Varysblackfyre321 Posted February 28, 2019 Author Share Posted February 28, 2019 1 hour ago, DMC said: OMG, the grey area has nothing to do with this. This is not a legalization and/or decriminalization debate. The issue that is not black and white is that when prostitution is still illegal and/or criminalized, which it is in most states, which is the status quo, which is the reality most prosecutors have had to deal with, then prosecuting sex work related crimes - regardless of if sex trafficking is involved - is not a black and white issue. To deny this reality is to deny justice to the victims you purport to defend. So long as prostitution is illegal people will be prosecuted for it? OMG, I didn’t know that when I said it’s bad for government to legally be able to be punish consenting adults over this people were actually prosecuted it. Sarcasm. No where did I suggest prostitution was legal in most places in the US. I did not deny this reality I’ve acknowledged and condemned as something that is shameful. You brought none of these points up in the last post. All you did was point to types of abuse that does sadly happen towards sex-workers and followed it up by saying the abuse would go down if prostitution and restate it’s not a black and white issue. In response to me just saying that it’s bad in 2019 government is allowed to punish sex-workers for their craft and that I hope more democratic candidates would support decriminalization of it. You can probably do this to for most statements for legalizing something. ”Consuming/selling pot often gets a lot of people who shouldn’t locked up in jail or prison in most states and that’s a bad thing we need to change” And you could go, ”Pot is illegal, people get prosecuted over it wake up” Makes as much sense quite frankly. But, we apparently agree there’s no black and white in terms actual legalization. Prostitution should be decriminalized no real good argument against it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 13 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: In response to me just saying that it’s bad in 2019 government is allowed to punish sex-workers for their craft and that I hope more democratic candidates would support decriminalization of it. No, it's in response to you having a bug up your ass about this with Harris and now giving her a backhanded compliment. Your attacks on her have been centered on the concept that prostitution should be legalized which, ok, but that's not a fair context in which to judge her record. That's my point. If you can't see the difference and are gonna develop a hostile attitude with weird formatting that hurts my eyes, I don't care to continue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rippounet Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 8 hours ago, DMC said: This whole discussion on Roberts, and I guess Kavanaugh, is way overanalyzing a few cases. Not for Roberts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varysblackfyre321 Posted February 28, 2019 Author Share Posted February 28, 2019 49 minutes ago, DMC said: No, it's in response to you having a bug up your ass about this with Harris and now giving her a backhanded compliment. Your attacks on her have been centered on the concept that prostitution should be legalized which, ok, but that's not a fair context in which to judge her record. That's my point. If you can't see the difference and are gonna develop a hostile attitude with weird formatting that hurts my eyes, I don't care to continue. You could have just said Harris’ positions in regards to sex-work shouldn’t be criticized or discussed in the beginning man. In the last two responses you’ve given to me you didn’t actually mention Harris. All you argued is the “issue” not being a black and white issue without really going into what the even the “ issue” you were talking about is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 4 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: You could have just said Harris’ positions in regards to sex-work shouldn’t be criticized or discussed in the beginning man. In the last two responses you’ve given to me you didn’t actually mention Harris. All you argued is the “issue” not being a black and white issue without really going into what the even the “ issue” you were talking about is. "In regards to" is incorrect. Identification of a previous topic for the purpose of further discourse is by an almost exclusive nature singular. You send someone your regards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorn Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 I'm kinda late to the party with this, but I was fascinated to hear that 1 million volunteers have already signed up for the Sanders campaign in less than one week - that's 1 out of every 300 Americans! I couldn't find the numbers to find out if it was a primary record or not, the best I found that Obama had 2.2 million volunteers in the general election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 10 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: You could have just said Harris’ positions in regards to sex-work shouldn’t be criticized or discussed in the beginning man. I'm not saying that it shouldn't be criticized. For the third time, I'm saying you