US Politics: I am a blatant racist and that will give unfair advantages to minorities or something

[awesome possum]

The American Middle Class is No Longer the World's Richest

While the wealthiest Americans are outpacing many of their global peers, a New York Times analysis shows that across the lower- and middle-income tiers, citizens of other advanced countries have received considerably larger raises over the last three decades.

After-tax middle-class incomes in Canada — substantially behind in 2000 — now appear to be higher than in the United States. The poor in much of Europe earn more than poor Americans.

The numbers, based on surveys conducted over the past 35 years, offer some of the most detailed publicly available comparisons for different income groups in different countries over time. They suggest that most American families are paying a steep price for high and rising income inequality.

Which is nonsense, as we all know. If the American Middle Class is losing its wealth, it's because we're just not working hard enough. /Fox

[Galactus]

Heh, and not only that: Bundy's claims to ancestral right are wrong as well.

http://www.8newsnow.com/story/25302186/an-abbreviated-look-at-rancher-cliven-bundys-family-history

[Paladin of Ice]

Heh, and not only that: Bundy's claims to ancestral right are wrong as well.

http://www.8newsnow.com/story/25302186/an-abbreviated-look-at-rancher-cliven-bundys-family-history

So the right wing is not only on the side of a law breaker who doesn't believe the United States exists, (despite claiming to follow the Nevada constitution, which explicitly says that Nevada is part of the US) and the militia conspiracy nuts who want to use their own wives and daughters as human shields in order to stir up outrage against their government, but they're now on the side of a lying lawbreaker who doesn't believe that the United States exists, and the militia conspiracy guys who want to stir up outrage against their own government by using their wives and daughters as human shields. (By the way, isn't that decried as cowardly when Islamist terrorists do it?)

Nice.

[Ramsay Gimp]

Charts and graphs and "science!" has given us phrenology, Supply side Economics and Eugenics. So while data driven policy can be useful (and the good generally outweighs the silly negative examples above), the data is only as good as the humans utilizing it. And data wonks and technocrats of the 2014 variety have a disturbing tendency to eliminate the human elements from their world view in chasing more pure numbers. That means I don't trust a lot of the policy prescriptions because they're so wildly divorced from the reality of human nature (inherently selfish and evil) and the realities of human behavior. Technocrats and wonks have replaced empathy and thoughtfulness with incentives and nudges, treating people like cold numbers or intriguing labrats.

:agree:

No such thing. Sovereignty is all-or-nothing. That's what it means. There is something superior to an individual state in the hierarcy that can override it's actions (the US Constitution) that means states are not sovereign entitites but subordinate ones. Being Sovereign means precisely that there is no higher authority than you.

The US Constitution is also superior to the federal government. The "supremacy clause", which is often touted as elevating federal power over state power, actually just elevates the Constitution over both

[Ramsay Gimp]

Talk about missing the point.

"New Jersey lawsuit seeks to ban Pledge of Allegiance"

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865601532/New-Jersey-lawsuit-seeks-to-ban-Pledge-of-Allegiance.html

Of course their whole objection is about "under God." :rolleyes: There are plenty of reasons to get rid of the Pledge, but that's the least of them. And I say that as an atheist

[Wise Fool]

Talk about missing the point.

"New Jersey lawsuit seeks to ban Pledge of Allegiance"

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865601532/New-Jersey-lawsuit-seeks-to-ban-Pledge-of-Allegiance.html

Of course their whole objection is about "under God." :rolleyes: There are plenty of reasons to get rid of the Pledge, but that's the least of them. And I say that as an atheist

Religious freedom is the least of them. What are the better reasons then?

[TerraPrime]

He's a rather interesting individual, actually, with some redeeming qualities. My own opinion on his actions would be considerably more sympathetic had he just chosen his target better.

So.... what targets could McVeigh have chosen for his mass killing that would meet your approval? What group of people are you happy to consign to being murdered?

[Bennis of the Brown Shield]

The constitutional limit on maintaining a standing army was an attempt to ensure states sovereignty. As soon as DC got itself a large permanent army the war was lost. Having armed forces in the US has never been about defending the country from potential foreign invasion. The United States is a continent spanning behemoth with enormous resources and a population armed to the teeth, and it always has been. A standing army was formed primarily to centralize power and then to project force overseas.

A lot more about projecting force overseas than centralizing power I'd say. While a conscription based military is much superior to a standing army in terms of national defense if done right, having one would make it much harder for USA to remain the dominant superpower on Earth for long. Manning bases in foreign countries, having ships patrolling all over the world, and most importantly being able to invade various lesser countries if they become troublesome, would be very hard to pull off without causing massive protests at home if the men there are routinely being pulled away from their jobs and their homes to do periods of such service against their will. USA being top dog in the world is much preferable to Russia or the Chinese, so it's a valid reason for having a standing army.

An alternative might be a model more like the one Russia is implementing, where most of the common soldiers are conscripts but there remains a smaller core of professional soldiers that can more easily be used abroad, but it's not like that would be much of a guarantee for democracy anyway. The fact that Russia never has had a professional army should tell you that.

[sologdin]

US Constitution is also superior to the federal government

yeah, where's that in the text? the supremacy clause simply apportions authority as between the state and the federal interests, and stands for the proposition that the federal sources of law trump state sources, inclusive of statutes and treaties. (by the time we get to cooper v. aaron, the supreme court can deduce that its own opinions are also the "supreme law of the land," which is kinda kickass.)

