|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-32322775
A small aircraft known as a gyrocopter has landed on the west lawn of the US Capitol building.
The operator of the aircraft has been arrested by Capitol police.
The Tampa Bay Times tells the BBC the pilot is Doug Hughes, a Florida post man who wanted to deliver a message about campaign finance reform to Congress.
![[image loading]](http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/media/images/82347000/jpg/_82347210_82346317.jpg)
lol, I love it when people do crazy things like that.
|
Florida Man living up to all my expectations.
|
On April 16 2015 04:14 GreenHorizons wrote:
So how about we unite in being angry at shitty cops shitting all over the law and the people they are paid to protect, instead of trying to make it some sort of proof that there isn't a problem with cops and minorities (which any remotely competent person can observe)?
You know I really wish this were true, but I actually think the US is sufficiently segregated that it's not. I think lots of intelligent white people (and black people from certain backgrounds) legitimately don't know or believe the kinds of things that go on. I think it's really easy to live in enough of a bubble that it really never comes up, except in statistics, where it's easy to say that there are cultural causes and leave it at that.
Rand Paul, for anyone keeping track, promises to end any law that disproportionately jails blacks. Not sure he could even if he wanted to, but it's a step in the right direction to say such things.
|
On April 16 2015 07:11 Yoav wrote:
Rand Paul, for anyone keeping track, promises to end any law that disproportionately jails blacks. Not sure he could even if he wanted to, but it's a step in the right direction to say such things.
What are the odds CNN or MSNBC mentions that?
$10 says they don't report anything he says that could possibly be construed as positive. Just like they did with Ron.
|
On April 16 2015 07:48 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2015 07:11 Yoav wrote:
Rand Paul, for anyone keeping track, promises to end any law that disproportionately jails blacks. Not sure he could even if he wanted to, but it's a step in the right direction to say such things. What are the odds CNN or MSNBC mentions that? $10 says they don't report anything he says that could possibly be construed as positive. Just like they did with Ron.
Like Fox mentioning good things about Hillary?
Media is the US is garbage on both sides.
|
On April 16 2015 07:53 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2015 07:48 Millitron wrote:On April 16 2015 07:11 Yoav wrote:
Rand Paul, for anyone keeping track, promises to end any law that disproportionately jails blacks. Not sure he could even if he wanted to, but it's a step in the right direction to say such things. What are the odds CNN or MSNBC mentions that? $10 says they don't report anything he says that could possibly be construed as positive. Just like they did with Ron. Like Fox mentioning good things about Hillary? Media is the US is garbage on both sides.
Pretty much.
I'm still bitter about how much they fucked over Ron Paul. On more than one occasion, they'd be talking to a soldier overseas about who the troops supported, and as soon as he started to say Ron Paul, they'd conveniently lose the satellite feed. I remember CNN showing a gallup poll at one point, with Romney in 1st, Ryan in 2nd, and Santorum in 4th. Completely neglecting Paul in 3rd. Also, in the infographic, Paul got a silhouette while everyone else got smiling portraits.
|
Yeah. Well, technically I know it because I read BBC, the Economist and (to be fair to US media) Politico, all of which actually cover things to some extent. BBC is limited by being super brief; the Economist is limited in that it's more analysis than news, though it has plenty of that; Politico is limited in that it focuses almost exclusively on Washington politics. But them plus NYT/WSJ gets you a decent survey.
I really do kinda want to like Rand Paul. Being the only politician of note seriously opposed to drone strikes, warantless wiretapping, and the incarceration state gets you enough cred in my eyes to cover over a lot of sins. I'm not sure it's enough, but I definitely give him a lot of credit.
On the other hand, I really want to hate Jeb Bush and he keeps insistently saying sensible things. Not sure which of the two is winning at the moment honestly.
|
On April 16 2015 07:48 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2015 07:11 Yoav wrote:
Rand Paul, for anyone keeping track, promises to end any law that disproportionately jails blacks. Not sure he could even if he wanted to, but it's a step in the right direction to say such things. What are the odds CNN or MSNBC mentions that? $10 says they don't report anything he says that could possibly be construed as positive. Just like they did with Ron. MSNBC has reported on it before. They put him on one of their shows to talk about the work he was doing with Corey Booker... So do I have to find one of them doing it after he officially declares before you pay up?
