Ten oz
Senior Members-
Posts
5551 -
Joined
-
Days Won
17
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by Ten oz
-
Women Rights and Civil Rights were real change and both were political. It is politicians that created Social Security and Medicare. Real change absolutely can be accomplished. In my opinion taking an apathetic view that it can't only aids and encourages those who don't want change in the first place. Yes most jobs that exist today will be gone decades from now. That has been the case since onset of the industrial revolution. People use to make a good living walking around cities hand lighting street lamps. Protecting those jobs was hardly a good argument for not developing an electrical grid. The invention of the car put many carpenters who built stagecoach's for a living out of work. My grandmother was born in 1909 in Nebraska without running water or electricity. She passed away in 1996 in Berkeley CA. You reference expecting the impossible; she went from a time when flight didn't exist to actually using commercial flight herself several times. She went from huddling around a neighbors radio to hear world news to having 24hr cable TV news in her living. Every aspect of society as she knew changed during her lifetime. None of those changes happened overnight though. It was all incremental. The world is always changing in significant ways. China and India of today compared to just 50yrs ago are incredibility different. Just 30yrs ago Germany was separated into 2 nations by a wall. Today Germany is one of the strongest economic powers in the world. You say we can't be patient but I don't see how we can afford not to be. Watching the world change is like watching grass grow in that it is absolutely happening and at the maximum speed it can within a given environment and yet from moment to moment is undetectable.
-
To receive DACA protection all had to register with Immigration services. Many local govt have changed their laws to make them legal. At this point they are documented and depending on where they're living legal within their communities. Ultimately this discussing is about what the law should be and not what is was 10yrs ago. Democrats and Republicans are debating about what the law will be and for Raider to just continue stating that illegal means illegal is completely useless to that conversation. The issue surround DACA is very similar to the issue surrounding Marijuana. Local govts all over the country have already passed legislation allowing it and the federal govt took a no enforcement approach. Ignoring those realities and just stating Marijuana is illegal and illegal means illegal is a total non-starter at this point. What the law should be and is now is what matters.
-
I agree people should vote for real change but people also must be realistic about how much can change at once. Obama was President for 8yrs and for 6 of those years had a combative Congress. I think Obama did about the best job he possibly could have all things considered but a lot of people, Sander supporters specifically, feel he was a disappointment. I have heard many progressives voice disappointment that Obama didn't accomplish X, Y, and Z. I think many of those people are delusional about what is possible in 8yrs. Back to my earlier point nothing resets when new people come to office. Obama became President in the middle of a depression. We were losing a half million jobs a money, foreclosures were at record highs, annual deficit was over 1.6 trillion, and we were fight 2 wars overseas. Obama had to address all that. Change is possible but it is also incremental. No President or Congress can get us from where we are today to an annual budget surplus in 4yrs. It would take 4yrs just to get our annual deficits to even freeze and another 4yrs after that to reverse. Obama is proof that the public doesn't reward success. We need to go several election cycles with consistent policies rather than the calls for massive change. Obama managed to cut the annual deficit in half during his tenure. Currently it is already up 20% and rising under Trump. I stress the deficit because without money the Govt can't afford to do anything. The sort of changes progressives are hoping for: single payer, free education, govt supported daycare, infrastructure spending, and etc have costly initial price tags that save money in the long term. Problem is that with power constantly swinging back and forth there is never a long term. Separately Republicans have only won the popular vote once in the last 7 elections (28yrs) yet amazingly control every branch of govt. Having more parties to shake things up is a thought people mutually support but is the 2 party system really the problem? Republicans win 1 national vote out of 7 yet get to call all the shots? Rather than being apathetic towards the 2 major parties I think people should be extremely pissed off that their votes aren't respected. Let's strive to fix gerrymandering, voter suppression, and our electoral system. We do that first and I think the 2 parties become more responsive to what the majority of citizens actually want. We can talk about new parties but ultimately have what we have so we should strive to fix what we have rather than just pontificate about how nice it would be to have something else which doesn't exist.
