EPTHe did it on live TV so when I get a good clip I'll add it.
EDIT: ‘I will not in any scenario run for the United States Senate’
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1759
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23459 Posts
He did it on live TV so when I get a good clip I'll add it. EDIT: ‘I will not in any scenario run for the United States Senate’ | ||
|
Introvert
United States4862 Posts
On August 16 2019 11:02 GreenHorizons wrote: As many stories as I'm reading about citizens being locked up I'm not entirely sure they couldn't visit immigrants traveling through Mexico and get caught up by ICE/DHS and have it explained as them meeting a threshold for detention. It is interesting that AIPAC used to be considered pretty right wing but in the era of Trump/Netanyahu they are the moderates. It's all relative I guess, conservatives have considered them moderate at best for years. They are the most well-known organization of that type though, so that may have helped. | ||
Falling
Canada11369 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23459 Posts
On August 16 2019 12:38 Falling wrote: Then it's a bust. I don't know how he looks at his numbers and figures it's time to ride or die. Unless maybe he's hoping for a repeat of 'anybody but Romney' for Biden, and he pops up on top as the next 'not Biden'. . . except Romney got the nomination in the end anyways. I imagine he's hoping he can net enough delegates to negotiate a position in a (Biden) administration and a pathway to 2024/8 Hard for me to imagine he actually thinks he can win, especially after his revamp flopped so hard. | ||
|
Vivax
22089 Posts
They will probably have their own Assanges and Snowdens sitting in there. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
Ryzel
United States535 Posts
On August 16 2019 17:25 Dangermousecatdog wrote: They don't. HK's population in itself is the "undesirables". They are used to a free press and the rule of law and a corrupt-free government. They are used to a government that doesn't abduct booksellers in HK, and torture them. That is very undesirable for China. This. Hong Kong’s days of being independent from China look numbered. I fear it’s highly likely most of the current population will be rounded up and best case displaced, worst case made an example of (tortured and executed). Expect to see awkward double talk from Trump where it’s almost mandatory he has to denounce the upcoming cleanse, but is not-so-secretly jealous he can’t deal with his political dissidents like Xi can. Something like “This misunderstanding between Xi and the HK people is truly tragic. I hope it can be resolved without further loss of life/bloodshed!” | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9716 Posts
On August 16 2019 22:07 Ryzel wrote: This. Hong Kong’s days of being independent from China look numbered. I fear it’s highly likely most of the current population will be rounded up and best case displaced, worst case made an example of (tortured and executed). Expect to see awkward double talk from Trump where it’s almost mandatory he has to denounce the upcoming cleanse, but is not-so-secretly jealous he can’t deal with his political dissidents like Xi can. Something like “This misunderstanding between Xi and the HK people is truly tragic. I hope it can be resolved without further loss of life/bloodshed!” Trump won't denounce the cleanse unless it significantly effects his own business. Trump's attitude to other leaders is that they have a hard job to do and we should all cut them some slack, except he also isn't afraid to shit on them for the sake of American interests every now and then. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On August 16 2019 22:07 Ryzel wrote: This. Hong Kong’s days of being independent from China look numbered. I fear it’s highly likely most of the current population will be rounded up and best case displaced, worst case made an example of (tortured and executed). Expect to see awkward double talk from Trump where it’s almost mandatory he has to denounce the upcoming cleanse, but is not-so-secretly jealous he can’t deal with his political dissidents like Xi can. Something like “This misunderstanding between Xi and the HK people is truly tragic. I hope it can be resolved without further loss of life/bloodshed!” It's doubly awkward considering that one of the greviances HK have against China is the apparent massive migration of Chinese who HK regard as foreign, who they regard as a deliberate attempt by the Chinese government to wipe out HK's unique freedoms and culture, which sits rather awkwardly to more deranged beliefs the voter base in which Trumps panders to. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15723 Posts
Fundamentally, I feel the issue boils down to the concept of parents having ownership of their children. | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28706 Posts
