All Purpose News and Politics Thread Part IV: The Center Cannot Hold

[aja_christopher]

I can't really discuss that until there's an idea of the alternatives, the solutions proposed by Democrats.

Yes you can.

You just don't want to and you'll even try to use articles by writers instead of the policies, proposals, and legislation of actual Democratic politicians and presidents like Clinton and Obama to avoid doing so.

[Malvolio]

Here's a reminder of why Elizabeth Warren will be a better Presidential Candidate than Bernie Sanders. Having a Democratic President won't do much good if the Senate is still dominated by Republicans. But Warren is much more likely than Sanders to support and campaign with Democratic Senate candidates. We probably won't vote Mitch McConnell out of office, but we can make it so that he is no longer Majority Leader.

[kidfresh512]

After today's trump tweets, I wonder if moderates and some on left will still say that trump isn't racist.

Of course they will just claim any uproar is "playing the race card". Just like any other time he is overtly racist and they want to excuse it.

[Kevinroc]

Republicans ready to dive off a cliff on Obamacare
GOP senators hope the courts strike down the health law — even if they have no plan to deal with the ensuing chaos.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...415313?cid=apn

Republicans have no real plan to establish a new health care system if the courts strike down the Affordable Care Act before the 2020 election. But plenty of them are rooting for its demise anyway — even if it means plunging the GOP into a debate that splits the party and leaves them politically vulnerable.

After a decade of trying to gut Obamacare, Republicans may finally get their wish thanks to a Trump administration-backed lawsuit. Its success would cause chaos not only in the insurance markets but on Capitol Hill. And Republican senators largely welcome it — even if they don’t know what comes next.

“I’m ready for it to succeed,” said Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.). “I would love to get back in and actually deal with health care again.”

“Do I hope the lawsuit succeeds? I do,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.). “What I wish is we had some idea where we are going if it does succeed, as it looks more and more like it might.”

Even Republicans not known for taking a hard line are eager for a forcing mechanism to take on Obamacare.

“I have a plan that I would be delighted to have Congress pick up and go forward with,” added Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) of a proposal to protect pieces of the law. “Necessity is the mother of acceptance. I hope that we reach that necessity and that would propel my proposal to see a good deal of support.”

“If it did succeed, I would be very concerned,” said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) of the lawsuit. “I don’t think there’s a plan in place to take care of individuals who’ve been using the exchanges to purchase their insurance or who have been covered under the Medicaid expansion. I’m just hoping the court doesn’t strike it down.”

Democrats are ready to hammer Republicans if the law gets taken down because of the GOP lawsuit. Democrats took back the House last year in large part because of their focus on health care.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) called the GOP’s stance “repeal without a replace.”

“Every plan Republicans have put forward has failed to maintain the protections offered under the current law,” he said. “It's pretty simple: If you care about maintaining protections for people with preexisting conditions, you don’t demand they be taken away.”

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), a close Schumer ally, added, “They better do something. If not, this is all on them. This is all on Mitch McConnell."

[Mister Mets]

Yes you can.

You just don't want to and you'll even try to use articles by writers instead of the policies, proposals, and legislation of actual Democratic politicians and presidents like Clinton and Obama to avoid doing so.

So you're saying that I'm failing to do the independent research to adequately discuss politics on a message board?

I would also clarify that my comments were about the rise in Central American migrants and the ensuing conditions in holding facilities (which was our chain of discussion), not about anything involving President Clinton.

Here's a reminder of why Elizabeth Warren will be a better Presidential Candidate than Bernie Sanders. Having a Democratic President won't do much good if the Senate is still dominated by Republicans. But Warren is much more likely than Sanders to support and campaign with Democratic Senate candidates. We probably won't vote Mitch McConnell out of office, but we can make it so that he is no longer Majority Leader.

Will Warren be a stronger campaign surrogate in Maine, Colorado, Alabama, North Carolina and Arizona than Sanders? They'll need to win three of those elections. The Sanders argument would be that his revolution has a better chance of national coattails.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

After today's trump tweets, I wonder if moderates and some on left will still say that trump isn't racist.