-
You have no problem with legal immigration yet haven't bothered to render post addressing the legal immigrants from El Salvador and Haiti Republicans want to deport. From this thread OP: " In 2018 the nature of debate has greatly changed. Those who came here legally as refugees from Haiti and El Salvador are being asked to leave. The military has suspended the Military Accessions Vital to National Interest (MAVNI) program which enabled immigrants to legally become citizens in trade for service. The Presidents travel ban seeks to limit the ability of targeted Muslim groups to legally travel to the U.S. It appears that Republicans do not care whether immigrants are legal or illegal anymore. The goal simply seems to be less immigration period." You keep repeating that illegal immigration illegal while ignoring what is actually happening and being discussed. Two hundred thousand immigrants from El Salvador in 2001 and nearly 60,000 immigrants from Haiti in 2010 came to the U.S. LEGALLY and Republicans what then gone. Those are the shithole countries Trump referenced. Additionally the administration has suspended programs like MAVNI which enable immigrants to LEGALLY become citizens and has sought to limit the amount of LEGAL immigration allowed into the country overall. We all understand that your think illegal immigration is illegal; we get it. Can we discuss LEGAL immigration now?
-
No doubt. Beyond the rhetoric even Republicans understand that to have a stable economy the Govt needs to employ people andspend money. Presidents like FDR and Eisenhower envisioned those jobs/spending being primarily in infrastructure and public services but as the Women movement and Civil Rights threatened the nature of control specific groups of people had over the population many began to look at limiting infrastructure and service as a way to mute people and maintain their advantage. Govt employment is still needed though so we pour all the cash that should be put into infrastructure and services into the military to ensure the money is still circulated. Large military contractors like Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and etc could just as easily be building a national high speed rail system, electric charge stations for cars, LED embedded roads, updating our drinking water infrastructure, and etc rather than building bombs. Same money could go to the same companies to do other projects which would be considerably more beneficial to the public overall but various groups do not want to help the public at large.
-
I think a lot of people wish we could hit a reset button; liberal and conservative alike. That makes 3rd parties appealing as they represent a new direction or fresh start. Reality is that a reset is impossible. Doesn't matter who we elect we already have the laws, agencies, debts, and etc we have. Businesses can go bankrupt, sell off sections, hire in new management and start over but our govt cannot. Whomever is elected into office (any elected office) has to directly take on the current state of affairs. It is an unbroken chain. The Iraq and Afghanistan wars didn't end just because Bush wasn't POTUS anymore.
-
There could be another 3 parties it doesn't erase the the multi trillion dollar annual debt we'll be faced with. Party aside to dig out of this whole a lot of very unpopular things will need to happen. We need large increases in taxes among wealthier citizens (by wealthy I don't strictly mean billionaires), massive changes to bank regulations to protect consumers, changes to capital gains taxes, corporate taxes, massive defense spending cuts, and etc. Doing those things will certainly have immediate (but short term) negative impacts on the economy. For example I think we all agree Defense spending needs to shrink. Military Defense jobs makes up over 10% of all manufacturing jobs in the country. The Defense industry employs 4 million people. Cuts to Defense spending will result in the loss of a lot of jobs and problem shrink national GDP for a couple years. I can't imagine any party being able to sell purposely creating a recession for the long term good.
-
Because they see White Christians(evangelicals) are the rightful heirs to U.S. heritage and success. Evangelicals Whites believe being gay is a sin and like marijuana laws because it empowers law enforcement to get after minorities. If whites went to prison for marijuana conservatives would feel very different about it. Whites are the majority of those overdosing on opioids which is why it is a national health crisis rather than a national scourge like Crack Cocaine was. The Opioid crisis is being dealt with compassionately while other drug epidemics have been dealt with by increasing minimum sentencing and giving local Police Departments military equipment. Mass Shooters and most Mass gun hoarders are white. So Conservatives ignore mass shootings and an ineffective cost of freedom. It is very simple they see things as being either pro their advantage or con. They do not ethically take any true position beyond their perceived collect benefit towards keeping them in the drivers seat. They do not care where the car is headed; only that they are driving because it is there place to drive. It is akin to chauvinistic men who insist on driving, controlling the remote, women be the ones to vacuuming, or etc based on their own strange internal ideology about a mans place in the world. Yeah, even if the Democrats take control of Congress in 2018 and win the White House in 2020 a lot of damage is already done. Deficits are climbing and raising taxes has proven to be impossible over the last 40yrs. We had Reagan's rounds of tax cuts, Bush's rounds of tax cuts, and now Trump's tax cut without any significant push in the opposite direction. I guess that is the GOP's long term plan; starve the beast. It is really hard to imagine Democrats successfully being able to negotiate any type of single payer healthcare system, free community college, govt assisted child daycare, or etc when it is running multi trillion dollar annual deficits.