+ Show Spoiler +
Condemning a war on drugs they call excessive, counterproductive and discriminatory, Sens. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, and Cory Booker, D-New Jersey, are pushing a new bipartisan bill to reform criminal background checks and the juvenile justice system.
The senators say their bill – the REDEEM Act – will cut the cost and stigma of non-violent drug offenses by limiting how long criminal records stick to ex-convicts.
Under current law, ex-convicts must answer employer questions about past convictions. That rule has major effects on the labor marker – even for low-level offenses, a criminal record makes many job applicants far less employable. Studies show the impact increases unemployment and disproportionately hinders poor and minority communities.
The senators’ legislation aims to counter that trend by offering some non-violent offenders a second chance.
It would seal criminal records for teenage offenders, while adults could apply to have their records expunged. Judges would review those applications, under the proposal, by balancing an offender’s interest in “employment” against the public’s interest in “knowledge and safety.” And when ex-offenders win, they would get something pretty rare under federal law – a do-over.
Source
Real question is when are the rest of Republicans going to get a clue?
|
On April 16 2015 08:04 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2015 07:48 Millitron wrote:On April 16 2015 07:11 Yoav wrote:
Rand Paul, for anyone keeping track, promises to end any law that disproportionately jails blacks. Not sure he could even if he wanted to, but it's a step in the right direction to say such things. What are the odds CNN or MSNBC mentions that? $10 says they don't report anything he says that could possibly be construed as positive. Just like they did with Ron. MSNBC has reported on it before. They put him on one of their shows to talk about the work he was doing with Corey Booker... So do I have to find one of them doing it after he officially declares before you pay up? + Show Spoiler +
Condemning a war on drugs they call excessive, counterproductive and discriminatory, Sens. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, and Cory Booker, D-New Jersey, are pushing a new bipartisan bill to reform criminal background checks and the juvenile justice system.
The senators say their bill – the REDEEM Act – will cut the cost and stigma of non-violent drug offenses by limiting how long criminal records stick to ex-convicts.
Under current law, ex-convicts must answer employer questions about past convictions. That rule has major effects on the labor marker – even for low-level offenses, a criminal record makes many job applicants far less employable. Studies show the impact increases unemployment and disproportionately hinders poor and minority communities.
The senators’ legislation aims to counter that trend by offering some non-violent offenders a second chance.
It would seal criminal records for teenage offenders, while adults could apply to have their records expunged. Judges would review those applications, under the proposal, by balancing an offender’s interest in “employment” against the public’s interest in “knowledge and safety.” And when ex-offenders win, they would get something pretty rare under federal law – a do-over.
Real question is when are the rest of Republicans going to get a clue?
Wow, that is a fantastic idea for a bill. That's a great way to reduce recidivism. A big reason recidivism is so high is because ex-convicts have so much trouble getting legitimate work.
Did they do a television segment on this or just a web article?
|
On April 16 2015 08:11 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2015 08:04 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 16 2015 07:48 Millitron wrote:On April 16 2015 07:11 Yoav wrote:
Rand Paul, for anyone keeping track, promises to end any law that disproportionately jails blacks. Not sure he could even if he wanted to, but it's a step in the right direction to say such things. What are the odds CNN or MSNBC mentions that? $10 says they don't report anything he says that could possibly be construed as positive. Just like they did with Ron. MSNBC has reported on it before. They put him on one of their shows to talk about the work he was doing with Corey Booker... So do I have to find one of them doing it after he officially declares before you pay up? + Show Spoiler +
Condemning a war on drugs they call excessive, counterproductive and discriminatory, Sens. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, and Cory Booker, D-New Jersey, are pushing a new bipartisan bill to reform criminal background checks and the juvenile justice system.
The senators say their bill – the REDEEM Act – will cut the cost and stigma of non-violent drug offenses by limiting how long criminal records stick to ex-convicts.