What I want to know is why Trump just doesn’t come out of the KKKloset and say before cameras that he IS a racist? I mean, everyone already knows he is, has been for decades, and today’s loathsome tweets only verified that fact. It’s not like Trump would lose anything in the way of support from his base is he proudly lets his bigot flag fly, hell, his lemmings would only love him more; the evangelicals don’t give a ****; the GOP won’t admonish or censure him, he’s long since taken their manhood and neutered them, meanwhile, the cretins of Faux News would stand up and cheer like there’s no tomorrow. So, what does Trump have to lose for admitting he’s a racist?

[aja_christopher]

So you're saying that I'm failing to do the independent research to adequately discuss politics on a message board?

I'm saying exactly what I'm saying -- that you refuse to hold your party accountable for their actions and are therefore directly complicit in their behavior.

The "argument" that you can't discuss the fact that Republicans are separating children from their families and fighting against providing them with soap and toothbrushes while forcing them to sleep on cold floors because of there are no reasonable alternatives to the Democratic goal of "open borders" is blatantly false and likewise, completely callous.

I'm not sure what makes you think people should buy your articles written by "left-wing" writers over actual Democratic leadership and legislation, but as was said earlier, if that's what passes for conservativism these days then it's no surprise that your party has no problem engaging in both criminal and immoral behavior given the ridiculous lengths you will go to defend it.

[Tami]

The U.S. Deported a Million of Its Own Citizens to Mexico During the Great Depression

In the 1930s, the Los Angeles Welfare Department decided to start deporting hospital patients of Mexican descent. One of the patients was a woman with leprosy who was driven just over the border and left in Mexicali, Mexico. Others had tuberculosis, paralysis, mental illness or problems related to old age, but that didn’t stop orderlies from carrying them out of medical institutions and sending them out of the country.

These were the “repatriation drives,” a series of informal raids that took place around the United States during the Great Depression. Local governments and officials deported up to 1.8 million people to Mexico, according to research conducted by Joseph Dunn, a former California state senator. Dunn estimates around 60 percent of these people were actually American citizens, many of them born in the U.S. to first-generation immigrants. For these citizens, deportation wasn’t “repatriation”—it was exile from their country.

The logic behind these raids was that Mexican immigrants were supposedly using resources and working jobs that should go to white Americans affected by the Great Depression. These deportations happened not only in border states like California and Texas, but also in places like Michigan, Colorado, Illinois, Ohio and New York. In 2003, a Detroit-born U.S. citizen named José Lopez testified before a California legislative committee about his family’s 1931 deportation to Michoacán, a state in Western Mexico.

“I was five years old when we were forced to relocate,” he said. “I…bec[a]me very sick with whooping cough, and suffered very much, and it was difficult to breathe.” After both of his parents and one brother died in Mexico, he and his surviving siblings managed to return to the U.S. in 1945. “We were lucky to come back,” he said. “But there are others that were not so fortunate.”

[Mister Mets]

I'm saying exactly what I'm saying -- that you refuse to hold your party accountable for their actions and are therefore directly complicit in their behavior.

The "argument" that you can't discuss the fact that Republicans are separating children from their families and fighting against providing them with soap and toothbrushes while forcing them to sleep on cold floors because of there are no reasonable alternatives to the Democratic goal of "open borders" is blatantly false and likewise, completely callous.

I'm not sure what makes you think people should buy your articles written by "left-wing" writers over actual Democratic leadership and legislation, but as was said earlier, if that's what passes for conservativism these days then it's no surprise that your party has no problem engaging in both criminal and immoral behavior given the ridiculous lengths you will go to defend it.

On the topic of Democratic leadership, if members of the leadership offer clarity, that's excellent. If Schumer and Pelosi announce a limiting principle on legal immigration, that would indicate that Democrats aren't for de facto open borders. If there is a clear plan offered to fix the problem of the rise in Central American migrants and the ensuing conditions in holding facilities, then it's fair to hold the Republican party accountable if the alternative is clearly superior.

