American Politics

[Spidy]

Antithetical and emblematic. Is that an oxymoron?

You posted:

You tell me, is it an oxymoron? And Yeah, I know what I wrote!

As far as oxymorons go, your post suggesting Repubs and their "state's rights" (when convenient), is the "solution" IS DEFINITELY an oxymoron.

I see very little evidence of the notion, that Repubs and ruby red states, would serve and protect the rights of ALL Americans, residing in their state, equally and with out prejudices, if left to their own devices, is folly and a large amount of hubris.

The solution lies at the state and local level. Communities and states, not the Feds, can change drug laws, and push counseling, rehabilitation and jobs programs for addicts

Yeah, you should have led with this in your first reply to my post. Perhaps then, your post would have contextually made sense.

But I think you'd be wrong. Long story short, as I alluded to in my initial post on the subject, basically Repubs can't be trusted to carry out and do the right thing for ALL American residents, living in their state. Their "culture war" politics are too divisive and not inclusive.

Just look at voting rights, LGBTQ rights, abortion, Mifepristone, IVF and book (dictionary) bans are great examples of Repubs and red states, having no intention of keeping these issues, as only "state rights" issues or applying them equally to their constituency. I am in favor of an top down approach, to ensure consistent uniformity in basic decriminalization rights, every American would have no matter the state.

And NOT like the voting system, that is a disastrous, hodgepodge of "state's rights" laws, made up to gerrymander, suppress and deny legal American citizens their right to vote, so as to artificially hold onto power. As with voting rights, Repubs can't be trusted to do the right thing.

Texas as a prime example:
Take the State of Texas, where Gov. Abbott, has created new a voting law, to give him powers to "suspend" (ie. suppress and purge) +2 million registered voters from voter lists.

Texas has removed a million people from the voter rolls. Why are we finding out now?, Aug 30, 2024
https://www.tpr.org/news/2024-08-30/...inding-out-now

And when "suspending" voters doesn't work, Gov. Abbott, decides to weaponize the Texas AG (Ken Paxton), LE and the police, to kick-down doors and harass tax paying American citizen voters, who's ONLY "crime" has been, according to Gov. Abbott, is NOT voting for him and the Repub Party.

Texas AG raids homes of Latino civil rights group members, setting up a voting rights showdown, Aug 27, 2024. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/...lac-rcna168216

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton raids Latino Democrats' homes, including those of LULAC members, Aug 26, 2024. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/texas-a...s-lulac-homes/

Never pass up an opportunity to bring up Republican gaslighting on slavery or Black History when you're focused on America getting past its differences.

Good advice! I always thought, it helps to clear the air, before hand and gets everyone focused on the right path to justice. Don't you feel better, already? I know I do!

I believe Reagan's War on Drugs was stupid. Furthermore, I don't believe sealing the border air tight is a practical solution. I far favor something like Checkmate's "Portuguese solution," back when Portugal was devoting sufficient resources to the problem to make it work...

Glad you agree, because that's exactly what I said. If American's had even 20 of those 40+ years (of "The War on Drugs"), put into funding a 'Portuguese solution', it's a good bet we'd be having a very different kind of conversation.

Since decriminalization, Portugal has gone from having one of the highest drug rates, to one of the lowest drug addiction rates in Europe. Now I'm pretty sure that if this type of drug rehabilitation program, where Portugal decriminalized small amounts of "hard" and "soft" drugs, WERE NOT initiated by the Feds, as a nationwide program, Repub Conservatives, would sooner have their heads explode than to accept such a thing.

As funny as, Repubs Conservative, exploding heads maybe, it would be, "a cold day in HELL", before any such laws by their own making, to the decriminalizing of small amounts of "hard" and "soft" drugs, would ever pass muster, in their ruby red states.

Meaning, as I stated in my initial post, Repubs and Conservatives would rather continue to demonize drug users with addiction problems and use it as campaign fodder (especially against minority residents) for "tougher police and LE measures", than to ACTUALLY SOLVE the problem.

So that's an unequivocal...NO!!! I think you're wrong, and leaving it up to "state's rights", IS NOT the answer or the solution!

PS: BTW, that 'Portuguese solution', that you favor so much, was created, adopted and implemented by a leftist Portugal government.