Under current law, ex-convicts must answer employer questions about past convictions. That rule has major effects on the labor marker – even for low-level offenses, a criminal record makes many job applicants far less employable. Studies show the impact increases unemployment and disproportionately hinders poor and minority communities.
The senators’ legislation aims to counter that trend by offering some non-violent offenders a second chance.
It would seal criminal records for teenage offenders, while adults could apply to have their records expunged. Judges would review those applications, under the proposal, by balancing an offender’s interest in “employment” against the public’s interest in “knowledge and safety.” And when ex-offenders win, they would get something pretty rare under federal law – a do-over.
Real question is when are the rest of Republicans going to get a clue? Wow, that is a fantastic idea for a bill. That's a great way to reduce recidivism. A big reason recidivism is so high is because ex-convicts have so much trouble getting legitimate work. Did they do a television segment on this or just a web article?
Yes they did a segment too. They also did an article when he supported the "CARERS" act. Which has somewhat flummoxed the people over at Fox News and the like. It makes using cannabis something Veterans would do, but the veterans have been desperately trying to get off deadly prescription medication for decades with the use of Cannabis. So they (on the right, like fox news) are torn between their hate of the visage of evil marijuana and their love of heroic veterans who's doctors and families think they should use cannabis instead of deadly opiates.
The fact that we can't easily pass stuff like this shows how proudly ignorant so much of our congress is.
|
On April 16 2015 07:11 Yoav wrote:
Rand Paul, for anyone keeping track, promises to end any law that disproportionately jails blacks. Not sure he could even if he wanted to, but it's a step in the right direction to say such things.
I've heard this brought up in a discussion a few months ago actually; Rand Paul has been making moves in that direction ever since his campaign became a near inevitability.
The general consensus from the black community leaders that were discussing at a panel was that this is:
1) A positive step for the Republican party, and
2) Rand Paul is almost certainly NOT the person to deliver on this, or from whom it will be readily believed among the African-American community.
|
On April 16 2015 08:37 Lord Tolkien wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2015 07:11 Yoav wrote:
Rand Paul, for anyone keeping track, promises to end any law that disproportionately jails blacks. Not sure he could even if he wanted to, but it's a step in the right direction to say such things. I've heard this brought up in a discussion a few months ago actually; Rand Paul has been making moves in that direction ever since his campaign became a near inevitability. The general consensus from the black community leaders that were discussing at a panel was that this is: 1) A positive step for the Republican party, and 2) Rand Paul is almost certainly NOT the person to deliver on this, or from whom it will be readily believed among the African-American community.
Pretty tough for the Republican party to no longer be the party of old white guys when black people just refuse to believe any of them who actually are trying to help with race relations.
I wish the Republican party would ditch the bible belt. They'd get so many more moderates if they focused on the libertarian side of the party.
|
On April 16 2015 08:37 Lord Tolkien wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2015 07:11 Yoav wrote:
Rand Paul, for anyone keeping track, promises to end any law that disproportionately jails blacks. Not sure he could even if he wanted to, but it's a step in the right direction to say such things. I've heard this brought up in a discussion a few months ago actually; Rand Paul has been making moves in that direction ever since his campaign became a near inevitability. The general consensus from the black community leaders that were discussing at a panel was that this is: 1) A positive step for the Republican party, and 2) Rand Paul is almost certainly NOT the person to deliver on this, or from whom it will be readily believed among the African-American community.
That sounds about right. He is basically just a placeholder for his father on this issue, except he's actually less libertarian on it than his father. Paul somehow doesn't support decriminalization. One of many reasons people say he's not really even a libertarian.