One reason I post here is that I can get the wisdom of the crowd. I'm not just going to learn about the best article you read recently, but about the most interesting things Tami or WestPhillyPunisher so if any of you guys come across an argument as eloquent and comprehensive as Andrew Sullivan's I'll learn about it.

I'll note you haven't addressed Sullivan's points. Your objection is Ad Hominem insinuating that he is not a left-wing writer (fair enough, he's a centrist although he voted for Kerry in 2004, Obama both times and Hillary Clinton in 2016) rather than the substance of anything he says about the current party.

I do tend to make negative inferences based on vagueness, so if politicians aren't answering pretty simple questions, it seems likely that the answer is going to be divisive.

[aja_christopher]

OI'll note you haven't addressed Sullivan's points. Your objection is Ad Hominem insinuating that he is not a left-wing writer (fair enough, he's a centrist although he voted for Kerry in 2004, Obama both times and Hillary Clinton in 2016) rather than the substance of anything he says about the current party.

No -- my objection is that it's ridiculous to offer a writer's opinion and expect people to take that as "evidence" against actual Democratic legislation.

Just as it's ridiculous to expect an honest discussion with you on this issue so long as your goal is to act as if you need a "limiting principle" for Republicans to provide immigrants with humanitarian treatment and children with access to soap, toothbrushes, and medical care.

[kidfresh512]

What I want to know is why Trump just doesn’t come out of the KKKloset and say before cameras that he IS a racist? I mean, everyone already knows he is, has been for decades, and today’s loathsome tweets only verified that fact. It’s not like Trump would lose anything in the way of support from his base is he proudly lets his bigot flag fly, hell, his lemmings would only love him more; the evangelicals don’t give a ****; the GOP won’t admonish or censure him, he’s long since taken their manhood and neutered them, meanwhile, the cretins of Faux News would stand up and cheer like there’s no tomorrow. So, what does Trump have to lose for admitting he’s a racist?

He doesn't even get the hypocrisy in what he's saying either. His entire MAGA slogan supposes that America is not great anymore. Yet he's criticizing these women for essentially the same thing he's saying. He wants to go back to blatant racism and all the brown people knowing their place. And progressives want to move the country forward.

Its all blatant redmeat to the base. And people wonder why minorities aren't just "grateful" and loving the economy. Voting for clear racists, who over and over gain show you who they are and that you are one misstep away from being told "go back to where you come from". I would argue every minority growing up has heard the same horseshit from racists all their life. It is textbook racist catchall when you think the minorities are being uppity and ungrateful.

[Kirby101]

After today's trump tweets, I wonder if moderates and some on left will still say that trump isn't racist.

I take your point, but I don't know anyone on they left who doesn't think Trump is a racist.

[Iron Maiden]

The U.S. Deported a Million of Its Own Citizens to Mexico During the Great Depression

The thing about this is that California was grabbed from Mexico as a part of President Polk's belief in the "Manifest Destiny" of the United States. We did pay them $15 million at least for California and all territory north of the Rio Grande, after laying seige Chapultepec Castle in Mexico City and forcing the deal.

[Gray Lensman]

After today's trump tweets, I wonder if moderates and some on left will still say that trump isn't racist.

Privately they should be thanking him (as begrudgingly as can be managed). He might have finally caused a good distraction and inadvertently defused the Dems current round of infighting. Not deliberately, of course, which is why the thanks should be given through gritted teeth - unless they can be given with a backhand on his way out the door.

[numberthirty]

It's just another dishonest assertion regardless -- most people, including the Democratic "base" are against police corruption, not against police in general.

Introducing things like body cam legislation and community oversight is exactly what addresses those fears but that's exactly the kind of legislation the Republican party obstructs or eliminates.

While I'm not exactly the Democratic base...

The police will always be the most active enforcement arm of one branch of things. As long as things like non-narcotic drugs and prostitution are something has been turned into a black market up above the police level, it's going to create the very situation where police corruption(well, a good chunk of that corruption) is even possible.

While "Against" is sort of a weird way to frame it, the entire framework that they are operating in is just asking for the issues that wind up happening.