So tell me, is it just "off with their heads" or does such a program even exist, anywhere in the world, currently under a right-wing gov't (or didn't inherit it, from a left-wing gov't)? (Note: Confirming the point, I was making in my initial post on the subject.)

[CheckMate1]

I do however feel very strongly that the border needs to absolutely be secured and fentanyl has no place in USA. Cocaine is one thing, but fentanyl kills normal everyday people who just want to party for the night and they end up dead. I also don't think it's fair to just let millions and millions of people into the country unchecked where they will work and not pay taxes. Border should be secured regulated and anyone who comes in to work is paying mother fucking taxes just like me, and no they don't get a vote. If they stay 7-10 years and keep their noses clean, offer a path to citizenship. That's how it used to be back in the day. Now it's just a dangerous mess.

Citizenship:

Let's get the misconceptions out of the way.

https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/...des/G-1151.pdf

The information above is how to become an American citizen. Same requirements as long as I can remember, when I applied in 96.

The Border:

https://www.dea.gov/sites/default/fi...20States_0.pdf

Again, we have a growing demand, and it will be filled by corporations and / or countries. Education will reduce the demand (Long Term), a support system to help the people get off of it quicker (Short Term), and enforcing / punishing pharmas / countries that supply the material will curb the problem. Punishing individuals muling the product is a fool's errand.

Taxes:

https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/brie...ants-pay-taxes

It's only one page, please read it. We pay taxes because we, as citizens, want benefits from the government. Roads, schools, clean drinking water, social security when we retire, medicare when we can't work anymore but still have medical needs, unemployment benefits if we were to be laid off, an Arm Forces system to protect from other countries, etc. Most of these benefits, specifically the individualized ones are NOT available to anyone without a social security, which are illegal nonresident individuals. When they buy groceries, a tv, a phone or any other products, they pay sales tax, but without any benefit going back to them.

A vicious circle of non logical assumptions:

1. Immigrants don't know how to read/speak english. They should learn and assimilate into OUR country.

2. Millions of them are illegally voting and skewing our election.

If you can't read, how do you know how to vote? Would you not be noticed, especially at any scale larger than 2 people.

[Spidy]

Our world which need peace wish for no Trump, to get rid of Netanyahou and Putin death and we will all live better after them. In US, I couldn t understand how a woman could vote for Trump, from his lack of respect for women, or they are really 0 neuron.

Preach Brother, Preach!

[Spidy]

... Good you didn't fall for Spidy's request for data and info. He would have just figured out a way to ignore it.

Yeah, no doubt! But I would have loved, to have been given, the opportunity to ignore it! (... kkkk!)

[EihTooms]

Antithetical and emblematic. Is that an oxymoron?

You posted:

The solution lies at the state and local level. Communities and states, not the Feds, can change drug laws, and push counseling, rehabilitation and jobs programs for addicts. And, at the state level, apparently the "do nothing Repubs" aren't doing too badly in stemming the fentanyl / opioid crisis in Nebraska, or Texas for that matter. In fact nine of the ten states with the lowest death rates from overdoses are red. Still, I don't believe there's necessarily a correlation between Democratic or Republican policies and the number of addicts and overdoses. If what you say were correct, then you'd think there would be, and a lot more people, per capita, would be dying in red states. But that's not the case.

Never pass up an opportunity to bring up Republican gaslighting on slavery or Black History when you're focused on America getting past its differences. I believe Reagan's War on Drugs was stupid. Furthermore, I don't believe sealing the border air tight is a practical solution. I far favor something like Checkmate's "Portuguese solution," back when Portugal was devoting sufficient resources to the problem to make it work. Admittedly we could do like some countries and just start executing drug addicts and traffickers. That would be the most effective solution. But not acceptable to me because I don't believe in capital punishment. And for that matter on telling people what they can and can't ingest, unless it's something really destructive like fentanyl.

That said, if anything, Reagan's War on Drugs decreased illegal drug consumption in the USA. But at what cost? Attacking the demand side, preferably through getting counseling and jobs for addicts instead of locking them up, is more productive than going after traffickers in Colombia and Mexico.

