Discussion: The DEMOCRATIC P - Part 2

[chaseter]

Oh no, how horrible, California's concept of what makes a human being extends beyond paperwork. It really is the end of the world, isn't it

How can you practice LAW with disregard for LAW? Makes zero sense.

Every sovereign nation has a controlled border with immigration laws. The US is no different and should be no different.

We are a nation of legal immigrants.

 

[chaseter]

I mean, pretty certain foreigners are allowed to take the CA bar exam. And if they pass, there is no reason not to allow them to practice law.

Illegally here =\= foreigner.

 

[Chance Jackson]

Getting into "war crimes under international law" is hilarious. They pick & choose what they want to label as that, turning the other cheek to others at their convenience.

the capriciousness of enforcement is a problem but it does not lessen the severity of the crimes of perpetrators

Given it was technically legal at the time stateside, yeah, I'm cool with the CIA pouring water on people to simulate drowning, forcing peope to listen to Metallica, and making them try to sleep while floodlights are pointed at their face.

Yeah, the UN probably labels it torture. In the scheme of things though, it's pretty ****ing mild.

No one should be saying this matter of factly without first enduring it

Any other major world power in the U.S.'s position in the early 2000s would be doing a hell of a lot worse to those involved they managed to take prisoner. Unpleasantness abounds, it's the damn reality of this field. Nasty goddamn work.

Suspects for the most part you're talking about suspects with shaky evidence of involvement in much of anything and at least one dude froze to death what part of that **** is "****ing mild"?

 

[Aximili86]

Bingo, Chaseter.

If you're here illegally, technically you shouldn't be allowed to get a drivers' license, let alone prosecute people in court.

That's the way the rest of the country does it, anyway. Silly 300 million or so people, we're so out of wack on what it means to be human. Laws & sovereignty are for sissies! Screw that, man.

Chance, it's mild. You got taken by the Communists in 'Nam, they'd pull out your fingernails or grow bamboo shoots through your torso. You get taken by ISIS or its proxy groups, they'll cut off your head or set you on fire.

We make (well, made) people uncomfortable when they're not co-operating, and we're suddenly Josef ****ing Mengele or whatever. It's apples & oranges. It's torture, loosely, but it's not torture. We don't do it anymore, it happened in the scariest couple of years the country's experienced in 70 years or so, when we were desperate for every bit of intel we could get our hands on, and it wasn't over the line of the letter of the law at the time.

You can have moral problems with it, but let's cut out this "war criminal" ****.

 

[chaseter]

How long before an illegal citizen gets elected to State office?

Is that ok? No...

 

[CaptainWagner]

It's not "foreigners" in a broad sense, Sithborg, it's illegal immigrants specifically. Of course it's a problem.

But this is California, they might as well. Not like there's any respect for the law there anymore anyway. Go for it, we've long passed the crazy threshold when it comes to CA. You could have a non-citizen run for Governor for god's sakes and nobody in San Francisco or Oakland would give a ****.

Captain, your train of thought on the torture thing is hilarious. Any conflict ever, over the 20th century, we and everyone else have done way worse. It's war, the good guys do ****ty things just like the bad guys do. War's the very worst thing humanity does, and we're by far the most humane of the major powers with prisoners. If she's a "war criminal", pretty much every senior military & intelligence officer across the globe is too. Only difference here is what was going down became public. Doesn't mean it was illegal, just disturbing. And even then, hell, not even all that disturbing on-balance. This is what conflict is.

We have signed treaties that dictate what is and is not allowed in war. We have then refused to actually abide by those treaties, which makes us no better than the people we fight. This is why the ICC and UN are so neutered, because countries like the US sign treaties to make themselves look good but then refuse to actually answer to a higher authority.

And again to Chaseter, I think it's great that California doesn't feel the need to define being American by paperwork. Until we fix our immigration system, this sort of stuff will just keep happening.

 

[Aximili86]

The UN's "neutered" for about a bazillion other reasons, though. It doesn't work, plain & simple. Clinton said his major regret of his Presidency was listening to the damn UN on Rwanda, says he should have just intervened unilaterally without them and stopped it all.

Nobody needs to be taking lectures from the freakin' UN on what to do in war. So long as you're not using chem weapons, intentionally killing civilians, executing surrendering people, or running labor/death camps, you're good.

If they want to be taken seriously on things, the can actually intervene more often in international genocidal cluster****s instead of sitting around playing Hans Blix in Team America World Police. Put up or shut up, basically, a superpower like the U.S. is going to look out for itself, the same way Russia would, same way China would.

 

[LTuser]

California Dems approve an illegal immigrant a State appointed job:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/first-undocumented-immigrant-appointed-state-122408144.html

What’s really scary, that I learned from that article, is that CA allows illegal immigrants to practice Law. What a world.....

I've never understood that. Go anywhere else in the world, and if you are NOT a citizen, you can't practice law there. SO WHY SHOULD WE?
But its just like how the hell can convicted felons, who legally can't vote, RUN FOR OFFICE?? Let alone how can illegal aliens run and hold offices (like there are out in CA)?