have directly, and now in subtext, criticized her based on the concept that prostitution should be legalized rather than fairly contextualizing the reality she was presented with as a prosecutor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varysblackfyre321 Posted February 28, 2019 Author Share Posted February 28, 2019 39 minutes ago, DMC said: I'm not saying that it shouldn't be criticized. For the third time, I'm saying you have directly, and now in subtext, criticized her based on the concept that prostitution should be legalized rather than fairly contextualizing the reality she was presented with as a prosecutor. Yeah, no. The bills that I contended hurt sex-workers, the ones I criticized her for supporting-she didn’t have to support them. At all. You point to the fact she was prosecutor, as if somehow that’s a great mitigating factor but the things I’ve criticized her on are things she chose to push for entirely on her own volition and was no shape or form legally compelled to do based of her position. It’s one thing to say a prosecutor should be given leniency for prosecuting those who broke a ridiculous law but it’s something else when the ridiculous law in question was something the prosecutor actively advocated for and helped get passed into law in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 15 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: but it’s something else when the ridiculous law in question was something the prosecutor actively advocated for and helped get passed into law in the first place. Except that's not what happened at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 What a loser. And he refused to talk about Human rights, which is a fucking President's job, all to stop a deal from tanking. Quote President Donald Trump acknowledged Thursday that North Korea is not ready to completely wind down its nuclear weapons program because, telling Fox News's Sean Hannity that he understands how much work the country has put into its arsenal. Trump spoke with Hannity following two days of meetings on denuclearization with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in Vietnam. That summit was abruptly cut short Thursday afternoon after it became clear that no deal could be reached. In a clip of Trump’s interview that aired on “Fox & Friends,” Trump said that Kim only “wanted to denuke certain areas, and I wanted everything.” “The sanctions are there, and I didn't want to give up the sanctions unless we had a real program, and they're not ready for that and I understand that fully, I really do,” he continued. “I mean, they spent a lot of time building it. But that doesn't mean the world has to be happy. But I wanted them to denuke.” Trump: I 'fully' understand why North Korea wouldn't denuclearize https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/28/trump-north-korea-nuclear-weapons-1195330 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 In other words: BREAKING NEWS: Trump failed at what everyone knew he was going to fail at. But he tried his bestest to get Cohen off the front pages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spockydog Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 1 hour ago, Martell Spy said: Trump: I 'fully' understand why North Korea wouldn't denuclearize He probably looked at what happened to Gadaffi after he gave up his nuclear weapons program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 I think that the best deal the US could possibly hope for is for NK to take apart it's nuclear enrichment facilities and agree to do no more enrichment (with some inspections program) in exchange for a full lifting of sanctions. NK would keep the 20-30 nukes it has right now. That would be enough that no one would dare invade them for regime change, which is what their tinpot dictator is most afraid of. But at the same time, with a limited number of nukes and a small country, he would know that he's in a weak position to actually start throwing his weight around with the rest of the world. Even that is a HUGE win for NK, but since no one can credibly threaten invasion when they have nukes, this is the best bad option. And, ridiculously enough, that might be where Trump wants to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 Do they have a Nobel Prize for “Understanding”? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 6 hours ago, Jace, Basilissa said: I'd like to see what Kirstin Dunst could do with the role. She has a lot of range. It’s Kirsten noob, and you just want to see her in the rain again. And no, you cannot play Spider-Jace. No for you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 1 hour ago, Maithanet said: I think that the best deal the US could possibly hope for is for NK to take apart it's nuclear enrichment facilities and agree to do no more enrichment (with some inspections program) in exchange for a full lifting of sanctions. NK would keep the 20-30 nukes it has right now. That would be enough that no one would dare invade them for regime change, which is what their tinpot dictator is most afraid of. But at the same time, with a limited number of nukes and a small country, he would know that he's in a weak position to actually start throwing his weight around with the rest of the world. Even