified' by American law. A great deal of those killings would not pass muster in other countries, where the police shoot between zero and ten people a year.

 

To me this is the real issue at heart and it has been co-opted by people on both sides of a racial divide that want to point to it as evidence of contentions they've made. So BLM activists who feel like black people in general face institutionalized racism in America flocked right to it, and basically seized the entire police-shooting issue as one that was a "black" issue, and then once they had to concede it was effecting all races then they had to call it a "predominantly" black issue, and then so on until we're at the point where we're comparing ratios of statistics for how often a black person is shot by the cops versus how often a white person is shot by the cops, and losing total sight of the bigger picture: There's too many people being shot by the cops.

 

Now I don't say any of that out of contempt for BLM or black activists in general, because I do think this is an issue that does effect them more, but it is compounded by black issues in general. This is a feature for many minorities, and it goes beyond class and even gender. If people think that black men being shot by the police is a big deal, I'm sure a lot of the black women in our society could tell you about a lot of their own special circumstances too. When everyone gets so self-internalized and only acknowledges those issues which also effects themselves, it makes us lose sight of the issues which are a common factor for all, and breeds divisiveness. Because of that, BLM is very much the catalyst for a huge racial divide, though I don't think this was ever an intention or some underhanded Democrat plot like some idiots in this country contend.

 

What was very unfortunate was when the term "All Lives Matter" was co-opted by the conservative right. Initially the point being made when this was coined, was that this is an issue that is effecting everybody, and that everybody's life was more deserving of protection than what we've offered it. However, the people who had already been alienated by BLM's seizure of the issue, themselves seized that phrase almost immediately and corrupted it to be in direct opposition to BLM. This tarnished the original meaning to the point now where "All Lives Matter" is more of a term to dismiss and demean the BLM movement, and became part of the right-wingers vernacular of buzz terms.

 

But I do think that the original ideology behind All Lives Matter is what we ought to be considering when we talk about police brutality in this country. These alienating notions that it's really a black issue are a slap in the face to every white, brown or yellow person that's suffered the same injustices in society, and I do think that it's undeniable that the media has a hyper-focus on these incidents when it's happened to a black citizen versus when it happens to any other ethnicity. If the news were to make a huge fiasco about every questionable police shooting, then there would literally be one for every day, and every single race and ethnicity in the country would be represented. The truth is that of the people actually disproportionately effected by police protocol, race is no where near the most common factor. Obviously the most common factor is poverty.

 

I think conflating the issues of systemic racism and police brutality is at the same time more alienating than what this country can withstand, but at the same time it is essential for understanding and facing the truth. The true predicament we are in is that nobody can agree on what is "fact", so instead of sitting down to talk about how we can reduce this massive loss of life at the hands of law enforcement, we just bicker along racial divides which are loftily propped up and supported by whatever cherry-picked interpretation of data and statistics is required to make the respective point. The stats can be juked and distorted to show how police are killing a disproportionate amount of black people, and the same data can be presented to demonstrate most of the homicide in the country is from black people. The grain of truth in both presentations is usually not sought out by anyone, but rather they pick a side and stick to it.

 

The point that American police, in supposedly the most free and most developed country in the world, kill almost 10 times as many people than in other developed nations, seems to fall flat. It's no wonder when most people are too distracted arguing with each other about who is more likely to be shot, rather than if we should be authorizing the very people we pay taxes to "protect us" with near impunity to kill and/or beat us. I've said it before but it's almost like we do not want "equal rights" but rather "equal oppression" because you end up hearing people suggest that it's totally justified for a police officer to shoot someone for holding a butter knife or something like that, when in practically any other country in the world that thought would sound asinine. We're literally so double-thunk you might as well say "Persecution is Protection".

Edited September 29, 2017 by Saggy

[ṼirulenⱦEqừinox]

Health Secretary Tom Price is outta there!!

 

He resigned because of the black lash of him using private jets at taxpayers expense.

 

So out of all the people Trump brought in how many are left?

 

I can only think of Kushner & Betsy DeVos tbh I don’t see her last past the 17-18 school year she is hated by the majority of educators

[Creed Bratton]

Knowing Trump, someone worse than Price will take his place.

[Spaghetti Cat]

Uh-oh...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In an update on the Reality Winner (aka Reality Loser) case, she had some not nice things to say about the U.S.:

 

 

“Look, I only say I hate America like 3 times a day,” Winner wrote. “I’m no radical. It’s mostly just about Americans obsession with air conditioning.”

 

Her sister asked: “But you don’t actually hate America, right?”

 

Winner replied: “I mean yeah I do it’s literally the worst thing to happen on the planet. We invented capitalism the downfall of the environment.”

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/09/28/accused-nsa-leaker-confession/715062001/

 

Man, that sounds like some of the posters here in this very thread.

Edited September 30, 2017 by Spaghetti Cat