On April 16 2015 08:40 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2015 08:37 Lord Tolkien wrote:On April 16 2015 07:11 Yoav wrote:
Rand Paul, for anyone keeping track, promises to end any law that disproportionately jails blacks. Not sure he could even if he wanted to, but it's a step in the right direction to say such things. I've heard this brought up in a discussion a few months ago actually; Rand Paul has been making moves in that direction ever since his campaign became a near inevitability. The general consensus from the black community leaders that were discussing at a panel was that this is: 1) A positive step for the Republican party, and 2) Rand Paul is almost certainly NOT the person to deliver on this, or from whom it will be readily believed among the African-American community. I wish the Republican party would ditch the bible belt. They'd get so many more moderates if they focused on the libertarian side of the party.
They would, but they wouldn't be running for president because they wouldn't make it out of Republican primaries.
|
On April 16 2015 08:40 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2015 08:37 Lord Tolkien wrote:On April 16 2015 07:11 Yoav wrote:
Rand Paul, for anyone keeping track, promises to end any law that disproportionately jails blacks. Not sure he could even if he wanted to, but it's a step in the right direction to say such things. I've heard this brought up in a discussion a few months ago actually; Rand Paul has been making moves in that direction ever since his campaign became a near inevitability. The general consensus from the black community leaders that were discussing at a panel was that this is: 1) A positive step for the Republican party, and 2) Rand Paul is almost certainly NOT the person to deliver on this, or from whom it will be readily believed among the African-American community. Pretty tough for the Republican party to no longer be the party of old white guys when black people just refuse to believe any of them who actually are trying to help with race relations. I wish the Republican party would ditch the bible belt. They'd get so many more moderates if they focused on the libertarian side of the party.
Amen.
No, the last while has made me wonder if it wouldn't be better if we had a multiparty system so Republicans could divide into libertarians and xenophobic nutjobs and the Democrats could divide into liberals and populist nutjobs.
|
On April 16 2015 08:50 Yoav wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2015 08:40 Millitron wrote:On April 16 2015 08:37 Lord Tolkien wrote:On April 16 2015 07:11 Yoav wrote:
Rand Paul, for anyone keeping track, promises to end any law that disproportionately jails blacks. Not sure he could even if he wanted to, but it's a step in the right direction to say such things. I've heard this brought up in a discussion a few months ago actually; Rand Paul has been making moves in that direction ever since his campaign became a near inevitability. The general consensus from the black community leaders that were discussing at a panel was that this is: 1) A positive step for the Republican party, and 2) Rand Paul is almost certainly NOT the person to deliver on this, or from whom it will be readily believed among the African-American community. Pretty tough for the Republican party to no longer be the party of old white guys when black people just refuse to believe any of them who actually are trying to help with race relations. I wish the Republican party would ditch the bible belt. They'd get so many more moderates if they focused on the libertarian side of the party. Amen. No, the last while has made me wonder if it wouldn't be better if we had a multiparty system so Republicans could divide into libertarians and xenophobic nutjobs and the Democrats could divide into liberals and populist nutjobs.
We'd need to rework elections entirely to have a multi-party system. No more First Past the Post BS. Proportional representation. Run Off style voting.
|
On April 16 2015 08:50 Yoav wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2015 08:40 Millitron wrote:On April 16 2015 08:37 Lord Tolkien wrote:On April 16 2015 07:11 Yoav wrote:
Rand Paul, for anyone keeping track, promises to end any law that disproportionately jails blacks. Not sure he could even if he wanted to, but it's a step in the right direction to say such things. I've heard this brought up in a discussion a few months ago actually; Rand Paul has been making moves in that direction ever since his campaign became a near inevitability. The general consensus from the black community leaders that were discussing at a panel was that this is: 1) A positive step for the Republican party, and 2) Rand Paul is almost certainly NOT the person to deliver on this, or from whom it will be readily believed among the African-American community. Pretty tough for the Republican party to no longer be the party of old white guys when black people just refuse to believe any of them who actually are trying to help with race relations. I wish the Republican party would ditch the bible belt. They'd get so many more moderates if they focused on the libertarian side of the party. Amen. No, the last while has made me wonder if it wouldn't be better if we had a multiparty system so Republicans could divide into libertarians and xenophobic nutjobs and the Democrats could divide into liberals and populist nutjobs.
