All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!

[Tazirai]

This, this is pretty epic.

[worstblogever]

That is a much longer way of explaining, "only two bills he wrote were passed, one was passed to open a post office". I mean, "roll call amendment" from '95 to '07? That's like, "ooh, attendance record".

That might have to do with how Sanders has run in front of a cable news camera non-stop for the past decade, without actually doing anything else.

But hey, keep huffing those Bernie fumes, friend.

[numberthirty]

Illinois governor Bruce Rauner is 9 points behind his Democratic challenger J.B. Pritzker in the first poll for that race. Gonna be an uphill climb for him.

Without trying to poke too much fun, that's ain't exactly news.

If it could make it onto the ballot, I'm pretty sure Candy Corn would be ahead of Rauner in the polls.

[Mister Mets]

Fox News Pundit, Charles Krauthammer, has died at the age of 68 due to cancer.

Very sad news. He was an excellent writer.

You include Kennedy with two War Criminals Traitors because he had some affairs?

It seems he had his teenage mistress perform oral sex on his special assistant in his presence.

https://newrepublic.com/article/100566/jfk-monster

And then there's the time he shared a mistress with mafia types. It goes beyond just having some affairs.

I agree with thar.

But..my original point..was that I see naff all difference between the scale of Peter Fonda’s offence and Roseanne Barr’s.

I think both show an inherently and similarly unpleasant cast of mind.

But because Peter is “liberal” I predict he will face far fewer consequences than Roseanne.

There are some differences, a few in Peter Fonda's favor and a few in Roseanne's.

Against Roseanne, there is her general history of terrible comments. Her firing did not occur in a vacuum.
Her specific comment fit a racist trope.
Peter Fonda apologized immediately and quickly for what he said, and his statements came from a place of anger about the poor treatment of marginalized people.

Against Peter Fonda, there is the fact that his comment was against about a child rather than a powerful adult.
Fonda is also a rich white guy with rich and famous parents. He hit the privilege jackpot.

"The Conners" has been announced as a real thing in the last couple of days.

The producers may find that it's harder to do without Roseanne, since unlike Garfield, Roseanne was actually funny.

We'll see. It's going to be a different series without her to bounce against. But it is worth noting that her costars' careers have been much more successful. John Goodman's been in a lot of good projects while Laurie Metcalf is an Oscar nominee and Tony winner.

Still, the holocaust of the Native American people and slavery are easily 2 of the top 5 atrocities of human history. And they made this country. Other than China and the Soviet Union, which nation was born in a deeper pool of blood?

Slavery was hardly exclusive to the United States.

[PunishedFire]

So glad to see American soldier remains coming back from North Korea.

That is closure for some people in a big way.

Really hope this tract continues!

[Mister Mets]

I can see the logic in that but I also think getting the proverbial "second chance at life" by coming to America might also contribute to immigrants being more law-abiding -- and hard-working -- than the people who already live here and take the opportunities here for granted.

A lot of them come here and start their own businesses as well, which is a good thing for the economy in the long run -- I think it's important to examine real data in that respect (i.e. "pros and cons") instead of just relying on conjecture: humanitarian behavior can also be profitable in the right circumstances.



Anytime you hear the words "open border" you can usually tell that you're in talking point territory -- the goal isn't to have a rational debate about the issue at hand, it's to paint you as someone who doesn't believe in sensible (albeit humane) immigration policy.

Like one that doesn't separate kids from their parents and hold them in cages indefinitely in undisclosed areas around the country with no solid plan for reunification.

The phrase "open border" pops up because advocates for "sensible immigration policy" rarely articulate what that means (Who should not be allowed into the country? How many people should be allowed? How do you keeps the numbers low?) and because some of the arguments on the left (Abolish Ice! Release families on their own recognizance) essentially criticize any alternative to borders that are effectively open.

This is just my personal opinion...I mean, I could be wrong so call it more of a theory....

Beyond White Privilege, I think there is also White Jealously. White European Americans are inherently jealous of Non-whites. They see Non-whites as having traits that they don't have and maybe can't. Basically, Whites have lost their sense of Community and Heritage. They (we, since I'm one too) have no heritage anymore, no sense of history or community. This loss of a sense of community fosters a lack of empathy, it encourages a sense of personal privilege, of Me First, of self-centerness.

Compare St. Patrick's Day with Hispanic Day Parades. The first is all about getting drunk, the second is all about community and heritage.

I, personally, have not fallen into that mindset. I actually think that multiculturalism and the diversifying of human genetics that comes from interracial marriages can make the human race stronger and better. I am a little jealous of the closer family ties often shown by Non-white communities, but I accept it. But many other whites have fallen into that mindset.

This is a bet messy since there are different experiences for all sorts of people based on their heritage.

For many African Americans, there is a sense of lost heritage because they don't know much about their ancestors, due to erased records during generations of slavery and racist policies.