-
Yeah but Obama wasn't legitimate. Trump won the biggest electoral college win since Reagan and would have won the popular by several millions if not for California and illegal voters. *Sarcasm
-
Republicans seem to feel that this U.S. is a White Christian nation. They only see whites as legitimate voters. Democrats who are elected with heavy percentages of Black, Latino, and Asian support are not legitimate in their eyes. How many times during Obama's tenure did you hear or read a conservative dismiss Obama legitimacy as President by say he only won because black people voted for him? The bike you reference should be a unicycle far as conservatives are concerned. Many honestly believe Democrats are propped up by illegal immigrant votes and other undesirables; people who have no right to be participating in our democracy.
-
Since Trump announced he was running to now the news media has transformed into the pro/con Trump media. Trump receives more daily coverage than any politician I have ever seen. Even talk shows like Kimmel and Colbert devote there entire opening monologues to Trump. The impact is billions upon billions of dollars of free press and a political environmental where Trump can control the public narrative with a single tweet. Two years ago I very distinctly recall political conversations here in the U.S. centering around things like what we should do regarding Assad in Syria, Russia in Crimea, contaminants in our drinking water, and etc. Today none of that stuff matters; no news but Trump news matters. Oprah Winfrey might be the only person considering running who is famous enough to break Trump's media spell. I can't imagine CNN, FoxNews, MSNBC, or etc cutting away from a fiery panel discussing about Trump to cover some nuanced policy position Elizabeth Warren or Cory Booker released on their campaign sites. That is the one thing, the only thing, I like about a potential run by Oprah; she would get equal time which means democrats would finally get equal time. If Oprah and Trump were both giving live speeches at the same time some networks would go with Oprah over Trump and the ones which don't would discuss her speech soon as Trump finishes.
-
Republicans are not interested in governing and have no idea how to. Most elected Republicans got elected campaign against government in the first place. When we put people in office who complain that government doesn't work and private business is preferred for everything this is what we end up with. For many of the House Republicans creating chaos and disorder while threatening numerous federal agency responsible for the health and well being of our infrastructure and lives is just them keeping their campaign promises.
-
If we believe, as I think must of us do, the Doctor fudged the height than doesn't that call the whole medical exam into question? I don't think we can trust any of it.
-
I have no doubt about it.
-
Because it is akin to what you are doing. No one can prove whether or not she knows Norway is a majority white country because no know can read her mind so there is plausible deniable there. Maybe she was being serious, right? Just as I can't hop the fence at the White House and put a tape measure next to Trump. It is all just a bit of gamesmanship meant to obfuscate his ongoing abuses of authority and lies.........Maybe there really was record turnout at the inauguration too; after all we can't trust our own lying eyes.
-
Irrelevant in context to the groups Trump and Republicans are targeting and the Democrats are seeking to protect. The Salvadorians and Haitians Trump wants deported came here legally. As for DACA it only applies to those who were to young to consent one way or another and had to register with immigration services for the protection; they are not undocumented nor did they knowing commit a crime.
-
Again, you are arguing that decades worth of videos and photo ops have misrepresented his actually height. Form his tan, his hair, his use of non-disclosure agreements, and etc Trump is very protective of his imagine yet he has ignored decades worth of bad lighting making him look short? I understand you are taking the plausible deniability angle here but it seems as though with Trump that is all anyone is ever doing. Trump's nominee for DHS Kristjen Nielsen went so far as to suggest she wasn't sure if Norway was a predominantly white country while being questioned by the Senate FFS. It is all just Gish Gallop.
