Politics and General Debates Thread

[paul1598419]

There are many examples of bottom up changes to federal laws. These are often concluded by the SCOTUS. One example is Brown vs Board of Education, 1954. Here many states were segregating public schools in a way that disadvantaged minorities. Unfortunately, this is a fight that continues to this day. I would expect eventually states will ban together to sue the federal government on the prohibition of marijuana. In the past several years where first medical marijuana was state sanctioned, then recreational use was, there has been much medical research done that was impossible in the past because of Nixon's war on drugs as a way to prosecute his enemies and later other politicians who thought marijuana caused all sorts of problems. The Movie "Reefer Madness" comes to mind in the lack of actual research into its use. In the early days of the 20th century southern states like Texas passed cruel laws in an effort to criminalize mostly Mexican Americans who were the only people using it at that time.

This reminds me of a case where a Mexican American man was sentenced to life in Texas State prison for a single marijuana joint. His statement to the judge was, "I can't do life!" The judge responded, "Just do what you can then."

Immigrants aren't coming from Mexico now, but from south and central America where there are legitimate sanctuary concerns. Trump has done all he can to make it as difficult as possible for people fleeing political persecution disregarding Federal laws that give any immigrant this right. Trying to force them to ask for sanctuary in any country they may cross before getting here or making them wait indefinitely in Mexico before they can even apply. Asking countries that are as bad or worse than the ones they are fleeing for sanctuary is ridiculous.

 

[Alien Laser]

Trump blames all problems on Mexicans the taking all the jobs but in reality the Mexicans are not the problem the problem is the rich but you have to blame someone for economic crisis and make people believe and focus on Mexicans so the don't focus on the rich corporations and the rich living in villas makes you thing what the real problem is

 

[RedCowboy]

Trump blames all problems on Mexicans the taking all the jobs but in reality the Mexicans are not the problem the problem is the rich but you have to blame someone for economic crisis and make people believe and focus on Mexicans so the don't focus on the rich corporations and the rich living in villas makes you thing what the real problem is

The rich democrat politician is the problem, but wealthy people build factories and employ others to work making the products we need and providing services, government on the other hand is terribly inefficient and any project has a lot of hands that get greased, lot of kickbacks, sweetheart deals, waste and fraud, but free enterprise is efficient as there is a profit motive and competition drives advancement, one of the many reasons socialism fails is lack of motivation, if people work hard and produce more then they are expected to do it again and again for no extra pay, but free enterprise rewards achievement.


But you tell me Alien Laser, how do the rich in their villas cause the problems, please explain.

 

[Shakenawake]

A few thoughts.

I dont think that having a single payer health care system which could also help non citizens can be attributed to pandering. Many countries with single payer systems have such a setup, even Trump has praised this. Before we attribute it to pandering can we rule out being compassionate decent human beings?

Democrats are not in favor of open borders. The closest any have come is Julian Castro who wants to change illegally crossing from a misdemeanor to a civil offense. So crossing is still illegal but the families and kids won't be spit up and "put in cages" a state of affairs even Trump has claimed to be against.

Having said all that, I DO think that some of the candidates speaking Spanish at the debates does qualify as pandering. Maybe not to illegals specifically but certainly to Hispanics and other Spanish speakers. English is our national language and while I'm not one to hate on people speaking other languages, I do think the debates should stick to English.

I think its important to remember that coming here legally isnt exactly easy or fast. It costs a lot of money and time. Maybe if this was easier more would do it. I also think we should look at the cause of the immigration because much of it is directly related to our economic imperialistic policies toward central and south America, to say nothing of our backing or right wing death squads overthrowing democratically elected governments and committing war crimes. Also the drug trade. I think that drugs should be legal and heavily regulated, addiction should be seen as a social rather than criminal problem. Prohibition didnt work and b either has the drug war. If they were legal it would pull the rug out from under the cartels and their power and influence would evaporate. Many illegals are either smuggling drugs or fleeing from cartel violence so this would dramatically reduce illegal crossings IMO, not to mention reduce our prison population. Addicts could get help and not fear legal trouble in addition to the problems they already face. The drugs could be produced better and more safely, not cut or extracted with dangerous chemicals or having deadly crap like fentanyl added. I could go on for a while on how to do this but I'll leave it there for now.

about states defying federal law. Well, the devil is in the details as usual. In some instances, states ignoring federal law is certainly bad. An example would be resisting desegregation. Theres an argument that sending in the national guard to force it violates posse comitatus, but I think we can all agree that desegregation was a good thing. When it comes to federal marijuana prohibition, well I side with the states that defy it. Not sure the constitution even gives the feds the right to ban it. We DO have the 10th amendment for a reason. At the very least the feds could reschedule it. The definition of a schedule 1 substance includes that it must have NO known medical benefits, and that arguement has been blown out of the water quite thoroughly with regard to marijuana. Meth and cocaine aren't even schedule 1 and most would agree that they are FAR worse. There is certainly a history of it being criminalized in order to target minorities, again, I could go on about this subject forever, I know a lot of the history, but I will again leave it there.

I LOVE that Tulsi called HRC queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot in the Democratic party. Amen to all of that

 

[RedCowboy]

You would think that common sense and bipartisan legislation could easily address the things where most people agree but somehow finding balance has proven to be difficult, maybe it's because everyone doesn't understand the problem.......that and so often I see politicians spinning the truth in order to make a power grab they can exploit, all politicians should test every concept against our constitution because we are meant to be free 1st and foremost.

