US Politics: Shotgun Wedding edition

[Ramsay Gimp]

and don't really care about the constitution save how it can fuel their ayn randian wet dreams.

:rolleyes: See, here's another common example of left-wing projection. Democrats and liberals bring up Ayn Rand far more than actual libertarians do.

She's a polarizing and controversial figure among libertarians, and while she was alive she violently rejected the libertarian label.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

This thread has officially become a Simpsons bit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVJpe1qbfb0

Gay Marriage and Guns! Together at last! BECAUSE YOU DEMANDED IT!

[Kalbear]

Sorry, Ramsay -I assumed you knew who your favored guy rand Paul was named after. My bad.

[JoeyBanana]

Sorry, Ramsay -I assumed you knew who your favored guy rand Paul was named after. My bad.

He wasn't

If you don't believe him, Ron Paul also addressed this vital issue

[The Marquis de Leech]

A written and codified constitution is preferable to legislative fiat because it restrains the state. Some things, like the Bill of Rights, should be enshrined above the raucous of partisan politics

Nah, all it means is that you end up with unelected judges deciding things, rather than elected representatives. It doesn't protect rights. It protects what those judges interpret those rights to be.

[ants]

We don't have to do that either, actually. We have more recent rulings to base our opinions on.

Harkening back to the intents of the founders is, for all intents and purposes, irrelevant. Because we have a whole system in place to resolve these issues. That's the genius of these guys, they forsaw the obsolescence of their own words, and put in place a system to faciliate change.

Wait, but if a judge does that and over-rules the constitution aren't they called 'activist'? Yet you're saying that was part of the plan all along to keep the constitution relevant.

[Shryke]

Nah, all it means is that you end up with unelected judges deciding things, rather than elected representatives. It doesn't protect rights. It protects what those judges interpret those rights to be.

Indeed. No matter your political inclination, the Roberts court has given ample examples of what anyone at some point would consider a kind of constitutional legislation by unelected fiat.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Hayyoth,

No I mean liberals

Can we please stop talking about how "all liberals believe X" and "all libertarians believe Y"? There are subtleties and variations in political opinions for everyone regardless of how people self identify politically. As such attempting to claim "all liberals are terrible because of X" or "all libertarians are terrible because of Y" is necessarily talking about characatures of individual political beliefs and fall into sterotyping instead of actual discussion.

[Kalbear]

He wasn't

If you don't believe him, Ron Paul also addressed this vital issue

Riiiiight.

[Paladin of Ice]

A quick overview of problems in the San Francisco justice system: they arrest black people at a 7:1 ratio compared to whites, their courts are much less likely to give pretrial releases (such as bail) to black defendants, and thousands of cases are being reviewed for bias after a group of officers busted for corruption were found to shared have quite horrifically racist texts.

A study conducted by the W. Haywood Burns Institute, a nonprofit dedicated to criminal justice equality, and published last week in a report by the Reentry Council of the City And County of San Francisco, took a close look at criminal justice disparities in the city. It concluded just as in Ferguson, Missouri; Baltimore; and New York City; the differences between the ways in which black and white citizens there interact with law enforcement and courts are shocking. For example, African Americans are 7.1 times as likely as whites to be arrested in San Francisco.

But one of the even more shocking areas of inequality had to do with what happens after arrest — who's released and who ends up behind bars. The Reentry Council concluded that black adults are less likely to be released, although they're more likely than white adults to meet the conditions for release. And this happens at every single step of the process:

Could it be that black people aren't being released because of other factors that weigh against release, like prior felonies or prior misdemeanors? Did education make a difference? No.

Black adults are less likely to be released at all process steps: Black adults are less likely to receive an "other" release (i.e., cited, bailed, and dismissed); less likely than White adults to be released by the duty commissioner; and less likely to be granted pretrial release at arraignment.

The study controlled for these things and found that, no matter how you slice it, black people are more likely to remain in custody while white people are more likely to walk free.

Public Defender Jeff Adachi told SF Weekly that the way black San Franciscans are treated — especially when it comes to pretrial release — puts an enormous burden not just on the people who are arrested, but their families and their entire communities.

