EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 8719
| Forum Index > Closed |
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. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
CIA Director Mike Pompeo said documents retrieved from the 2011 Navy Seal raid that killed Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden would be released in "weeks"—with the exception of one particular part of the haul, his pornography stash. In a wide-ranging interview on the anniversary of 9/11, Pompeo said told Fox News’s Bret Baier: “There’s some pornography, there’s some copyrighted material. Everything other than those items will be released in the weeks ahead.” Source. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
| ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
If he thinks his base wants it, he'll pass it in a heartbeat, as long as you include a "defund Obamacare" provision. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
I don't think there's one in the constitution itself covering what actually happens if someone violates it; is there federal law that covers what would happen in case of a violation? | ||
KwarK
United States44030 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
| ||
|
Gahlo
United States35173 Posts
On September 13 2017 08:17 Danglars wrote: If it's got popular support and hits Trump's desk, he'll sign anything up to and including fully socialized medicine. It just has to be tremendous and shiny and Trumpcare in golden lettering. I'd shoot for the middleground of "Making Healthcare Great Again" | ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On September 13 2017 08:33 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote: https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/907726542276583424 To me, this indicates if things continue as is, it will be unfavorable for Trump. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 13 2017 07:47 zlefin wrote: is there a specified rule for violation of the emoluments clause? I don't think there's one in the constitution itself covering what actually happens if someone violates it; is there federal law that covers what would happen in case of a violation? Impeachment for violation of the constitution. Look up high crimes and misdemeanors. It isn't super specific because we haven't had to do this a whole lot. | ||
|
ChristianS
United States3304 Posts
http://www.philly.com/philly/opinion/commentary/paying-the-price-for-breakdown-of-the-countrys-bourgeois-culture-20170809.html?mobi=true It's been generating a lot of controversy lately that I've been hearing a lot about because my parents are very upset about the reaction it's been getting. TL;DR: a couple law professors wrote an article arguing that the "bourgeois culture" of the 40s and 50s helped people be productive, well-adjusted members of society, and our reaction against those values in the intervening decades was a mistake. Both professors have been thrown under the bus somewhat by their colleagues at their respective schools, in the face of a lot of protests calling the op ed dogwhistle racism. I think a bunch of the other professors at Amy Wax's school signed some public letter disavowing it. Does it strike you guys as dogwhistle racism? I didn't think that Coates article was totally crazy, which seems to make me pretty extreme on racial issues judging by this thread, but I didn't immediately get a dogwhistle racism vibe from it. I don't really agree with the op ed but it doesn't seem so objectionable that a bunch of their colleagues should pull something as savage as that. That's a shitty thing to do to a colleague just because they wrote an op ed that largely boils down to "if people just kept their head down, worked hard, and didn't do anything too crazy, a lot of them would be better off." Am I way off base here? | ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18860 Posts
On September 13 2017 08:57 ChristianS wrote: So I'm curious if any of you guys have encountered this op-ed from about a month ago: http://www.philly.com/philly/opinion/commentary/paying-the-price-for-breakdown-of-the-countrys-bourgeois-culture-20170809.html?mobi=true It's been generating a lot of controversy lately that I've been hearing a lot about because my parents are very upset about the reaction it's been getting. TL;DR: a couple law professors wrote an article arguing that the "bourgeois culture" of the 40s and 50s helped people be productive, well-adjusted members of society, and our reaction against those values in the intervening decades was a mistake. Both professors have been thrown under the bus somewhat by their colleagues at their respective schools, in the face of a lot of protests calling the op ed dogwhistle racism. I think a bunch of the other professors at Amy Wax's school signed some public letter disavowing it. Does it strike you guys as dogwhistle racism? I didn't think that Coates article was totally crazy, which seems to make me pretty extreme on racial issues judging by this thread, but I didn't immediately get a dogwhistle racism vibe from it. I don't really agree with the op ed but it doesn't seem so objectionable that a bunch of their colleagues should pull something as savage as that. That's a shitty thing to do to a colleague just because they wrote an op ed that largely boils down to "if people just kept their head down, worked hard, and didn't do anything too crazy, a lot of them would be better off." Am I way off base here? Trumpeting the supposedly forlorn values of hard work as though the poor and disadvantaged of today are somehow lazier or more prone to idle jib jab seems pretty close to dog whistle politics to me (it's also an ambitious historical claim that requires FAR more than a brief op-ed). I wouldn't lose my shit over it, but I'd certainly argue with a colleague over it, particularly at a law school. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 13 2017 08:57 ChristianS wrote: So I'm curious if any of you guys have encountered this op-ed from about a month ago: http://www.philly.com/philly/opinion/commentary/paying-the-price-for-breakdown-of-the-countrys-bourgeois-culture-20170809.html?mobi=true It's been generating a lot of controversy lately that I've been hearing a lot about because my parents are very upset about the reaction it's been getting. TL;DR: a couple law professors wrote an article arguing that the "bourgeois culture" of the 40s and 50s helped people be productive, well-adjusted members of society, and our reaction against those values in the intervening decades was a mistake. Both professors have been thrown under the bus somewhat by their colleagues at their respective schools, in the face of a lot of protests calling the op ed dogwhistle racism. I think a bunch of the other professors at Amy Wax's school signed some public letter disavowing it. Does it strike you guys as dogwhistle racism? I didn't think that Coates article was totally crazy, which seems to make me pretty extreme on racial issues judging by this thread, but I didn't immediately get a dogwhistle racism vibe from it. I don't really agree with the op ed but it doesn't seem so objectionable that a bunch of their colleagues should pull something as savage as that. That's a shitty thing to do to a colleague just because they wrote an op ed that largely boils down to "if people just kept their head down, worked hard, and didn't do anything too crazy, a lot of them would be better off." Am I way off base here? This is not a paragraph you write in 2017 in your defense of 1950's culture. This cultural script began to break down in the late 1960s. A combination of factors — prosperity, the Pill, the expansion of higher education, and the doubts surrounding the Vietnam War — encouraged an antiauthoritarian, adolescent, wish-fulfillment ideal — sex, drugs, and rock-and-roll — that was unworthy of, and unworkable for, a mature, prosperous adult society. This era saw the beginnings of an identity politics that inverted the color-blind aspirations of civil rights leaders like the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. into an obsession with race, ethnicity, gender, and now sexual preference. There is a ton of shit to unpack in this op-ed, but it is mostly overly simplistic and tells people to conform to social norms to obtain success. Don't rock the boat and you will succeed. Which is fine advice until the author decided to claim MLK created identity politics and the 1960s were bad and childish. The entire piece is filled for rootless nostalgia for a time that the author is sure exists because he watch Lassie on Nick at night and like Norman Rockwell paintings. I like this part too: All cultures are not equal. Or at least they are not equal in preparing people to be productive in an advanced economy. The culture of the Plains Indians was designed for nomadic hunters, but is not suited to a First World, 21st-century environment. Nor are the single-parent, antisocial habits, prevalent among some working-class whites; the anti-“acting white” rap culture of inner-city blacks; the anti-assimilation ideas gaining ground among some Hispanic immigrants. These cultural orientations are not only incompatible with what an advanced free-market economy and a viable democracy require, they are also destructive of a sense of solidarity and reciprocity among Americans. If the bourgeois cultural script — which the upper-middle class still largely observes but now hesitates to preach — cannot be widely reinstated, things are likely to get worse for us all. This single paragraph crosses like three separate cultures that the US has abused in different ways. And that is by the third sentence. This quote right here: "the anti-“acting white” rap culture of inner-city blacks" is so extra, yet basic AF. All cultures are not created equal, especially the ones that white people fucked over super hard. And the Coates article was about as extreme as The letter from Birmingham Jail by MLK, which riled up a lot of white people at the time. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On September 13 2017 08:57 ChristianS wrote: So I'm curious if any of you guys have encountered this op-ed from about a month ago: http://www.philly.com/philly/opinion/commentary/paying-the-price-for-breakdown-of-the-countrys-bourgeois-culture-20170809.html?mobi=true It's been generating a lot of controversy lately that I've been hearing a lot about because my parents are very upset about the reaction it's been getting. TL;DR: a couple law professors wrote an article arguing that the "bourgeois culture" of the 40s and 50s helped people be productive, well-adjusted members of society, and our reaction against those values in the intervening decades was a mistake. Both professors have been thrown under the bus somewhat by their colleagues at their respective schools, in the face of a lot of protests calling the op ed dogwhistle racism. I think a bunch of the other professors at Amy Wax's school signed some public letter disavowing it. Does it strike you guys as dogwhistle racism? I didn't think that Coates article was totally crazy, which seems to make me pretty extreme on racial issues judging by this thread, but I didn't immediately get a dogwhistle racism vibe from it. I don't really agree with the op ed but it doesn't seem so objectionable that a bunch of their colleagues should pull something as savage as that. That's a shitty thing to do to a colleague just because they wrote an op ed that largely boils down to "if people just kept their head down, worked hard, and didn't do anything too crazy, a lot of them would be better off." Am I way off base here? Hah, I can see why that article would drive lefistists nuts. The arguments and points made are anathema to the cultural Marxism of the past fifty years. That the authors are being accused of racism is exactly the the response that I'd expect. Of course, the charge is horseshit, but such is the standard for discourse from the far left. | ||
|
ChristianS
United States3304 Posts
I mean I disagree with the op ed, but signing a public letter condemning it isn't arguing with the author, it's trying to save face or gain righteousness points for your reputation or something. It just seems like the reaction it's getting is comparable to the Google memo, which doesn't seem justified to me. Were it not for tenure, would these professors still have jobs? | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On September 13 2017 08:42 Plansix wrote: Impeachment for violation of the constitution. Look up high crimes and misdemeanors. It isn't super specific because we haven't had to do this a whole lot. high crimes and misdemeanors is something I would consider to refer to things spelled out in the criminal code as felonies and misdemeanors. the list of federal statutes is long; and there's plenty of felonies and misdemeanors to choose from. but is accepting an emolument without appropriate approvals actually spelled out as being a felony or misdemeanor anywhere in the federal code? violating the constitution is not per se a felony or misdemeanor as far as I know; at least not in so generic a term. if it is, I'd like to know what exact part of the federal code covers that. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
| ||