The way I see it, Republicans are going to lose the presidential race for the next few cycles (barring an Obama like rise from someone or a self destruction from a candidate on the left). Libertarians are going to lose too (being trapped within the Republican party). So I think Libertarians should just cut the social conservative dead weight and trade them for rational moderates and independents. They probably won't be successful for a bit but in the meantime they can focus on shaving off leaning liberal's support for Dems until Social conservatives/Traditional republicans have to choose between the Democrat's nominee and the Libertarian representative (Because their future Huckabee/Perry or whoever won't have a chance).
I think libertarians have a better chance turning Jeb voters libertarian than the Republican party has turning Blacks into Republican voters. Considering where the right has been going on immigration, Hispanic support will probably be as low or lower than when Obama ran too.
|
On April 16 2015 09:04 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2015 08:50 Yoav wrote:On April 16 2015 08:40 Millitron wrote:On April 16 2015 08:37 Lord Tolkien wrote:On April 16 2015 07:11 Yoav wrote:
Rand Paul, for anyone keeping track, promises to end any law that disproportionately jails blacks. Not sure he could even if he wanted to, but it's a step in the right direction to say such things. I've heard this brought up in a discussion a few months ago actually; Rand Paul has been making moves in that direction ever since his campaign became a near inevitability. The general consensus from the black community leaders that were discussing at a panel was that this is: 1) A positive step for the Republican party, and 2) Rand Paul is almost certainly NOT the person to deliver on this, or from whom it will be readily believed among the African-American community. Pretty tough for the Republican party to no longer be the party of old white guys when black people just refuse to believe any of them who actually are trying to help with race relations. I wish the Republican party would ditch the bible belt. They'd get so many more moderates if they focused on the libertarian side of the party. Amen. No, the last while has made me wonder if it wouldn't be better if we had a multiparty system so Republicans could divide into libertarians and xenophobic nutjobs and the Democrats could divide into liberals and populist nutjobs. The way I see it, Republicans are going to lose the presidential race for the next few cycles (barring an Obama like rise from someone or a self destruction from a candidate on the left). Libertarians are going to lose too (being trapped within the Republican party). So I think Libertarians should just cut the social conservative dead weight and trade them for rational moderates and independents. They probably won't be successful for a bit but in the meantime they can focus on shaving off leaning liberal's support for Dems until Social conservatives/Traditional republicans have to choose between the Democrat's nominee and the Libertarian representative (Because their future Huckabee/Perry or whoever won't have a chance). I think libertarians have a better chance turning Jeb voters libertarian than the Republican party has turning Blacks into Republican voters. Considering where the right has been going on immigration, Hispanic support will probably be as low or lower than when Obama ran too.
So...you're not only writing off the GOP in 2016 before the race has even started in earnest, you assume they're already going to lose the race in 2020 and 2024 too? How arrogant can you be?
|
On April 16 2015 09:30 coverpunch wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2015 09:04 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 16 2015 08:50 Yoav wrote:On April 16 2015 08:40 Millitron wrote:On April 16 2015 08:37 Lord Tolkien wrote:On April 16 2015 07:11 Yoav wrote:
Rand Paul, for anyone keeping track, promises to end any law that disproportionately jails blacks. Not sure he could even if he wanted to, but it's a step in the right direction to say such things. I've heard this brought up in a discussion a few months ago actually; Rand Paul has been making moves in that direction ever since his campaign became a near inevitability. The general consensus from the black community leaders that were discussing at a panel was that this is: 1) A positive step for the Republican party, and 2) Rand Paul is almost certainly NOT the person to deliver on this, or from whom it will be readily believed among the African-American community. Pretty tough for the Republican party to no longer be the party of old white guys when black people just refuse to believe any of them who actually are trying to help with race relations. I wish the Republican party would ditch the bible belt. They'd get so many more moderates if they focused on the libertarian side of the party. Amen. No, the last while has made me wonder if it wouldn't be better if we had a multiparty system so Republicans could divide into libertarians and xenophobic nutjobs and the Democrats could divide into liberals and populist nutjobs. The way I see it, Republicans are going to lose the presidential race for the next few cycles (barring an Obama like rise from someone or a self destruction from a candidate on the left). Libertarians are going to lose too (being trapped within the Republican party). So I think Libertarians should just cut the social conservative dead weight and trade them for rational moderates and independents. They probably won't be successful for a bit but in the meantime they can focus on shaving off leaning liberal's support for Dems until Social conservatives/Traditional republicans have to choose between the Democrat's nominee and the Libertarian representative (Because their future Huckabee/Perry or whoever won't have a chance). I think libertarians have a better chance turning Jeb voters libertarian than the Republican party has turning Blacks into Republican voters. Considering where the right has been going on immigration, Hispanic support will probably be as low or lower than when Obama ran too. So...you're not only writing off the GOP in 2016 before the race has even started in earnest, you assume they're already going to lose the race in 2020 and 2024 too? How arrogant can you be?