Yes, Reagan's War on Drugs, like Bush's War on Terror, should never have been waged. And perhaps without the Obama / Biden War on Coal and the Biden War on Natural Gas, West Virginia wouldn't be at the top of the chart of states with the most drug overdoses. I imagine poverty and joblessness are correlated with use of fentanyl and opioids, and Obama and Biden took away the West Virginian's jobs.

Well, please feel free to look at the data. I'm not falling for that one a second time. Re-state my case and you might read my post or look at the data points. I'm not Charlie Brown and you're not Lucy.

You and Tooms are happy to make spurious correlations between the party of the president and employment and GDP growth. And ignore the real, underlying reasons for changes in employment and GDP growth. However, if the spurious correlation works against the case for "Democrats are good, Republicans are bad," like with deaths of Americans in wars and party of the president, or states with the lowest rates of deaths from drug overdoses, then you're willing to dig deeper and look at the fundamentals. So I guess there is a silver lining here. You're doing your homework! And I do mostly agree with you about the War on Drugs and the border crisis as it relates to drug overdoses.

With at least a Million American Deaths from Repub Trump's Pandemic added to Repub Lincoln's Civil War, Repub Eisenhower's Vietnam War, Repub GW Bush's Iraq War, Afghanistan War, etc, I didn't think anyone would want to keep tally of the number of American Deaths due to Repub vs Dem (mostly elective and not forced upon us) policies and stewardship as some bizarre slam on Dem results and outcomes.

But there it is.

If only the number of American jobs created vs LOST due to Repub presidents' policies and stewardship remotely matched the impressive number of American Deaths due to those Repub presidents' policies and stewardship, you might have something on your side worth arguing.

All as the result of a remarkable, some would say impossible, series of wild coincidences, magical economic cycles, bad luck for Repub potuses vs good luck for Dem potuses, that rumored witch's curse and all that over the past 170+ years, of course.

Here is another non spurious Mainstream Media report that has been largely ignored since we and they knew about it more than four critical years and now 3 critical election seasons ago:

Under Fire For Coronavirus Response, Trump Officials Defend Disbanding Pandemic Team.
March 18, 2020

https://time.com/5806558/administrat...ght-criticism/

Anticipating the likely investigation into their handling of the coronavirus outbreak, current and former Trump Administration officials are starting to push back on widespread allegations that the Administrations cuts to critical global health staffing and funding may have hampered its response. Much of that attention has focused on the 2018 disbanding of a National Security Council unit focused on pandemic preparedness, which critics say left a leadership vacuum in global health security at the White House.
............
Another former administration official, speaking anonymously in order to describe discussions with the President, placed the blame on Trump himself, who initially praised Beijing for its handling of the outbreak. "The United States greatly appreciates their efforts and transparency," Trump tweeted Jan. 24. "It will all work out well. In particular, on behalf of the American People, I want to thank President Xi!" Trump has now shifted to blaming China for being too slow to notify the international community, but the intervening weeks muddled the message the commander in chief was sending to Americans about the origin and scope of the threat.

"Basically, the President hates to admit to anything that could affect the economic success negatively and equally important, never wants to say anything about Xi Jin Ping or China that might impact the trade deal, the official says. Some have said its kind of a blindness."

[Spidy]

So when I say I am not too political, I am not, but I offer my opinion. Especially because it seems like this is not the "American Politics Forum", but the "Support Democrats No Matter What Forum" LOL. There doesn't seem to be too many people engaging in a real discussion based in objectivity, but more like people who support their political party no matter what and the other side is evil, stupid, and corrupt. I analyze and form my opinion on each particular issue even if it doesn't align with the political party I am supporting at the moment.

Could have fooled me! Less than a few weeks ago (when Trump got shot at), I could have sworn, this forum turned into an ISG Mongerer's early version of the 2024 Republican National Convention. You had Repubs and QAnon\MAGA cultists, conspirators and Trumpsters, crawl out from hiding, to deluge this forum with post after post of celebrations of untold glee, exuberance and triumph of a win in ROEvember, as I couldn't get a word in edgewise to inform your boisterous Repub QAnon/MAGA fellow ISGers that elections are won at the ballot-box.

So where are they now, all those Trumpsters and RFK Jr. supporters (...kkkk!) from just a few weeks ago? But hey, good-news is, you're still hear holding down the fort, as it were!