that is a HUGE win for NK, but since no one can credibly threaten invasion when they have nukes, this is the best bad option. And, ridiculously enough, that might be where Trump wants to go. My worry is that failed negotiations will empower the crazy moustache in the administration. I agree that is the best deal to be had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Horse Named Stranger Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 11 hours ago, Gertrude said: I've never held much hope that there would be a smoking gun. I think there are grounds for impeachment, but I don't think it can happen in the senate without some serious evidence. I'm just hoping and praying that we can change enough opinions about him to turn the tide in 2020. Attack him over his taxes, his tweets, his temperament, his lousy staff, but most importantly - his nonexistent knowledge about god-damned anything. Pin him to the wall and don't let him weasel word his way out with platitudes. First. There's no wall, congress won'T fund wall, wall won't work. Then again, temperament, tweets, texts, morons surrounding him, and his dipshittery didn't stop Republicans from voting him into office. It's not like he has grown any dumber during the past couple of years. It's still dipshit Donnie, or just Twitler if you will. 10 hours ago, karaddin said: Re: Sex work and decriminalisation - it really is as black and white as VBF says. Trafficking isn't sex work and would still be illegal even if sex work is decriminalised and those that have been trafficked and are in need to help find it much easier to get that help when the industry isn't illegal. When they can go to the police, when clients that notice problems can go to the police. I don't expect people to actually accept it, or the major dems to take it up as an issue, but start listening to the sex work advocates who are actually, or have actually been, sex workers instead of SWERFs that conflate two completely different things to manipulate people into agreeing with them. Second Somewhat more serious response to a serious issue. Decriminalization can lead to some pretty dire unwanted side effects. Path to hell paved with good intentions and stuff. In Germany there are now so called Flat Rate Brothels. So giving prostitutes the same rights as other workers is a good idea, but when you think of Amazon warehouse employees or the folks working at MacDonald's, you can see how this has the potential to go bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 Not that it's rocket science, but it's becoming increasingly clear that the battleground states in 2020 are going to be MI, WI, PA, FL and AZ. Maybe NC if you're being generous, although I have trouble envisioning a scenario where NC flips blue and the Democrats haven't already won. Priorities USA mostly agrees with this: Quote Priorities USA, the Democratic super PAC, recently released a strategy memo in which it reaffirmed this consensus by identifying Pennsylvania and Michigan as the two states Democrats are most likely to regain from Trump in 2020. The group then pinpointed Wisconsin as the state most likely to push the Democratic nominee’s vote count over the edge, with Florida ranking next as the state most likely to tip toward the Democrats. The group announced it will shortly launch a $100 million advertising and organizing effort in those four states. I'd definitely agree with PA and MI as being (almost) must-win states for Democrats, but I think that AZ might be just as promising as FL at this point. After all, FL has just barely voted Republican for the past three cycles, whereas 2018 Arizona split it's decision (Dem Senate and SecState, Republican Gov). I hope that $100 million is spent more on organizing and registering than advertising, although obviously Democrats will need both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gertrude Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 1 hour ago, A Horse Named Stranger said: Then again, temperament, tweets, texts, morons surrounding him, and his dipshittery didn't stop Republicans from voting him into office. It's not like he has grown any dumber during the past couple of years. It's still dipshit Donnie, or just Twitler if you will. Agreed. The true believers are doubling down on the stupid. I'm more pinning my hopes on the people who were on the fence or voted for Trump as an agent of change. I know several Trump voters who just didn't want status quo and now regret that vote. I'm hoping to push these people away from supporting him again or at least have them sit this one out. I should wish for a pony while I'm at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lokisnow Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 AOC joining forces with Pelosi to try and maintain caucus unity and whip defector Dems to NOT support poison pill republican amendments at the obscure congressional procedural phase called the motion to recommit. Republicans NEVER lost a single motion to recommit in the house from 2011 to 2018, democrat dummies have already lost TWO, and one was a horrible one on that big gun violence bill. https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/28/nancy-pelosi-house-democrats-1195854 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.