Jump to content

U.S. Politics: The Bipartisan Dismemberment of the VA


lokisnow

Recommended Posts

On 7/23/2016 at 0:56 PM, DireWolfSpirit said:

Well for non violent crimes theres barely a point. But lets not forget the very important need to protect the innocents in society. Prison still is what society relies on to seperate the wolves from the sheep. And there will always be a percentage of dangerous people that need segregation in order to protect victims or future victims. The fact that some prisoners cant be rehabbed doesnt correlate to "no point in this", that would be overlooking the role of protecting the innocents.

I too would vote to end the pointless "war on drugs" strategy, but I stay cognizant that there are still a portion of hardcore felons that will never be safe or rehabilitated enough to expose the public to. We still need to keep hitmen, mobsters, serial killers, chronic sex offenders, etc segregated. Whether they can be "fixed" or not, theres the public safety to give precedence to, above and beyond (imo) the rehab challenge.

I think whether or not one believes it's ethical to cage a human being for life or execute them is probably an entirely different discussion.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dr. Pepper said:

What you're describing is basic therapy.  And sure, mental health services in prison can probably be much approved, but it doesn't really address the realities one faces when one leaves prison.  They usually leave with no money, few if any job prospects, often poor housing options or even having to return to the community where one got into trouble in the first place.  This basic therapy they received in prison might have some uses, but being told there's a world outside of selling drugs means fuck all when there literally aren't any jobs outside of selling drugs available for many convicted felons.  No amount of rejection preparation is going to change that.

What aceluby is addressing is specifically challenging society as a whole in how we view people who have been in prison.  That's what needs significant rehabilitation.  There's barely any point to a prison system if those who commit crimes can not ever repay their debt to society.

I get what Ace is saying. I'm finding it hard to put into words the mentality of growing up in "the hood". We're not exposed to the same world view that a middle or upper-class kid is exposed to. Wall Street? That might as well be Mars.

So many of my friends dropped out of junior high or high school to sell drugs. They would never even leave our neighborhood. They'd look at me like I was crazy when I would hang out with friends from other neighborhoods.

The point I'm trying to make, and I know this is anecdotal, is that a certain level of self-exploration or self-awareness can go a long way towards helping cats better deal with certain levels of rejection so that they don't resort to hustling in the hood.

Obviously, I'm not suggesting that there isn't more to be done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How Your Pedigree Prejudices Your Employer

Quote

Who gets the top jobs in America? A new book says people who look like the people who already have them...

Lauren Rivera wants to understand how and why American elites keep reproducing themselves. Social and economic mobility in the US anow trail much of Europe's. Concentration of wealth at the top is up. We have no titled aristocracy. No formal entitlement. We love our up-by-the-bootstraps, Horatio Alger stories. But American elites keep reproducing themselves from the same pool. Rivera has gone deep on hiring at top firms. Looking at how and why elites hire elites with such consistency. She’s with us. This hour On Point: "Pedigree." Who gets the top jobs in America, and why.

Heard this podcast yesterday and it was quite interesting.  I won't have a chance to read the book probably for many months, but the attached articles in the link provide much food for thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On July 23, 2016 at 1:03 PM, Dr. Pepper said:

I think whether or not one believes it's ethical to cage a human being for life or execute them is probably an entirely different discussion.  

Would you not be willing to jail a serial killing sociopath for life?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only tangential to politics, but prosecutors have dismissed all charges against Ingmar Guandique, who was previously convicted and had been facing a retrial, for the murder of Chandra Levy. 

The only reason given was that the decision was based on "based on recent unforeseen developments." I really wonder what an unforeseen development 15 years after the fact is. Also, I wonder if this something like a new alibi or DNA evidence exonerating Ingmar or if there's new evidence making it clear that someone else is responsible. 

I remember that Rep. Gary Condit was looked at really closely once news of the affair broke, but I don't know if there was ever any hard evidence that he might've been involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shockingly, it turns out Roger Ailes was a racist, sexist homophobe pretty much all the time. 