-
Trump has been photographed and recorded millions of times over the decades. He has made thousands of public appears throughout his life. There are countless photos and videos of him standing next to other famous people who have known heights. Trump is obviously not 6'3. If we only had a hundred pictures or a single short video to look at than maybe one could say he is just wearing flat shoes or is photographed at a bad angle but decades of countless photos...come on. Jeb Bush and Trump participated together in 8 debates during the primary. You are arguing that at every debate Jeb Bush was just wearing shoes that made him look taller or that the video crew titled the camera in a way that made Trump appear shorter? It isn't like I am claiming Trump is actually 5'3 or some crazy number of inches below 6'3; just that he obviously isn't 6'3. I would prefer to not litter the thread with links to videos and photos but there are millions out there. Trump appears to just a little short than everyone listed as 6'2 he stands next to from entertainers like Steve Harvey to other politicians like Mitt Romney. I find it next to impossible that video and photos would consistently be wrong over and over for decades.
-
I am not claiming he he was ordered. Rather my responses regarding him following unlawful orders was playing out if he had been. I do not pretend to know his motives for lying.
-
Nope, I suggest you read through this thread. I have repeated said Trump's height (I haven't even mentioned his weight) is irrelevant. I am upset about a Navy Rear Admiral following an unlawful order to lie. The White House's doctor is a political appointee. Trump asking them to lie is unlawful. Them lying is unlawful. it is a problem. From Trump asking Comey to let the stuff with Flynn go to him tweet about the Justice Department investigating his political rivals there is a serious pattern here of Trump abusing his position and those around him kowtowing. It is a serious problem.
-
All of that is true but I think racism plays a bigger role. If a immigrant from Norway came over and did everything the same as an immigrant from Haiti this administration and most Republicans in general would applaud the Norwegians and have problem with the Haitian. It doesn't really matter how an immigrant behaves, how many jobs they create, how hard they work, how many govt subsides they use, or etc. Only thing that seems to matter is their ethnicity. Trump made that point crystal clear with his shithole comment. In that discussion Democrats where trying to support Haitians who have already be legally in this country for 7 yrs. They are all vetted, documented,and have built lives here in the U.S. yet Trump wants to through ALL of them out regardless where they work, how much they pay in taxes, etc while at the same times Trump welcomes an imaginary group of new immigrants from Norway. Obviously nothing about what an immigrant does as an individual matters to Trump. Where they come from is what matters, all that matters.
-
If the senior brass isn't willing to refuse unlawful orders than we are all f@*&^%. He could have just said Trump's health is good but that he won't discuss specific details which aren't relevant to the public. Trump's height isn't actually important. The Doctors willingness to lie over something so trivial is very disheartening. I also don't believe he would have gone to court martial for saying no as that would only create a public record of him stating under oath Trump ordered him to lie. At worst he'd be forced to retire at the end of his current tour which is likely to happen anyway given the attrition rates of senior commissioned personnel. Either way the Doctor had a duty to not lie.
-
Per the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 90 one must obey all lawful orders. Key word being lawful. I don't believe it an order to lie about ones height is a Lawful order. "The order must relate to military duty, which includes all activities reasonably necessary to accomplish a military mission, or safeguard or promote the morale, discipline, and usefulness of members of a unit and directly with the maintenance of good order in the armed forces. MCM, pt. IV, 14c(2)(a)(iii). The order can affect otherwise private activity. United States v. McDaniels , 50 M.J. 407 (C.A.A.F. 1999) (order to not drive personal vehicle after diagnosis of narcolepsy); United States v. Hill , 49 M.J. 242 (C.A.A.F. 1999) (no- contact order issued by military police had valid military purpose of maintaining good order and discipline in the military community and to protect the alleged victim while during the investigation); United States v. Padgett , 48 M.J. 273 (C.A.A.F. 1998) (order requiring 25-year- old service member to terminate his romantic relationship with 14-year-old girl had valid military purpose); United States v. Milldebrandt , 25 C.M.R. 139 (C.M.A. 1958) (order to report, while on leave, financial conditions unrelated to the military did not have valid military purpose). An order that has for its sole object a private end is unlawful, but an order that benefits the command as well as serving individuals is lawful. United States v. Robinson , 20 C.M.R. 63 (C.M.A. 1955) (use of enlisted personnel in Officers’ Open Mess at Fort McNair)." http://www.ucmjdefense.com/resources/military-offenses/the-lawfulness-of-orders.html
-
That is an excellent point. Much of the U.S. literally use to be Mexico. Hispanics are ingenious while blacks and Asians were forced to immigrate to work as labor. That history looms big over the way many internalize this issue.