However when you deal with 'parents having ownership of their children', I think this is one of the most difficult philosophical and political questions to handle. What degree of bad parenting constitutes abuse of children/ to what degree does society have a responsibility to shield children from the effects of bad parenting weighted against the strong natural bond between parents and child and their rights to raise their child in the fashion that most suits them / is that 'right' a real 'right' and if it is, should it be? Personally i lean towards building such strong public child-rearing institutions that the damages of an incompetent (not abusive) parent are greatly diminished, favoring that over a more intrusive child protection agency. (Well, that's me the Norwegian speaking. It might be that the american child protection agency is not nearly intrusive enough - but in Norway I feel we might be erring a bit on the other side. ) | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11629 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45024 Posts
On August 16 2019 11:24 GreenHorizons wrote: O' Rourke just announced it's presidency or bust for him and I think he means it. Not sure if he got baited or did it to/for himself, but he's not running for Corbyn's seat in Texas. He did it on live TV so when I get a good clip I'll add it. EDIT: ‘I will not in any scenario run for the United States Senate’ That's incredibly selfish, short-sighted, and stupid of him. If he was polling in the top 3, then I could see him taking this position... but he's not even remotely close. He's already mathematically eliminated, unless the rest of the candidates die or something. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23459 Posts
On August 17 2019 04:06 IgnE wrote: boarding schools in ireland, or for orphans, or whatever were similarly horrible. it is hard to disentangle the cultural obliteration in those indian boarding schools from more general norms regarding the disciplining of lower class hoi polloi regardless of color. (also consider the complicated interpenetration of such norms by sincerely held religious beliefs and the theological obligations of evangelization) i submit that you should not compare the US at a given per capita income to eg china at that income. 2019 is 2019. it presents new global norms and new technologies of control. i also submit that china probably has an equivalent to gitmo, and that the surveillance and reeducation going on in xinjiang is in addition to its political prisoner and police black sites which are undoubtedly at least as numerous as those in the US. I mean sometimes it makes sense to say 2019 is 2019, but sometimes it makes no sense to compare (straight-up anyway) a country with several times the per capita wealth to a country with a fraction of that. We covered before that China's wealth distribution is comparable to the US for example. I'm not sure that anything China is doing is notably worse than what we've done in the last 100. Doesn't make it right for either of us, just reminds me of "do as I say, not as I do" parenting when US figures want to lecture about shit they don't deal with in their own country (despite ample resources to do so). I think the US would be an absolute nightmare hellscape (comparable to or worse than China) for non-wealthy people if we had so little wealth as well in 2019. But the US did it's mass slaughtering and looting (not counting Iraq and such) when it was "okay" so it's a lot more shameful imo to let someone starve in a country that has $50,000/yr to spend on him than in a country with a fraction of that. The surveillance thing is true. While after 9/11 there was a massive illegal domestic surveillance program, black sites, and we actually did slaughter 100's of thousands of Muslims (halfway across the planet), China's surveillance technology seems to be well ahead of ours. | ||
|
Falling
Canada11369 Posts
On August 17 2019 03:52 Mohdoo wrote: Question: at what point do people think children's rights will become a bigger deal? Currently, parents are basically given ownership of children. Many children essentially have no shot in life because of their parents. Fundamentally, I feel the issue boils down to the concept of parents having ownership of their children. I don't know that we have a concept of ownership of children. In what way do we and how does it manifest? Ownership would mean that the child is a good that can be exchanged on the marketplace. Not true as we can't even scapegoat dowries anymore. What we have is more of a guardianship idea on the understanding that children begin completely dependent and become more independent over time- the goal, then for the guardians is to assist in that growth to maturity and independence, which varies vastly by individuals, by families, by cultures, etc. The default is the parents as the guardians unless they are demonstrably incapable by abuse or by neglect. Why wouldn't it be? Not even reversing the default, but simply getting more aggressive in state intervention is guardianship has created some rather interesting conversations of late. Up in Canada, it is common for indigenous people to talk of the Sixties Scoop when indigenous parents were "considered 'unfit' parents in some capacity". It was heavily used to argue there is and active an ongoing genocide in Canada against indigenous people in the Missing and Murdered Women Report. While I disagree with the allegation/ conclusion of genocide, I do think it highlights an important idea, which is that bad families harm individual children, but bad government policy harms children enmass. So I'd rather default to the parents and then strain out the really bad ones as best as we can via the rubric of abuse or neglect. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23459 Posts