For instance I think most people feel empathy for others but we also need to control how fast our country changes as we allow immigrants to come in, that said I think a lot of Mexican immigrants will turn out to be republicans in the long run as they are usually hard working people who appreciate freedom and fairness, most have grown up with religious teachings which place a strong value on fairness and most will expect others to work for what's theirs just like they have and most have a stronger appreciation for freedom than the typical know nothing follower of the herd liberal American having escaped tyranny themselves, Mexican immigrants and conservatism should be a good match as most Mexican American citizens also support a strong boarder because they want to keep their better life, not see everyone else flood in and ruin it.

It's not a simple as just allowing everyone to come on it at will.

----edit----
I agree that people who are addicted to drugs are physical ill and should not be treated like criminals, we could easily and inexpensively give people maintenance medications that would take the profit out of the illegal drug trade and give people a chance to recover and continue to work and be productive at the same time in many cases, people need to understand what they are up against and how to overcome it and if not how to manage it just like we manage other disease with medication addiction should be no different, prosecute dealers but not end users who are stuck without any easy answers.

 

[paul1598419]

And you truly believe that Trump has given immigrants that reassurance that his administration will protect their freedoms? If so, you are blinded by your political aspirations.

Today was another bad day for Trump. The ambassador that took over for Yavanovitch testified in the impeachment inquiry today further showing the ABSOLUTE quid pro quo that Trump put on the release of funds to Ukraine only if he opened an investigation into the Biden's and the CrowdStrike server AND announcing it before the world. It is striking to watch him meltdown as this brings more and more evidence to the fore.

After Clinton was impeached for lying about a sexual affair, he hired a republican to help him change his policies. I lost all faith in him after that. He did so many things in his last 18 months in office I hated.

 

[Shakenawake]

I know plenty of liberals who appreciate freedom, hard work, fairness, etc. I am one. When it comes to healthcare and education the idea is to give everyone the same baseline starting place regardless of whether they were born into wealth and privilege or not. I often get the sense that conservatives think that all wealthy people worked to earn their wealth. Not so. Not universally anyway. Much wealth is inherited and most super wealthy get that way by taking advantage of others in some way, not hard work. Then the wealthy use their influence to make the rules favorable to them, hence the growing wealth inequality.

Often the reason things that most of us agree on aren't done is when there is a profit incentive running counter to that interest. Like when private prisons are allowed and there is a profit incentive to lock people up. Hardly ethical and bound to lead to conflicts of interest. When all the media companies are owned by a handful of corporations, do you think they will ever be objective about news that doesnt serve their interests? This is where the fake news arises from primarily, regardless of overall political slant. This is why getting money out of politics is so important. Making money is all well and good, but we should measure our wealth in other ways too and not let profit incentive dictate every aspect of our existence

 

[RedCowboy]

 

[Alaskan]

I don't care if Trump is guilty or not, he needs to be impeached, we didn't want an outsider to become president, the people who voted for him and the electoral college are either idiots or misguided. He is unconventional and rude, the bastard has got to go, especially after trying to investigate one of our own; Biden (This is what the dems are thinking, not me).

 

[RedCowboy]

Of course, but with the underhanded inequitable mendacious way Schiff has conducted this investigation hoping to cherry pick testimony ignoring everything exculpatory and while being a material witness himself as well as fabricating a false transcript which no doubt has affected the so called impeachment polls the senate would likely vote to dismiss any impeachment the house might hand down based on flawed procedure alone, at this point it's just an excuse to keep looking for something and emoluments is nonsense as that's for any business interests acquired after being elected, not business owned before being elected but the fake media will hype this one sided sh1t show, none the less this impeachment is not going to work but it is showing those on the fence just how despicable some democrats can be.

I'm ready for 4 more years of Trump then 8 years of Pence or how about Sean Hannity, yes Sean Hannity would make a great potus.

 

[Alaskan]

I'd like to do to Schiff what is sometimes done to puppies when they shyt on the carpet. Funny you should mention Sean Hannity, I was just thinking that myself yesterday.

 

[paul1598419]

This is a re-post of one that was deleted somehow overnight.

Loading…

www.washingtonpost.com

Read this, then read the next one.

Loading…

www.washingtonpost.com

I'm getting new error codes when trying to load these. It maybe temporary or is the result of all the other threads and posts that were deleted. Will have to wait and see.

 

[GSS]

I tried for you too.. Same thing Paul as you probably know, sorry..

 

[paul1598419]

Yeah, I went to a different server and tried those links. They are good.

Since I can't supply those, lets see if anyone saw Trump get massively booed at the World Series game and then got chanted, ironically, with "Lock him up. Lock him up." It is great to laugh once in awhile when we have such a corrupt and seriously ignorant Liar In Chief.

It is also of note that the House will take a vote on Thursday to open impeachment proceedings to the public. This is a main talking point that republicans have used to try to delegitimize this inquiry. Does anyone believe that this administration will comply will House subpoenas after that? Betcha any one of my lasers, your choice, that they don;'t.

My point is that they will not be happy when this occurs as they have no defense against the opening statements of those who have testified so far. When everything is out in the open it will only get worse.

 

[RedCowboy]

Never let the facts get in the way of your hate when you can parrot the spin and rest assured that Trump will not be evicted from the Whitehouse for doing his job.

 

[paul1598419]

Fox News is the only organization doing Trump's defense, though it is still not on any of the substance. And going after Hunter Biden is a great distraction from Trump's kids who have been getting payments from foreign parties since joining his administration. It should be interesting when Trump's taxes are finally released so we can see exactly to what extent he has profited personally from his office as every court has said he can't keep them private so far. I don't see the SC backing him up either as the law is on the side of the prosecutors. Obama was investigated to death by republicans while in office, so this is another distraction from what will become obvious once the House starts open hearings that his pressure on Ukraine was a ploy to gain advantage in 2020. That, BTW, is definitely a gross abuse of power.

Since the House is voting on this Thursday and Pelosi would not go forward without the votes, this should get interesting no later than next week. Stay tuned