all swedes are racist Posted September 10, 2017 Author Share Posted September 10, 2017 1 hour ago, lancerman said: Why would they? Repealing Obamacare has been a winning issue for them for years and they got Congress, the Presidency, and likely the Supreme Court all in part to that momentum. Obamacare was successfully branded as a bad thing and Democrats failed to defend it. This happened since before it passed. Now we are at a point where there's actually real problems with it that need to be addressed and Republicans are allowing it to fall apart so it's becoming more unappealing. It was always intended to be backed up by more legislation, but they aren't going to give the Democrats any victories. It would be repealed already if the Republicsns were capable of crafting a replacement that didn't knock millions of people off their insurance and look like a blatant tax break for the rich at the same time. Not that they care because they can keep running against it. meanwhile, more and more people are getting on board with single payer/medicare-for-all .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seli Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 On 09/09/2017 at 0:13 AM, dmc515 said: I think it's far too premature to speculate on whether and how much Harvey and Irma affect future elections at this point. My first cynical thought was the demographics of the likely permanently displaced, and the loops they will have to go through to get re-registered as voters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongRider Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 4 hours ago, Seli said: My first cynical thought was the demographics of the likely permanently displaced, and the loops they will have to go through to get re-registered as voters. Not that cynical considering it's Texas and Florida. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 13 hours ago, Zorral said: John Le Carré speaks the F word in public: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/sep/07/john-le-carre-on-trump-something-truly-seriously-bad-is-happening Fake writer! Sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 Debt Ceiling Deal: the NYT tells us all about it. Schumer himself takes ALL the credit, if, indeed, credit is due. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/09/us/politics/chuck-schumer-new-washington.html? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 2 hours ago, Nasty LongRider said: Not that cynical considering it's Texas and Florida. Also, knowing what happened with that in Louisiana and New Orleans post-Katrina. It's not only Disaster Capitalism, but Disaster Power Politics. It's so much easier after catastrophes, which always affect those who are with fewer resources than the entrenched local wealthy and powerful, which makes it easier to rid themselves of those pesky voters who don't support THEM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 15 hours ago, Simon Steele said: I'm with you--at first, I thought this was a good move. But now I think the Republicans may feel backed in a corner/unified by this move. Which is a problem. The best thing America has going for it right now is that Republicans are dysfunctional--and Trump, for all his faults, is a business man. If he can get them unified, we more problems on the horizons. Hopefully I'm wrong. I'm fine entertaining this notion, I just don't know what policy outcome the deal leads to even if it serves to unify the GOP (which certainly doesn't seem to be the case at this juncture). The GOP leadership wanted to extend the debt ceiling until after the midterms because many of its members do not want multiple votes raising it. It's very difficult to see how keeping this as leverage for the Dems in December could possibly be a bad thing. Now, maybe it could help unite the GOP on tax reform or finally getting together on repealing Obamacare in the next 20 days. To the former I'm still wondering how the GOP isn't already unified on (basically) tax cuts, and still quite skeptical on the latter. The deal does clear the agenda to refocus on Obamacare by September 30, but leadership has not singled it's ready get back on the merry-go-round with Graham-Cassidy and there's arguably more momentum for bipartisan agreement rooted in the HELP committee. The only other policy outcome I can conceive of is getting the entire GOP on board with funding the Wall, which, hell maybe, but it's still not gonna get passed cloture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 Hillary Clinton Says She Will Never Run for Office Again http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/09/10/hillary_clinton_says_she_will_never_run_for_office_again.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 55 minutes ago, Martell Spy said: Hillary Clinton Says She Will Never Run for Office Again http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/09/10/hillary_clinton_says_she_will_never_run_for_office_again.html I'm With Her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IamMe90 Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 19 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: I'm With Her. No kidding. Glad to finally hear the speculations and worries quelled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 Bad week to launch a book that is a cri de cour as to why she lost the election. Again, no sense of timing, rhythm etc. Only John Le Carré seems able to have cut through all the Stuff to positively launch a book . . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonnot OG Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 In Vancouver WA some white supremacist tried to run over a crowd of antifascist protesters. The cops let him go after detaining him. Fucking pigs man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Week Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 1 hour ago, Lew Theobald said: Possibly because they had no reliable evidence against him? Spin aside, he seems to have done little more than try to maneuver his way out of a violent mob that was attacking his vehicle. But they did diffuse the situation by removing him from the scene and "detaining" him. Seems to me the "fucking pigs" have a tough job, keeping two groups of potentially violent persons from attacking and potentially killing each other. With no thanks or help from the likes of you. Thanks for the much needed voice speaking out for the innocent white supremacists* attacking counter-protesters. *Confederate Flag decal is enough to appropriately identify. http://www.wweek.com/news/2017/09/10/police-in-vancouver-arrest-man-for-nearly-running-down-antifa-protesters-with-his-truck/ Quote A black Chevy Silverado with Oregon plates and two large American flags and several small flags hanging from its windows (along with a Confederate flag decal displayed on the back window of the cab) drove up to the marchers. It was driving slowly down a street flanked by people dressed in black bloc clothing. As the crowd parted to clear the way for the truck to move forward, protesters filled the street behind it and started throwing rocks and water bottles at the truck. The driver suddenly put his vehicle in reverse and accelerated toward the protesters. As he sped up, people jumped out of the street. The driver continued to drive in