How can you practice LAW with disregard for LAW? Makes zero sense.

Exactly Chase.. How can one who has disregard for the law, ever be seen as neutral when practicing it.
Its the same reason i feel when a lawyer/judge/politican/cop BREAKS the law, they are doubly guilty, compared to Joe schmoe average who breaks that same law.. CAUSE THOSE judges/cops etc, Swore an oath to UPHOLD the law.

If someone's in this country illegally, how can anyone trust them to "uphold our laws" when they've already shown a willingness to break it?

How long before an illegal citizen gets elected to State office? .

IIRC< Ca already has some that are illegal aliens who ARE in state and local offices..

 

[Robert_Anthony]

Progressives, who are WORSE than Democrats, take pride in wanting to silence conservatives! Milie Weaver, a reporter for the website Infowars went to the SXSW festival in Austin, TX to confront progressive geeks...and it wasn't to talk the latest in tech!

[YT]4sQQzHfiX58[/YT]

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Infowars. Legit news.

 

[Aximili86]

Haha, yeah. What the hell, Robert?

The Infowars guys aren't "conservatives". They're looneybags.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Nonsense. The republicans are Looney leftists. The infowars people are the true conservatives. Can't we be reasonable and meet at the center?

 

[Aximili86]

Aaaand there ya are, coming off just as wacky as the Alex Jones freaks.

 

[chaseter]

Speaking of SXSW and Democrats, I about choked on my lunch reading the article about Chelsea Manning, the former intelligence pvt that leaked classified data to Russian sponsored Wikileaks, talk about how people that wrote code need a code of ethics. Doesn’t the military have a code of ethics concerning state secrets and foreign entities? Her political career is off to a running start!

 

[LTuser]

And how is it, that a traitor LIKE manning, can even be allowed to RUN for office in the first place?

 

[Aximili86]

It doesn't really matter that she is. Nobody's going to vote for her, it's all basically just humoring her at a certain point. Demeaning little pat on the head, a few "aww, the widdle cwiminal wants her moment in the spotwight"s, and one of the other candidates wins by a landslide

*Shrugs* Not really even worth pointing out how ridiculous it is that she's running.

 

[Doug_Moore]

Louise Slaughter has passed away. Another political overstay gone.

 

[Chance Jackson]

This person also thinks Sanders is some sort of extremist for campaigning for stuff that is at the center of politics in other countries.

He calls himself a centrist.

A very important detail, that is sadly lost on some

 

[STINGRAY]

The real problem The Democratic Party has is a lack of charismatic leadership.
These days, it`s not enough to have good ideas and the best of intentions for the nation...
You have to LOOK & SOUND GOOD while doing it.

Altho, frankly --given my ever-increasing level of frustration and outright disgust with the eternal Democrat-vs-Republican GAME that our government is perpetually mired in, with both flawed parties forever jockeying for power, and accomplishing very little when they have it....

I genuinely wish there could be a viable Third Party Candidate....

Say... That`s an idea... I wonder if it would float hereabouts....?

 

[Herofan]

I tend to like the Libertarian party (voted for Johnson in 2012 but not 2016, he revealed himself as or had become too unintelligent) but it and most third parties in general tend to be pretty extreme at least on some issues, that makes a few people passionate but tends to alienate more people.

The main plus of the Libertarians for people more to the left is a peaceful foreign policy but most people more to the left seem to care much, much more about wealth distribution than whether or not we're at war.

 

[Orba]

Judge orders Gov. Scott Walker to hold special elections for open legislative seats in Eric Holder suit

Unsurprisingly the GOP are planning to appeal.

 

[MaceB]

Libertarians and Democrats agree half the time.

Libertarians - limited gov regs on social issues / limited gov regs on economic issues

Republicans - stronger gov regs on social issues / limited gov regs on economic issues

Democrats - limited gov regs on social issues / stronger gov regs on economic issues

Authoritarian - stronger gov regs on social issues / stronger gov regs on economic issues

I would argue that having a lassez-faire approach to economics, like the Libertarians do, is morally bankrupt. I want government to help feed the poor, and keep the people healthy, and to subsidize those in need. I believe that is our moral obligation. When it comes to social issues though.. I don't want government in the way. I don't want government telling me who I can marry or if I can have an abortion or what kind of lifestyle I should live. That's why I'm a Democrat - hands off my social life, hands on in my pocket book.

 

[Sithborg]

Chuck Schumer is apparently going to introduce a bill in order to decriminalize marijuana. Granted, this is all theater, given it is unlikely to go anywhere in the Senate. But, this is a rather drastic shift for Schumer. And a firming of a position for Democrats on marijuana.

 

[KevanG]

Considering Canada has been pushing to decriminalize starting this year and Sessions is trying to invoke the 'Reefer Madness' clause to cause America to vote like panicked idiots, I'd say it's beyond time to get some younger blood in US politics.

 

[Aximili86]

Marijuana's already decriminalized, for all intents & purposes. "Medical" use in California was basically a joke, it's been recreationally fine for like 15 years or so in small personal-use quantities. "Hey doc, my balls itch, hit me with some dank". - "Yessir."