Many white people don't have much of a sense of heritage because their families are from all over. Others are proud of bits and pieces from various ancestors (the stereotypical one-eighth Irish guy who loves St Patrick's day) or can trace the majority of their roots to one part of the world due to relatively recent immigration/ ancestors who married within the community (which is my case- my family's from Estonia, a country with a population of about a million people.)

The answer is already out there -- nobody sweats it when Irish people celebrate St. Patrick's Day or if Germans celebrate Oktoberfest or if Italians or Swiss or Finns want to celebrate their own unique culture or boast (like Rocky and Connor) about Italian or Irish or other kinds of national "pride": I don't think most people of color have a problem with those kinds of cultural celebrations and if they have, I haven't seen them.

The problem is that "white pride" has a lot of negative historical connotations -- especially here in America -- so it's only reasonable that we're wary when we hear that kind of terminology.

It gets a bit messy for the white people who don't have one specific unique culture or heritage.

Sanders should be sued for harassment. Complaining about someone on twitter is tantamount to weaponizing your followers for cyber-bullying.

This is a major problem for two reasons.

Would you be ready to insist that this be universally enforced, so that no Democrat could complain about anyone on twitter?

One of the principles of American law is the idea that truth is a bar absolute. There is no claim that Sanders' claims about her experience at the restaurant are untrue or inaccurate.

I see it as her punching low as well as being a total hypocrite. She's all about protecting the constitutional rights of small businesses to exclude gay customers, but the second another small business exercises its rights to exclude her, well this is predjudice in motion and it needs to be called out immediately.

The Masterpiece cake shop case was not about the right to exclude gay customers.

There were multiple arguments that were not applicable with the restaurant. The baker said he would be willing to make cakes for gay customers. If a gay customer needed something for a birthday or graduation, he'd provide it; the opposition was specifically to gay weddings (at a time when the state did not recognize gay marriage.) The baker also claimed that custom products are a form of artistic expression, which doesn't apply to anything ordered for a menu. The review board was also dismissive of any good-faith religious opposition to gay marriage, which is a big reason that half the court's liberals went with the decision.

She has a personal twitter account. She chose to do this on the official Press Secretary account.

If she wants to bitch, she should bitch as SHS, not as Press Secretary.

That's a different argument, although it does seem she got the reaction she did because of her profession.

It's so weird that you just can't abolish ice and never have ice ever again. It's so weird that you just can't do that, why do we need ice we never had ice before. Why do we need to start from scratch? Ice does not predate the 2000s so why do we need it?

If there are immigration laws, shouldn't there be some kind of enforcement mechanisms?

[Tami]

Trump Calls for Depriving Immigrants Who Illegally Cross Border of Due Process Rights

Still, the president, who has always dug his heels in when criticized, has not backed back down from his hard-line talk, even amid a national outcry over a detainment policy that has resulted in the separation of more than 2,300 children from their families.

He has instead gone on the offensive, complaining to aides about why he could not just create an overarching executive order to solve the problem, according to two people familiar with the deliberations. Aides have had to explain to the president why a comprehensive immigration overhaul is beyond the reach of his executive powers.

And privately, the president has groused that he should not have signed the order undoing separations.

“Our system is a mockery to good immigration policy and Law and Order,” Mr. Trump tweeted Sunday, adding, “Our Immigration policy, laughed at all over the world, is very unfair to all of those people who have gone through the system legally and are waiting on line for years! Immigration must be based on merit.”

But Mr. Trump’s call to ignore due process faced both constitutional questions and dissension from Republicans in Congress, some of whom have insisted that the number of judges be increased so migrant families can have their cases heard more quickly. Federal immigration courts faced a backlog of more than 700,000 cases in May, and cases can take months or years to be heard.

The House bill up for a vote this week would beef up border security and provide a path to citizenship for the young undocumented immigrants known as Dreamers, while also effectively codifying Mr. Trump’s executive order by allowing migrant families to be detained together indefinitely.

Many on Capitol Hill believe legislation is necessary to deal with the order, since it allows indefinite detentions. Under a 1997 consent decree known as the Flores settlement, migrant families can be detained for no more than 20 days, leaving the order’s status in court in doubt.

But the president’s conflicting statements are complicating legislative efforts, said Senator Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona.

“It makes it very difficult,” Mr. Flake said on ABC’s “This Week,” continuing, “It’s difficult in any event, right, in an election year where the president has decided to have this at the forefront of the Republican election strategy to paint the Democrats as soft of immigration.”

He added: “I don’t know how in the world we’re going to fix this in the short term, given the Flores decision and given the lack of infrastructure, judges to process these claims. It’s really a big mess.”

[Jack Dracula]

I agree with thar.

But..my original point..was that I see naff all difference between the scale of Peter Fonda’s offence and Roseanne Barr’s.

I think both show an inherently and similarly unpleasant cast of mind.