[Shryke]

Heh, and not only that: Bundy's claims to ancestral right are wrong as well.

http://www.8newsnow.com/story/25302186/an-abbreviated-look-at-rancher-cliven-bundys-family-history

It's lies all the way down.

His continued exposure as a lying lunatic is the only thing that's good about the right-wing jumping all in on this shit. Just further proof that their opinions aren't worth hearing.

[Shryke]

As usual Ta-Nehisi Coates has a take on the Bundy Thing:

Another good example of how this goes down when you are not white and thus don't have the support of one fo the major politiacl movements in the US:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOVE#1985_bombing

In 1981, MOVE relocated to a row house at 6221 Osage Avenue in the Cobbs Creek area of West Philadelphia. Neighbors complained for years that MOVE members were broadcasting political messages by bullhorn at all hours and also about the health hazards created from piles of compost. On May 13, 1985, after the complaints as well as indictments of numerous MOVE members for crimes including parole violation, contempt of court, illegal possession of firearms, and making terrorist threats,[9] the police department attempted to clear the building and arrest the indicted MOVE members. This led to an armed standoff with police.[10] The police lobbed tear gas canisters at the building. MOVE members fired at the police, and the police returned fire with semiautomatic weapons.[11] A Pennsylvania State Police helicopter then dropped two one-pound bombs made of FBI-supplied water gel explosive, a dynamite substitute, targeting a fortified, bunker-like cubicle on the roof of the house. [12]

The resulting fire ignited a massive blaze that eventually destroyed approximately 60 houses nearby.[3][12][13] Eleven people, including John Africa, five other adults and five children, died in the resulting fire.[14] Ramona Africa, one of the two survivors, claimed that police fired at those trying to escape the burning house, while the police stated that MOVE members had been firing at police.[15]

Black people in a standoff with the government get tear-gassed without a second thought.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

It's lies all the way down.

His continued exposure as a lying lunatic is the only thing that's good about the right-wing jumping all in on this shit. Just further proof that their opinions aren't worth hearing.

I don't think lunatic fits. If he were a lunatic, he'd have a viable excuse for his behavior. Privileged a-hole squatter with some armed friends fits better, as far as I'm concerned.

[The Iceman of the North]

Galactus,

That depends on whether or not you believe the Federal Government was granted or assumed the power to force a State to remain in the Union. Is there a provison for a State to leave the EU? If a State tried to leave and the EU raised armies to invade that State how would the EU actions be viewed?

A quick google search suggests a State can leave the EU with the permission of the EU parliment:

However, needing the permission of the EU Parliment to leave the EU raises an interesting question.

Galactus, wouldn't that mean EU member States are not sovereign as you have defined sovereignty? The States need the permission of the EU to withdraw from the EU.

This just says that the EU Parliament must agree to an agreement dealing with the divorce issues. If a member state were to leave the EU there's plenty of affairs that need to be settled, thus an agreement must be brokered. Presumably, if negotiations for an agreements break down, the deal will be brokered by the EU court. The clause you mention just place the authority to negotiate the agreement within the EU system, that is it's the EU Parliament, not the bureaucracy that are responsible.

At least that's how I read it.

[Galactus]

Not precisely on topic, but apparently Piketty's Capital in the 21st Century is atop Amazon's bestseller's chart.

Surely the Reign of Terror and the guillotines come next?

Writing a book with that title seems... A bit premature.

[Altherion]

The Supreme Court has upheld Michigan's ban on affirmative action in a 6-2 decision (Kagan recused herself, Breyer joined the majority).

Importantly, the decision doesn't touch on the constitutionality of affirmative action, and instead just stated that the state supreme court didn't have the authority or precedent to overturn this specific law.

ETA: The law itself did not ban affirmative action. Instead it said that a referendum on whether to ban affirmative action would have to go before the voters. The referendum passed during the next election.

This is yet another nail in the coffin of an old monstrosity that has long outlived its usefulness. It'll take a long time to finally die, but with Breyer switching sides, I think we're getting there.

[Shryke]

This is yet another nail in the coffin of an old monstrosity that has long outlived its usefulness. It'll take a long time to finally die, but with Breyer switching sides, I think we're getting there.

Yeah, america totally doesn't have an issue with racism anymore......

[Mazigh]

Another good example of how this goes down when you are not white and thus don't have the support of one fo the major politiacl movements in the US:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOVE#1985_bombing

Black people in a standoff with the government get tear-gassed without a second thought.

Black supremacist criminal terrorists with stolen guns get in a gunfight with the police My what a sad story :crying:

[TerraPrime]

Black supremacist criminal terrorists

I notice a distinct lack of adjectives in your written posts. I think you should recitfy that in the future.

[Mazigh]

I notice a distinct lack of adjectives in your written posts. I think you should recitfy that in the future.

That is how they were described so that is what I will call them

[Shryke]

Black supremacist criminal terrorists with stolen guns get in a gunfight with the police My what a sad story :crying:

Yeah, it's too bad they weren't white. Then the police wouldn't have engaged as we've literally just seen.

Hell, they dropped a fucking bomb on the black criminals. In a residential neighbourhood.