Out of all adults who meet the criteria for pretrial release (the entirety of the SFPDP database):

39 percent of Black adults had prior felony(ies) compared to 26 percent of White adults, however, White adults with a prior felony were almost always more likely to be released at arraignment than Black adults with a prior felony

44 percent of Black adults had prior misdemeanor(s) compared to 45 percent of White adults, however, White adults with a prior misdemeanor were almost always more likely to be released at arraignment than Black adults with a prior misdemeanor; and 62 percent of Black adults had a high school diploma or GED compared to 66 percent of White adults, however, White adults with a HSD/GED were almost always more likely to be released at arraignment than Black adults with a HSD/GED.

"There is a direct correlation between being denied pretrial release and being convicted," he said. "People in jail are more likely to plead guilty just to get out, even if they're innocent. Being allowed pretrial release means being able to hold onto your job, your housing—even your children.

Gascon’s probe has so far identified 3,000 criminal cases that could have been affected by perceived bias by 14 officers. Investigators in a task force he created are combing through each case to determine whether some convictions must be overturned or pending cases dismissed.

“If just one individual was wrongly imprisoned because of bias on the part of these officers — that’s one too many,” Gascon said.

He said some pending cases already have been dismissed, and prosecutors so far have alerted defense attorneys of potential problems in about 60 other cases. The office is giving priority to cases that involve people who are behind bars. About 1,400 cases involved arrests but no prosecution.

...

The probe began after the U.S. attorney’s office filed a motion in March opposing bail for Ian Furminger, a former San Francisco police officer sentenced to 41 months in prison on various corruption-related charges. The motion, intended to prevent Furminger from obtaining bail while appealing his conviction, listed the texts.

The messages included slurs and disparaging references to African Americans and gays.

Police Chief Greg Suhr has so far recommended that six of the 14 officers who sent such texts be fired and has turned over the results of his investigation to the San Francisco Police Commission.

“We have been cooperating with the district attorney the whole time,” said Officer Grace Gatpamdan, an SFPD spokeswoman. She said some of the officers had “single incidents.”

The furor over the texts followed a series of law enforcement scandals in San Francisco in recent months. Sheriff's deputies have been accused of staging gladiator-like fights among inmates in the jail, and Suhr was suspended for five days for failing to follow department policy in helping a female friend who was a victim of domestic violence.

If you were curious about the exact nature of the texts sent, then look no further!

"We got two blacks at my boys [sic] school and they are brother and sister! There cause dad works for the school district and I am watching them like hawks."

In response to a text asking "Do you celebrate quanza [sic] at your school?" Furminger wrote: "Yeah we burn the cross on the field! Then we celebrate Whitemas."

"Its [sic] worth every penny to live here [Walnut Creek] away from the savages."

"Those guys are pretty stupid! Ask some dumb ass questions you would expect from a black rookie! Sorry if they are your buddies!"

"The buffalo soldier was why the Indians Wouldnt [sic] shoot the niggers that found for the confederate They [sic] thought they were sacred buffalo and not human."

"Gunther Furminger was a famous slave auctioneer."

"My wife has 2 friends over that don't know each other the cool one says to me get me a drink nigger not knowing the other is married to one just happened right now LMFAO."

"White power."

In response to a text saying "Niggers should be spayed," Furminger wrote "I saw one an hour ago with 4 kids."

"I am leaving it like it is, painting KKK on the sides and calling it a day!"

"Cross burning lowers blood pressure! I did the test myself!"

In response to a text saying "All niggers must fucking hang," Furminger wrote "Ask my 6 year old what he thinks about Obama."

In response to a text saying "Just boarded train at Mission/16th," Furminger wrote "Ok, just watch out for BM's" [black males].

"I hate to tell you this but my wife friend [sic] is over with their kids and her husband is black! If [sic] is an Attorney but should I be worried?" Furminger's friend, an SFPD officer, responded: "Get ur pocket gun. Keep it available in case the monkey returns to his roots. Its [sic] not against the law to put an animal down." Furminger responded, "Well said!"

In response to a text from another SFPD officer regarding the promotion of a black officer to sergeant, Furminger wrote: "Fuckin nigger."

Speaking of police problems, this week NY Police Commissioner Bill Bratton turned down all 9 proposals for reform by the city council.

Police Commissioner William Bratton renewed his opposition on Monday to a set of proposed regulations on use of force and other policing issues, telling City Council members that the New York Police Department can reform itself

....

