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

[ed2962]

I'll have to take your word for it.

So... what does it do then?

It brings attention to the issue. Which is the main point.

[ed2962]

Tendrin, Thank you!

There is a lot more to this than what Trey or Number 30 is explaining. What people don't understand is that there have been marches in neighborhoods where there was shootings, and in some cases people were shot at while doing memorials and the like. So they decided to take it to a place where it's not just going to get the attention of Chicago, we've been paying attention for a long time now, but on a national level, to maybe get people who are hiding this information to at least see that there are people tired of this.

Regarding the jobs thing. The issue is that there are some that can leave the area but most people can't. See there are a lot of single parents and in a lot of cases they have to take public transit. Now this wouldn't be a big deal if there was a way for the kids to be taken care of but because of not having daycare in the area or people to watch the kids, Moms and dad's can't go to work far so that they can be home for the kids. Then there are the gangs where they take out people's family if they talk. Just an example, there was a case a few years ago where a kid was killed in retaliation for a situation with another gang member. They killed a little kid as a payback for the father either getting into a fight or something with a rival gang. This is why people are scared to talk. They don't want to be killed.

Add to that you have issues with the cops, you have the whole split within the community, and the reason why people want the jobs there is to better the community. Closer jobs means parents can be closer to their kids. The kids have their parents, or an opportunity to work so they make money and don't feel the need to get involved in the gangs. There's a whole other level of stuff that I can't really explain because of the history, long and sordided that it is, is a lot to digest and I"m not the best person to go into the more cultural aspect of it.

So forgive me if I'm a bit pissed that I see people ragging on this. Do you know how nice it was that this went off without some sort of horrible incident.

^^Yes, All of the above.

[aja_christopher]

Okay, maybe I’m ignorant (god knows I’ve been called worse things), but I’ve never understood the GOP’s obsession with keeping Trump safe from harm. His numbers in the polls have never seen the high side of 40 percent since the day he was sworn in, so it’s not like there would be a revolt from the public if he’s removed from office, and if that were to happen, Pence would assume the duties of president, so Republicans would still control the Executive Branch. The only scenario where the GOP needs to keep Caramel Caligula around would be if they lose the midterms, Democrats reclaim either the House or Senate and he’d be the last line of defense against Dems obstructing them. Otherwise, Trump’s about as useful as tits on a warthog.

I think it's more about the fact that if they go against him they are likewise attacking a large part of their base -- for them it then becomes a matter of ethics vs. "political pragmatism" and we've all seen which option most of them choose when faced with said decision, as a move like that could potentially split the party apart.

He gave the "base" their Supreme Court pick, he's attacking minorities -- as promised -- on many different fronts, he's putting "America First" ahead of both enemies and allies alike, he's cutting taxes for the wealthy and health care benefits for the poor: he's a Republican wet dream come true and I'm sure Ryan, Pence, Sessions, and McConnell wake up every day thankful that he's out there pushing their agenda to the forefront so that they can sit around doing their own private dirt in relative secrecy.

Like Ryan himself said, that's how they know they're family.




Edit: It's also not at all unlikely that some -- if not many -- of these Republicans (especially those involved in the transition team such as Pence, Sessions and Nunes) know that they may have been complicit in crimes that Mueller knows about that are related to the Russians, so they aren't so much protecting Trump from Mueller's investigations as they are also protecting themselves.

The Russian RNC email hacks and potential illegal NRA financing alone are immense red flags and the fact that Mueller is only expanding his investigation as time goes on shows that they may have uncovered much more than we know at this point and that there is still a lot more to come.

[Trey Strain]

Don't be surprised if she runs again, and don't be surprised if the nomination is rigged so that she gets it again.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/...n-in-2020.html

[Tendrin]

1) it wasn't 'rigged'.

2) lol fox news article on Hillary.

[aja_christopher]

Watching this again puts Stormy Daniels (and Michael Cohen) in perspective -- interesting how prescient that was.



Still -- it remains to be seen if he's correct about Trump being finished.

[ed2962]

Don't be surprised if she runs again, and don't be surprised if the nomination is rigged so that she gets it again.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/...n-in-2020.html

There are real life elections happening this year that have nothing to do Clinton. Why oh why are we still talking about her?

[Gray Lensman]

I'm at my parents before leaving for Sedona, and they are listening to Faux News in the background. Which is trying to defend Pruitt and suggesting (in pretty strong terms) that it was a liberal media attack rather than his over the top corruption which did him in.

[Kevinroc]

There are real life elections happening this year that have nothing to do Clinton. Why oh why are we still talking about her?

What else do the right wing have to run on?

[4saken1]

What else do the right wing have to run on?

With Kennedy retiring. Plenty!

[Kevinroc]

With Kennedy retiring. Plenty!

http://thehill.com/homenews/news/395...ort-roe-v-wade

Poll: Majority of Americans support Roe v. Wade

A majority of Americans support Roe v. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion nationwide, a new Quinnipac University poll found.

The poll found that 63 percent of respondents agree with the court decision, compared with 31 percent who don't.