But that's OK, I'm sure it didn't affect Fox's journalistic integrity. :rolleyes:

(incidentally, typing "fox" then "journalistic integrity" nearly made my keyboard combust)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, alguien said:

Shockingly, it turns out Roger Ailes was a racist, sexist homophobe pretty much all the time. 

But that's OK, I'm sure it didn't affect Fox's journalistic integrity. :rolleyes:

(incidentally, typing "fox" then "journalistic integrity" nearly made my keyboard combust)

Jesus Christ, what is Susan Estrich (feminist lawyer/activist, managed Dukakis' campaign in 1988) doing defending this swollen bag of dick cancer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is on the borderline between this thread and the Elections thread, but since it's as much about Obama as Trump I thought I'd post it here:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/09/gop-tried-sink-obama-imploded-extremism

I don't suppose Richard Wolffe is saying anything new here but he says it very well. I particularly like this paragraph:

"The rise of Trump has led, perversely, to the revival of Obama. Republican candidates are saying they will not vote for their presidential nominee, and the party’s national security officials are lining up to condemn Trump as a reckless danger to the Republic. How could the incumbent not look like a statesman compared to a man who apparently can’t be trusted with the elevator button,never mind a nuclear one? "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Martell Spy said:

How We Killed the Tea Party
Greedy PACs drained the movement with endless pleas for money to support “conservative” causes and candidates. I worked for one of them. But Tea Party ideas live on.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/08/tea-party-pacs-ideas-death-214164

Interesting read, not just for what the author wanted to tell us but in what can be pulled from what he didn't emphasize.  The knowledge that the Tea Party base is an angrier segment of those who keep falling for Ethiopian prince scams is not new; the gold selling schemes that dominate conservative talk radio have been talked about before.

But even this cynic, who knows damn well he pushed snake oil for years, still buys snake oil on the other end without questioning what is in the damn bottle. 

Quote

What began as an organic, policy-driven grass-roots movement

Second paragraph and already shaking my head.  There may have been an original grass roots element to the tea party but it was co-opted long before it could be considered a movement, or indeed anyone had any idea what it was.  Grass roots movements are not bankrolled by known billionaire political players.  They are not given a 24-7 pledge drive by the leading news station in the country.  The tea party from the start was a new push by a few players to co-opt anger and hatred and funnel it to favorable legislation. 

Quote

Various autopsies have offered a number of causes: IRS targeting, bad candidates, hostile media, and even some hazy form of moral and political victory, in that the Tea Party pushed the GOP to take tougher stances on some issues. All have at least some merit.

Ah yes.  While Bad candidates and bad politics in a generally improving economy are the most likely answer for the collapse let us not discount a few conservative bugaboos.  The IRS targeting that resulted in no action against any conservative groups but did cause substantial trouble for a single liberal voting rights group.  And the ever present 'hostile media' that refused to call bull shit  unless it was knee deep but didn't actively cheer for tea party candidates and thus was very biased.

The tea party was a scam job fed by hatred and anger that a black democrat dared to enter the office he was elected to.  A lot of people made money off it, a few people got policies to go their way, and an 8 year attempt to block our countries growth ultimately failed.  If it truly is dead I would spit on its grave but hell has most likely already claimed the spot as a unholy site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SkynJay said:

Interesting read, not just for what the author wanted to tell us but in what can be pulled from what he didn't emphasize.  The knowledge that the Tea Party base is an angrier segment of those who keep falling for Ethiopian prince scams is not new; the gold selling schemes that dominate conservative talk radio have been talked about before.

But even this cynic, who knows damn well he pushed snake oil for years, still buys snake oil on the other end without questioning what is in the damn bottle. 

Second paragraph and already shaking my head.  There may have been an original grass roots element to the tea party but it was co-opted long before it could be considered a movement, or indeed anyone had any idea what it was.  Grass roots movements are not bankrolled by known billionaire political players.  They are not given a 24-7 pledge drive by the leading news station in the country.  The tea party from the start was a new push by a few players to co-opt anger and hatred and funnel it to favorable legislation. 