The commissioner labeled nine bills that would outlaw police chokeholds, put restrictions on street stops and require greater disclosure of police records as largely unnecessary, prompting City Councilwoman Vanessa Gibson to comment, “I see we’re batting 0 for 9.”

Much of the proposed legislation came in response to the police chokehold death of Eric Garner and to the NYPD’s widespread use of street stops to fight crime. Critics say the measures are needed in part to repair relations in communities of color where the department is viewed as overaggressive.

The bill that would make using chokeholds a misdemeanor isn’t needed because the department already bans the maneuver, Bratton said.

“We firmly believe that this prohibition should remain a matter of policy rather than become, on its face, a crime,” he said.

Bratton also challenged bills that would require officers to identify themselves to people they stop and inform them they can refuse to be searched, saying the NYPD has already answered concerns by drastically cutting back on the stops and implementing better training.

I particularly like the part I bolded. Chokeholds were banned when Eric Garner died due to one, and it failed to even get an indictment, but we don't need to put any teeth into the measures to prevent that from happening again, because after all, they're banned!

[Swordfish]

Wait, but if a judge does that and over-rules the constitution aren't they called 'activist'? Yet you're saying that was part of the plan all along to keep the constitution relevant.

I've never made that argument. But keep hacking at that strawman.

As I said, there are processes in place to modify and interpret the constitution.

I'm not sure why that simple fact flummoxes you so much.

But technically, yes, if a judge 'overruled' the constitution, that would be over reach. 'Overruling' is not their job.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

A quick overview of problems in the San Francisco justice system: they arrest black people at a 7:1 ratio compared to whites, their courts are much less likely to give pretrial releases (such as bail) to black defendants, and thousands of cases are being reviewed for bias after a group of officers busted for corruption were found to shared have quite horrifically racist texts.

If you were curious about the exact nature of the texts sent, then look no further!

Jesus Christ. We have a long way to go. I hope these assholes all lose their jobs.

[awesome possum]

Bernie Sanders brought in a crowd of 10,000 yesterday in Wisconsin. I still don't think he can beat Hillary without this momentum growing at a rapid pace or any drop off or leveling out, but my fingers are crossed.

And a leaked TPP paper - you know, that thing Congress fast tracked while everyone was arguing over gay people and racist flags - shows just part of the plans our corporate overlords have for us.

A draft of part of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal leaked to the Politico website suggests the US is demanding increased protections for pharmaceutical companies, restricting access to the lower-cost generic versions of drugs that agencies such as New Zealand's Pharmac buy.

The draft copy of the intellectual property chapter of the trade agreement as it stood on May 11, before the Guam negotiating round, includes what is known as 'patent-linkage' provisions which would prevent regulators in TPP countries approving generic versions of drugs whenever there were unresolved patent issues, the Washington-based Politico website reported.

The draft would make linkage mandatory, as it is in the US, allowing drug companies to fend off generics by claiming patent infringements, the website reported. It cited Heather Bresch, chief executive of generic drug maker Mylan, as saying mandatory patent linkage would amount to "a recipe for indefinite evergreening of pharmaceutical monopolies."

I mean, it's not like prescription drugs are expensive or that the country already spends $374 billion a year on them or anything. Gotta make sure that people pay full price for those fucking pills or else those billion dollar companies might not be able to send their executives on their 4th vacation.

No, it makes me notice that like his father, he's terrible on race. And on most things. Cause at best he's a worthless hypocrite who will sell out every value he has to get the nomination. At best.

Paul does not have aggressive minority outreach unless it's "aggressively running away".

But he, like, totally wants to make weed legal dude.

That is pretty much the exact argument I've heard from a couple Paul fanatics I know. Nothing else matters, he wants to legalize weed.

[Fez]

Starting to get a little nervous about Sanders. I still don't think he'll ultimately knock Clinton off, but he's definitely gaining momentum. I really don't want the party to nominate another McGovern, the stakes are too high to lose the White House in 2016, but liberal activists seem to be in as big a bubble about Sanders' chances as Republican voters are about everything.

And Sanders will almost certainly lose in the general. There's not been a ton of general election polling with Sanders yet, but what there is is pretty awful; such as losing to Walker (who has similar name recognition) by 10 points in Michigan(!!!) while Clinton is crushing all the Republicans in the same poll.