If Kamala wins, even though I will not be voting for her and I truly don't trust her Political Party, I am still her number one fan on day one. I hope she is an amazing President if she pulls it off. I especially hope she figures out a way to get more money into my bank account and make the lives of me and my family and friends better. I could care less about her being a Democrat if she is truly the best person for the job. I have seen nothing to convince that will happen though, she has hidden the last 4 years and it took her a pathetic 40 days to even do an interview. It's sad and disheartening to see. Many people will vote for her though just because they are convinced Trump is a psycho racist due to the racial and socio-economic injustice which has plagued the history of the USA. I don't think many people out there genuinely believe in her abilities as a leader. If so, please show me an interview or speech where she deserves my respect as such. I remember that interview she did with Charlamayne Tha God and it was so cringe I couldn't watch it. If she can't stand up to that guy, how the fuck is she going to lead a country?

Sure politicians can be cringeworthy at times, but none more so that the "weirdo" cringe duo of Trump/Vance. If I called them the "Kings of Cringe", I couldn't of spoken of anything more truer. They IMHO, literally ooze "cringe", that kind of cringe, is on a whole other level, the got dubbed "weird".

Yes, I have seen Rhetoric from republicans to go after the FBI. I don't agree with it strongly, but I do feel they have weaponized the government against Trump. False Russia conspiracy, two bogus impeachments based on nothing, convicting this guy and fining him hundreds of millions because he slandered some chick. That's so stupid. That being said, I don't think anyone should defund the FBI. Also, the defund the FBI campaign was no where even close to as strong as the defund the police campaign. That was very mainstream for a long time. I also think its silly to defund the education system and go after universities. I think that's nonsense and a waste of time and energy.

Trump and his J6, cronies, insurrectionists and rioters are not above the law, if they're found criminally liable. And neither is BLM. The popularization of "Defund the Police", was stronger, because right-wing politicans, FOXY Muse and other MSM, seized this as an opportunity to paint Dems as demons and to fill their "fear mongering watching base", with dreed. If you're against the silly notion of abolishing the educational system, then you should be railing against Trump and Project 2025.

As for BLM, I agree with you 100%. The vast majority of BLM are good people who just want more equality and justice for blacks who have historically seen far more injustice and received much less privilege. BLM is very important and was a noble cause. The few bad apples did spoil the bunch. Here is my problem with BLM. They eventually took the stance that if you don't support our cause, that means your racist and your a bad person. They went so far to even state, if you stay silent and don't offer a public opinion supporting my cause, that means you racist and your evil. That's when BLM lost me and I felt it was more about creating division and chaos than it was actually about advancing the prosperity of African Americans. I don't think Martin Luther King or an older more mature Malcom X would have supported those sentiments.

Anyone reading this is probably already aware that, to call a proud white man or woman racist publicly is like calling an African American the n word. It just shuts us down completely and the level of shame and pain from being called that publicly is overwhelming. For many white males, they experience the emotion of shame very intensely. I believe its why white males are far more likely to commit suicide. It is unacceptable to be unproductive for many white males. I also don't mean to de-value the significance of shame to any other races when I state that. Of course all humans experience shame very intensely.

Some of your thoughts on BLM are fair, but should not reduce the long hard fought movement for justice, because Black folk and people of color are telling you their "truths" and use words like "racist" to describe some white folk. It is just simply their "truth", their lived world experiences and their painful history of slavery in America for the past 400+ years.

And sure it might just be their opinions of the some white folk (which I may not agree with), but hey it's their opinion, just like you have your opinion. DON'T mean it's RIGHT or even FACTUAL correct! But they have one!

So when the latest reiteration, for the call for justice from Black folk, show up as BLM and utter a few inflammatory words like "racist", given the history of injustice from events like, 1921 Tulsa, Oklahoma, racial burning, massacre and slaughter of +300 blacks and the beating of thousands more, to the modern day police sanctioned killing and murders of people of color, like George Floyd (at a
disproportionate rate) at the hands of police, I for one am thankful, it's just peaceful protests and "harsh language", their using.

Vehemently, disagree with conflating the two words, as having the same contextual historical significance. The "racist" word for whites and the "n" word for blacks, are IMHO nothing alike. Black, Brown and other people of color get painted as racists, just as often.