About 20% as arrogant as xdaunt.
They lost in 2012 against the black socialist muslim antichrist. They have decided to double down on the tactics that lost them the election in 2012 for this election season. Unless the republican party ditches the Tea Party, they will keep producing nominees who are unelectable (see: Paul, Cruz). The only saving grace they have this year is that Jeb Bush is running, and he might not say stupid shit like the other potentials because he has enough political capital to be a threat without the support of the Tea Party.
|
On April 16 2015 09:39 Jormundr wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2015 09:30 coverpunch wrote:On April 16 2015 09:04 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 16 2015 08:50 Yoav wrote:On April 16 2015 08:40 Millitron wrote:On April 16 2015 08:37 Lord Tolkien wrote:On April 16 2015 07:11 Yoav wrote:
Rand Paul, for anyone keeping track, promises to end any law that disproportionately jails blacks. Not sure he could even if he wanted to, but it's a step in the right direction to say such things. I've heard this brought up in a discussion a few months ago actually; Rand Paul has been making moves in that direction ever since his campaign became a near inevitability. The general consensus from the black community leaders that were discussing at a panel was that this is: 1) A positive step for the Republican party, and 2) Rand Paul is almost certainly NOT the person to deliver on this, or from whom it will be readily believed among the African-American community. Pretty tough for the Republican party to no longer be the party of old white guys when black people just refuse to believe any of them who actually are trying to help with race relations. I wish the Republican party would ditch the bible belt. They'd get so many more moderates if they focused on the libertarian side of the party. Amen. No, the last while has made me wonder if it wouldn't be better if we had a multiparty system so Republicans could divide into libertarians and xenophobic nutjobs and the Democrats could divide into liberals and populist nutjobs. The way I see it, Republicans are going to lose the presidential race for the next few cycles (barring an Obama like rise from someone or a self destruction from a candidate on the left). Libertarians are going to lose too (being trapped within the Republican party). So I think Libertarians should just cut the social conservative dead weight and trade them for rational moderates and independents. They probably won't be successful for a bit but in the meantime they can focus on shaving off leaning liberal's support for Dems until Social conservatives/Traditional republicans have to choose between the Democrat's nominee and the Libertarian representative (Because their future Huckabee/Perry or whoever won't have a chance). I think libertarians have a better chance turning Jeb voters libertarian than the Republican party has turning Blacks into Republican voters. Considering where the right has been going on immigration, Hispanic support will probably be as low or lower than when Obama ran too. So...you're not only writing off the GOP in 2016 before the race has even started in earnest, you assume they're already going to lose the race in 2020 and 2024 too? How arrogant can you be? About 20% as arrogant as xdaunt. They lost in 2012 against the black socialist muslim antichrist. They have decided to double down on the tactics that lost them the election in 2012 for this election season. Unless the republican party ditches the Tea Party, they will keep producing nominees who are unelectable (see: Paul, Cruz). The only saving grace they have this year is that Jeb Bush is running, and he might not say stupid shit like the other potentials because he has enough political capital to be a threat without the support of the Tea Party.
What makes Paul unelectable?
|
Abolish the fed, dismantle social security, end medicaid/medicare...
well is there any 3rd rail he hasn't licked?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