strong public child-rearing institutions that the damages of an incompetent (not abusive) parent are greatly diminished, favoring that over a more intrusive child protection agency. Lots of rich kids have shitty (most frequently neglectful) parents too. Strong public institutions can offer kids that don't have a nanny or whatever to supplement that lack of parenting an alternative to joining gangs/hate groups and such to find validation. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7917 Posts
On August 17 2019 04:10 Liquid`Drone wrote: With regards to children's rights, I believe they have been on a fairly consistent rise for the past century and I think that's gonna be a continuing trend. Children are increasingly being considered autonomous humans rather than future adults, and I think it's a very positive development. (This can be signified by stuff like to what degree children's enjoyment is considered an independent factor in school and not just something that may or may not accelerate their learning.) However when you deal with 'parents having ownership of their children', I think this is one of the most difficult philosophical and political questions to handle. What degree of bad parenting constitutes abuse of children/ to what degree does society have a responsibility to shield children from the effects of bad parenting weighted against the strong natural bond between parents and child and their rights to raise their child in the fashion that most suits them / is that 'right' a real 'right' and if it is, should it be? Personally i lean towards building such strong public child-rearing institutions that the damages of an incompetent (not abusive) parent are greatly diminished, favoring that over a more intrusive child protection agency. (Well, that's me the Norwegian speaking. It might be that the american child protection agency is not nearly intrusive enough - but in Norway I feel we might be erring a bit on the other side. ) To be honest Barnevarnet is one of the most fucked up and terrifying aspect of an otherwise highly functional norwegian society. The amount of young parents I know here who live in absolute terror of those people is mind boggling. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23459 Posts
Allies to Joe Biden have been floating the idea of altering the former vice president's schedule in an effort to reduce the gaffes he has made in recent days. The allies, growing increasingly nervous about Biden's verbal flubs, have said it's an approach that's been suggested to campaign officials on the heels of the former vice president’s stumbles. Biden has a tendency to make the blunders late in the day, his allies say, particularly after a long swing on the road, like he had last week in Iowa. They say something needs to be done to give the candidate more down time as the campaign intensifies in the fall. "He needs to be a strong force on the campaign trail, but he also has to pace himself," said one ally who has talked to members of the campaign team and others in the broader Biden World about how to move forward. The ally said it was unclear whether the campaign would make any changes to Biden's schedule, particularly because Biden was criticized recently for not doing as many events as his Democratic rivals. “I think you’ll see the same schedule and maybe even more Joe Biden,” one ally said. “Everyone wants to see Joe Biden be Joe Biden. If he’s held back in any way, that’s almost the antithesis of who he is.” “I think it’s the wrong approach,” the ally added. thehill.com | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45024 Posts
On August 17 2019 04:27 Simberto wrote: This is further complicated beyond the ethical problems with taking children away from their parents by the practical considerations about the outcomes. Because parents need to be really shitty to make taking the children away improve the outcomes for them. Just average shittyness is probably not enough, because being raised by the state usually doesn't lead to the best outcomes either. I agree, and I have no idea how to qualify or quantify "shittiness". Apparently, not vaccinating a child isn't shitty enough for a parent to lose custody of their child. Instilling beliefs (religious or otherwise) that teach bigotry and hate apparently isn't shitty enough either. As a teacher, I regularly see parents fucking up their children, and it's extremely frustrating. | ||
| ||