Ah yes.  While Bad candidates and bad politics in a generally improving economy are the most likely answer for the collapse let us not discount a few conservative bugaboos.  The IRS targeting that resulted in no action against any conservative groups but did cause substantial trouble for a single liberal voting rights group.  And the ever present 'hostile media' that refused to call bull shit  unless it was knee deep but didn't actively cheer for tea party candidates and thus was very biased.

The tea party was a scam job fed by hatred and anger that a black democrat dared to enter the office he was elected to.  A lot of people made money off it, a few people got policies to go their way, and an 8 year attempt to block our countries growth ultimately failed.  If it truly is dead I would spit on its grave but hell has most likely already claimed the spot as a unholy site.

This shit has been around long before talk radio too.

This is a great article on the subject:

http://thebaffler.com/salvos/the-long-con

All about the long connection between american right-wing politics and direct mail scams.

Quote

 

The history of that movement echoes with the sonorous names of long-dead Austrian economists, of indefatigable door-knocking cadres, of soaring perorations on a nation finally poised to realize its rendezvous with destiny. Search high and low, however, and there’s no mention of oilfields in the placenta. Nor anything about, say, the massive intersection between the culture of “network” or “multilevel” marketing—where ordinary folks try to get rich via pyramid schemes that leave their neighbors holding the bag—and the institutions of both evangelical Christianity and Mitt Romney’s Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

And yet this stuff is as important to understanding the conservative ascendancy as are the internecine organizational and ideological struggles that make up its official history—if not, indeed, more so. The strategic alliance of snake-oil vendors and conservative true believers points up evidence of another successful long march, of tactics designed to corral fleeceable multitudes all in one place—and the formation of a cast of mind that makes it hard for either them or us to discern where the ideological con ended and the money con began.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, R'hllors Red Lobster said:

So, a bit of a parlimentary/ procedural question here... If one wanted to start discussion on more small scale, local politics and elections, should these be brought up here, in the US politics thread, or would a new "Local politics" thread be worthwhile?

This is the right place; UK and AUS politics have local and national ones. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read this today and thought it was pretty interesting given how many people think ISIS represents the religion.  Most of the recruits barely know anything about the religion.

Quote

Based on a coding system developed by whatever ISIS’s equivalent of human resources is, 70 percent of recruits in 2013 to 2014 had at most a basic knowledge of Islam. According to a trove of more than 3,000 leaked documents, only 5 percent of recruits indicated they had an advanced knowledge of the world’s largest religion before signing on to the group. [The Associated Press

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/10/2016 at 10:20 AM, Ormond said:

This is on the borderline between this thread and the Elections thread, but since it's as much about Obama as Trump I thought I'd post it here:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/09/gop-tried-sink-obama-imploded-extremism

I don't suppose Richard Wolffe is saying anything new here but he says it very well. I particularly like this paragraph:

"The rise of Trump has led, perversely, to the revival of Obama. Republican candidates are saying they will not vote for their presidential nominee, and the party’s national security officials are lining up to condemn Trump as a reckless danger to the Republic. How could the incumbent not look like a statesman compared to a man who apparently can’t be trusted with the elevator button,never mind a nuclear one? "

Seems like a cheap shot. The paragraph suggests that somehow Trump was responsible for the elevator stalling out, but nothing in the actual article suggests that's the case at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, NestorMakhnosLovechild said:

Seems like a cheap shot. The paragraph suggests that somehow Trump was responsible for the elevator stalling out, but nothing in the actual article suggests that's the case at all. 

A later CNN story reveals a little more about how Trump's group got stuck in there, and how they were to blame for the rally getting so big that the fire marshal had to intervene:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/10/politics/donald-trump-elevator-colorado-fire-marshals/

So, to recap:

1. Trump campaign agrees on attendance cap with fire department.

2. Trump campaign distributes too many tickets to rally

3. Trump's entourage or SS detail misuses an elevator bypass key, gets stuck

4. Fire department rescues Trump from elevator

5. Trump goes on stage and insults the fire marshal for enforcing agreed-upon attendance limit, implies he's a Democrat out to sabotage him

In other words, just another day in the unbound and paradoxically stupid life of a flaming moronic shitheel that happens to be the Republican Party's choice for President.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...