[Commodore]

If she can't handle Sanders, she shouldn't be the nominee. Competition is a healthy thing.

Wait till the Clintons turn their Death Star on Sanders. She's super rich, power hungry, paranoid, entitled, corrupt. It will be ugly.

I still think of Sanders as a stalking horse to make Hillary look more moderate and less old, but the polls say otherwise.

https://twitter.com/PatrickRuffini/status/616653952399114241

@PatrickRuffini 21m21 minutes ago

At this point 8 years ago, Barack Obama had 180,000 donors in his successful primary campaign against Hillary.

Today, Sanders has 250,000.

[aceluby]

Starting to get a little nervous about Sanders. I still don't think he'll ultimately knock Clinton off, but he's definitely gaining momentum. I really don't want the party to nominate another McGovern, the stakes are too high to lose the White House in 2016, but liberal activists seem to be in as big a bubble about Sanders' chances as Republican voters are about everything.

And Sanders will almost certainly lose in the general. There's not been a ton of general election polling with Sanders yet, but what there is is pretty awful; such as losing to Walker (who has similar name recognition) by 10 points in Michigan(!!!) while Clinton is crushing all the Republicans in the same poll.

I'm still voting for him.

[Fez]

If she can't handle Sanders, she shouldn't be the nominee. Competition is a healthy thing.

But primary competition isn't the same as general election competition. The same organizational needs are there, but the target voters are different. And the candidates who are most appealing in primaries usually aren't the ones who are most appealing in the general.

Look at the Republican primary, Trump is in second place right. I doubt it'll last, but if it does, and if somehow wins, Clinton might break 400 electoral votes against him (I think even Sanders would be beat him, although that's one matchup that hasn't been polled). How was that healthy competition?

All primaries do is drag mainstream candidates too far to the left or right, cause fringe candidates to take nominations (and often blow the general, as Republicans found in multiple senate races in 2010), and cause bad blood within the party as disagreements are publicly aired. Both parties would be better off returning to systems where party leaders handpick their nominees for office.

[Hayyoth]

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/246759-george-takei-justice-thomas-a-clown-in-blackface

Actor and gay rights advocate George Takei is slamming Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas after his dissent to last week's decision legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide claimed that the government can neither give nor take away human dignity.

"He is a clown in blackface sitting on the Supreme Court. He gets me that angry," the former "Star Trek" star said in an interview with Fox 10 this week in Phoenix, standing alongside his longtime partner and husband.

What is it with libs who think it's OK to throw casual racist insults at conservative black people? I'll wait for the social media storm as Takei gets Trumped....or not.

[IamMe90]

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/246759-george-takei-justice-thomas-a-clown-in-blackface

What is it with libs who think it's OK to throw casual racist insults at conservative black people? I'll wait for the social media storm as Takei gets Trumped....or not.

I'm a "lib" and I don't think it's okay for anyone to casually throw around "blackface" as an epithet so I dunno :shrug:

[OnionAhaiReborn]

If she can't handle Sanders, she shouldn't be the nominee. Competition is a healthy thing.

Wait till the Clintons turn their Death Star on Sanders. She's super rich, power hungry, paranoid, entitled, corrupt. It will be ugly.

I still think of Sanders as a stalking horse to make Hillary look more moderate and less old, but the polls say otherwise.

https://twitter.com/PatrickRuffini/status/616653952399114241

There's nothing to support the view that Sanders is a stalking horse but baseless conspiratorial thinking (I've seen this same baseless claim put forth in far left outlets, what strange company you're keeping). The guy has a progressive track record stretching back decades, it would be quite an elaborate game to play just so he could betray everything he's stood for to vaguely maybe help out a centrist politician by providing contrast.

But he's not going to win. I think it's great that he's drawing crowds and donors, but he's nowhere near where Obama was polling at this time before the 2008 primaries. Obama was within 10% or so nationally, Sanders is more like 40% or so behind, and no one else looks likely to help him out by fracturing Clinton's overwhelming support.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/246759-george-takei-justice-thomas-a-clown-in-blackface

What is it with libs who think it's OK to throw casual racist insults at conservative black people? I'll wait for the social media storm as Takei gets Trumped....or not.

Is George Takei a liberal media personality seeking the Democratic nomination for President, polling around 10%?

Until then, there's no comparison to be had.