reverse for nearly a block, stopping at the next intersection and revving his engine. [..] After the man was arrested, a group called the "Proud Boys" drove down Columbia Ave and sprayed pepper spray out their windows at protesters in the street. The counter-protesters lobbed rocks at their truck. Police stopped the Proud Boys, but did not detain them. Fifteen minutes later they drove away. But they didn't get far: Reporters nearby say the Proud Boys crashed into a police vehicle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Week Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 24 minutes ago, Lew Theobald said: The article you cite suggests possible reasons why this might be so. It seems to indicates that the protesters started the violence by pelting the vehicle with rocks and bottles. The driver did not actually hit anyone with his vehicle, and, given the chaos of such violent situations, the cops would be hard pressed to prove he intended to hit anyone. Per the article, he was given a path forward. He stopped and then went in reverse towards protesters. He changed direction 180 degrees from a clearing path to a group of people. Hard to continue to argue that it lacked intent -- but I know you'll soldier on. Again, per the article -- he maneuvered towards the crowd. Your description is not supported by news sources from the area that I've read. Feel free to share any local news source that supports your point. 24 minutes ago, Lew Theobald said: A confederate decal on his vehicle is not enough to prove to me that he is guilty of any other crime than having a confederate decal on his vehicle. And that is not a crime in the United States, regardless of what else it may signify. I didn't accuse him of a crime -- I labelled him as a white supremacist. Apt identification -- sadly, not a crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 41 minutes ago, Lew Theobald said: I was speaking up for the (probably) innocent cops. As for the "white supremacist", his innocence cannot be ruled out either, since the cops know doubt know more than I, and they found no basis for charging him. The article you cite suggests possible reasons why this might be so. It seems to indicates that the protesters started the violence by pelting the vehicle with rocks and bottles. The driver did not actually hit anyone with his vehicle, and, given the chaos of such violent situations, the cops would be hard pressed to prove he intended to hit anyone. A confederate decal on his vehicle is not enough to prove to me that he is guilty of any other crime than having a confederate decal on his vehicle. And that is not a crime in the United States, regardless of what else it may signify. More of your mealy-mouthed bullshit? So, firstly, you're correct that the police knew more than you, because they found cause for arresting the maniac in the truck. Secondly, regardless of whether the protesters started the altercation (which is a assumption not in evidence that you nevertheless feel comfortable asserting), putting the truck in reverse and accelerating towards the people throwing rocks is clearly an escalation, and cannot be construed as self defense in any way whatsoever. Purposefully risking killing or seriously injuring one or more people for something as insignificant as some property damage is outrageous. Finally, given the reporting that a group called the Proud Boys was reported as driving around and pepper spraying antifa protesters, and given that you completely ignored this section in your rush to excuse the man apparently trying to run over protesters, it's quite clear that you have a very specific bias in your interpretation of the events of that story. But by all means, keep moving those goalposts. Quote Police in Vancouver this afternoon arrested a man... As the crowd parted to clear the way for the truck to move forward, protesters filled the street behind it and started throwing rocks and water bottles at the truck. The driver suddenly put his vehicle in reverse and accelerated toward the protesters. As he sped up, people jumped out of the street. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry of the Lawn Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 A Confederate flag is always a symbol of white supremacy. Police support white supremacy on an institutional level. This is basic stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Week Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 1 minute ago, Lew Theobald said: If you are not accusing him of a crime, perhaps you understand why the "fucking pigs" released him without charging him. In that specific instance, you misrepresented what I said -- which I corrected and you again misrepresented. No big surprise here. *yawn* Should not have expected you to go out on a limb for anyone other than the violent Right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 Bannon plotting primaries against slate of GOP incumbents The effort threatens to drain millions from party coffers that could be used against Democrats. http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/10/bannon-gop-primaries-mcconnell-trump-242522 Once Obamacare repeal is dead, the GOP has no plan B The right is regrouping and rethinking. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/9/11/16271168/obamacare-repeal-dead-what-now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Week Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 4 minutes ago, Lew Theobald said: I didn't misrepresent you. If you agree with me that the decal is not evidence of a crime, then just use other evidence. I never said it was - so you did and you are again. Feel free to keep holding on to whatever evidence of bias you see here in other posters while ignoring the evidence of what actually occurred in the incident. Clearly, you are winning the argument in your own mind by keeping the argument disconnected from the facts, as reported, on the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 21 minutes ago, Lew Theobald said: It says the crowd parted as he moved forward. It also says (in different language) that the crowd parted as he moved backwards. Of course, I don't have to assume that the article is 100% accurate. The cops, who chose not to charge this fellow, may have better or different information. There are a number of different versions of this news story, each telling a different version of events. When driving forward, he must have intended to move forward. When driving backwards, he must have intended to move backwards. There was a crowd in both directions. In both cases, the crowd parted as he moved towards them. Obviously, when being attacked by a violent mob, it might be dangerous to remain stationary. The people behind him, attacking his vehicle with rocks and bottles, may possibly be coloring the truth a bit. In any event, they would not ordinarily be judged to be neutral or objective observers. His only alternative would be to remain stationary ... while being attacked by a violent mob. If you are not accusing him of a crime, perhaps you understand why the "fucking pigs" released him without charging him. You seem to be fine being 100% about the mob attacking him based on the same sources you find ~ about his behaviour. Odd, that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.