While 58 percent of Republicans disagree with the court case, a majority of every other group by party, gender, education, age and racial group agrees with it, according to the poll.

There is only a slight gender difference, the poll found: 65 percent of women agree with the case compared to 61 percent of men.

Would they really want to actually RUN on that issue with numbers like that?

[InformationGeek]

There goes America, being an asshole again.

A resolution to encourage breast-feeding was expected to be approved quickly and easily by the hundreds of government delegates who gathered this spring in Geneva for the United Nations-affiliated World Health Assembly.

Based on decades of research, the resolution says that mother’s milk is healthiest for children and countries should strive to limit the inaccurate or misleading marketing of breast milk substitutes.

Then the United States delegation, embracing the interests of infant formula manufacturers, upended the deliberations.

American officials sought to water down the resolution by removing language that called on governments to “protect, promote and support breast-feeding” and another passage that called on policymakers to restrict the promotion of food products that many experts say can have deleterious effects on young children.

When that failed, they turned to threats, according to diplomats and government officials who took part in the discussions. Ecuador, which had planned to introduce the measure, was the first to find itself in the cross hairs.

The Americans were blunt: If Ecuador refused to drop the resolution, Washington would unleash punishing trade measures and withdraw crucial military aid. The Ecuadorean government quickly acquiesced.

The showdown over the issue was recounted by more than a dozen participants from several countries, many of whom requested anonymity because they feared retaliation from the United States.

Health advocates scrambled to find another sponsor for the resolution, but at least a dozen countries, most of them poor nations in Africa and Latin America, backed off, citing fears of retaliation, according to officials from Uruguay, Mexico and the United States.

“We were astonished, appalled and also saddened,” said Patti Rundall, the policy director of the British advocacy group Baby Milk Action, who has attended meetings of the assembly, the decision-making body of the World Health Organization, since the late 1980s.

“What happened was tantamount to blackmail, with the U.S. holding the world hostage and trying to overturn nearly 40 years of consensus on best way to protect infant and young child health,” she said.

In the end, the Americans’ efforts were mostly unsuccessful. It was the Russians who ultimately stepped in to introduce the measure — and the Americans did not threaten them.

...

During the deliberations, some American delegates even suggested the United States might cut its contribution the W.H.O., several negotiators said. Washington is the single largest contributor to the health organization, providing $845 million, or roughly 15 percent of its budget, last year.

The confrontation was the latest example of the Trump administration siding with corporate interests on numerous public health and environmental issues.

In talks to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, the Americans have been pushing for language that would limit the ability of Canada, Mexico and the United States to put warning labels on junk food and sugary beverages, according to a draft of the proposal reviewed by The New York Times.

During the same Geneva meeting where the breast-feeding resolution was debated, the United States succeeded in removing statements supporting soda taxes from a document that advises countries grappling with soaring rates of obesity.

The Americans also sought, unsuccessfully, to thwart a W.H.O. effort aimed at helping poor countries obtain access to lifesaving medicines. Washington, supporting the pharmaceutical industry, has long resisted calls to modify patent laws as a way of increasing drug availability in the developing world, but health advocates say the Trump administration has ratcheted up its opposition to such efforts.

The delegation’s actions in Geneva are in keeping with the tactics of an administration that has been upending alliances and long-established practices across a range of multilateral organizations, from the Paris climate accord to the Iran nuclear deal to Nafta.

Ilona Kickbusch, director of the Global Health Centre at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva, said there was a growing fear that the Trump administration could cause lasting damage to international health institutions like the W.H.O. that have been vital in containing epidemics like Ebola and the rising death toll from diabetes and cardiovascular disease in the developing world.

“It’s making everyone very nervous, because if you can’t agree on health multilateralism, what kind of multilateralism can you agree on?” Ms. Kickbusch asked.

A Russian delegate said the decision to introduce the breast-feeding resolution was a matter of principle.

“We’re not trying to be a hero here, but we feel that it is wrong when a big country tries to push around some very small countries, especially on an issue that is really important for the rest of the world,” said the delegate, who asked not to be identified because he was not authorized to speak to the media.

He said the United States did not directly pressure Moscow to back away from the measure. Nevertheless, the American delegation sought to wear down the other participants through procedural maneuvers in a series of meetings that stretched on for two days, an unexpectedly long period.

[ed2962]

What else do the right wing have to run on?

But democrats/progressives are still whining about her as well!

[Mister Mets]

Don't be surprised if she runs again, and don't be surprised if the nomination is rigged so that she gets it again.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/...n-in-2020.html

This is fantastic news for all the people on this forum who have been impressed with her as a political figure.

[Carabas]

http://thehill.com/homenews/news/395...ort-roe-v-wade

Poll: Majority of Americans support Roe v. Wade



Would they really want to actually RUN on that issue with numbers like that?

As long as the majority of Americans wouldn't be caught death near a voting booth they can run on it and win on it as long as they like.
It's the same with gun control, which is also supported by a majority of Americans.

Of course that does rely on them not being stupid enough to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs and actually do away with Roe v. Wade.