But because Peter is “liberal” I predict he will face far fewer consequences than Roseanne.

Again, not excusing his behavior, but Fonda's comments were based in anger at the treatment of innocent children by the Trump administration, which is at least understandable. His mistake was in his way of expressing it.
Rosanne's point seems to have been "Burning Jews is funny".
I can't reconcile those two.

[Tendrin]

Parents in immigration detention who’ve been separated from their children are being told their families can be reunited if they sign voluntary deportation orders, the Texas Tribune reported Sunday.
The paper cited an unnamed Honduran man who told the paper that he and the majority of the roughly 20 to 25 others he was with in the IAH Polk County Secure Adult Detention Center, outside Houston, had been given the same offer.

Who's surprised?

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewi...ortation-order

[Tazirai]

That is a much longer way of explaining, "only two bills he wrote were passed, one was passed to open a post office". I mean, "roll call amendment" from '95 to '07? That's like, "ooh, attendance record".

That might have to do with how Sanders has run in front of a cable news camera non-stop for the past decade, without actually doing anything else.

But hey, keep huffing those Bernie fumes, friend.

[Tazirai]

Dolt 45 literally wants to ignore the Constitution and Rule of Law to enforce Rule of law?

Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
We cannot allow all of these people to invade our Country. When somebody comes in, we must immediately, with no Judges or Court Cases, bring them back from where they came. Our system is a mockery to good immigration policy and Law and Order. Most children come without parents...

Trump stokes fears of immigrants with attack on ‘these people invading our Country’ in nasty series of tweets



Trump calls for deportations without judicial process

[aja_christopher]

The phrase "open border" pops up because advocates for "sensible immigration policy" rarely articulate what that means (Who should not be allowed into the country?)

No -- it pops up a lot because many conservatives would rather use misleading terms when discussing these issues than focus on the facts: nearly every conservative pundit on television accuses "liberals" and "Democrats" of wanting "open borders" when I don't know of one actual Democrat who is advocating "open borders" as a serious immigration policy.

Now if the discussion is about having "more secure" borders or developing a more stringent immigration policy, then that's fine, but the "open borders" terminology is a transparent ploy to paint almost anyone who disagrees with the conservative view on immigration as wanting "open borders" -- which is exactly why said phrase is used.

I've already told you twice now that I would need to see hard objective data before going into detail on such a policy but -- again -- the issue at hand isn't that "liberals want open borders" -- it's that Republicans (like Sessions) are separating children from their parents and putting them into camps with no real plan at reunification and would still be doing so if not for the public outcry and immediate backlash.

I know you want to ignore the fact that that's what this discussion is really all about -- sensible immigration policy will always be up for debate in most societies (as it was under Lincoln, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Obama, etc) so that's not the real issue at hand here.

The real issue at hand here is that the Republican party is pushing a racist agenda to rally it's voting "base" for the midterms, and they show all signs of pushing forward with even more constitutional and human rights violations if the voting public and/or continued Russian interference gives them the power to do so.

Your party is attacking the integrity of the FBI, The CIA, and the Justice Department, effectively enabling Russian interference in our democratic process while complaining of non-existent voter fraud on the part of the Democratic party in order to suppress minority voters, starting a trade war with China, Japan, Germany, Canada, Mexico, the UK (etc), covering for a blatantly unqualified, dishonest and racist president, and robbing future generations blind by combining some of the largest tax cuts in history with some of the largest proposed spending cuts in history.

The "open borders" rhetoric is par for course: just another blatantly dishonest Republican talking point that has no root in reality but appeals solely to prejudice... like comparing four year old immigrant children to hardened MS-13 gang members.

-----

[Darkspellmaster]

Illinois governor Bruce Rauner is 9 points behind his Democratic challenger J.B. Pritzker in the first poll for that race. Gonna be an uphill climb for him.

Not surprised at all. Rainer is not liked here at all.

[aja_christopher]

Who's surprised?

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewi...ortation-order

Hold kids for ransom and ignore due process.

Never forget that this is what the Republican party has brought us to -- the erosion of our civil rights and a complete loss of respect all around the globe.

Again.

[Malvolio]

Well, they both have rabidly insane supporters who muddied the waters of a primary and made it easier for the other side to win, and other than that, accomplished f*** all in spite of their popularity.

But that's probably hard for you to see, considering you think Sanders has accomplished SO MUCH. Seriously, what legislation can he take credit for, after a political career that has stretched decades? TWO BILLS. One was to rename post office. You act like he's performed the miracles of f***ing Moses, though.

I'll state again, I voted for Bernie in the primary in 2016, but I'm not quite as delusional as you about him.

This. I voted for Bernie in the 2016 Democratic Primary, too, but I saw that he never made much more than a token effort at supporting progressive candidates down ballot, so I wasn't going to go out on a limb to argue for him to somehow get the nomination through the super-delegates or other arcane methods.