W/R to MLK and Malcolm X...perhaps not! But I am going to flip your question on its head and ask you, "Did the racists and white supremacists of the day, like George Wallace or Joseph McCarthy, want peace or to sow division, with their fellow Americans of color?"

Fast forward to today, do you think Trump's hateful speeches are all about peace and unity? Or his running mate calling him "America's Hitler"? Or his dinners with Neo-Nazis, like Nick Fuentes? Or ties to J6 insurrectionists, Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, Three (3%) percenters, White Nationalists, bikers and skin heads is a coincident? Or his ties with INCEL, misogynists and anti-semites like Charlie Kick and Gov. of North Carolina, Mark Keith Robinson? What about any of this would have you believe, it isn't "...more about creating division and chaos than it was actually about advancing the prosperity of [African] Americans"? To use your words.

My point is, so when BLM takes the strong stance that it did and falsely played the race card like that, I could no longer support them even though I thought the core of what BLM stood for was of righteous significance.

Yes, BLM's righteous struggle for equality and equal treatment of justice under the law, IS and has ALWAYS been universally TRUE. Unfounded opinions aside, w/r to "playing the race card", I think it is Trump and his QAnon/MAGA minions/disciples who are sowing division in America, with their white supremacist ideology, borrowed from the 1960's and other periods of American racial unrest.

Here is why I am not big on charts and data and links. ...

... Sorry went on a bit of a side quest rant there LOL.

Yeah, I'll stop you there, and say thanks for the opinion!

As I am fully aware, that Trump loves his gullible ideological Repubs/QAnon/MAGA supporters, whom have been, may I say politely "brainwashed" and "indoctrinated", into pushing the Rush Limbaugh narrative about "the four corners of deceit" and have been told to abolish, rebuff and deny all forms of:

• government, academia, science, and the media, isn't news to me.

So your "opinion" about NOT providing facts comes as no surprise! In fact, I expected as much! So I'll leave you with a parting quote from a renaissance man of science.

As Leo said:

• "The greatest deception men suffer is their own opinions" -Leonardo da Vinci

[RamDavidson84]

Antithetical and emblematic. Is that an oxymoron?

You posted:

The solution, if there is one, lies at the state and local level. And apparently the "do nothing Repubs" aren't doing too badly in stemming the fentanyl / opioid crisis in Nebraska, or Texas for that matter. In fact nine of the ten states with the lowest death rates from overdoses are red. Still, I don't believe there's necessarily a correlation between Democratic or Republican policies and the number of addicts and overdoses. If what you say were correct, then you'd think there would be, and a lot more people, per capita, would be dying in red states. But that's not the case.

Never pass up an opportunity to bring up Republican gaslighting on slavery or Black History when you're focused on America getting past its differences. I believe Reagan's War on Drugs was stupid. Furthermore, I don't believe sealing the border air tight is a practical solution. I far favor something like Checkmate's "Portuguese solution," back when Portugal was devoting sufficient resources to the problem to make it work. Admittedly we could do like some countries and just start executing drug addicts and traffickers. That would be the most effective solution. But not acceptable to me because I don't believe in capital punishment. And for that matter on telling people what they can and can't ingest, unless it's something really destructive like fentanyl.

That said, if anything, Reagan's War on Drugs decreased illegal drug consumption in the USA. But at what cost? Attacking the demand side, preferably through getting counseling and jobs for addicts instead of locking them up, is more productive than going after traffickers in Colombia and Mexico.

Yes, Reagan's War on Drugs, like Bush's War on Terror, should never have been waged. And perhaps without the Obama / Biden War on Coal and the Biden War on Natural Gas, West Virginia wouldn't be at the top of the chart of states with the most drug overdoses. I imagine poverty and joblessness are correlated with use of fentanyl and opioids, and Obama and Biden took away the West Virginian's jobs.

Well, please feel free to look at the data. I'm not falling for that one a second time. Re-state my case and you might read my post or look at the data points. I'm not Charlie Brown and you're not Lucy.

You and Tooms are happy to make spurious correlations between the party of the president and employment and GDP growth. And ignore the real, underlying reasons for changes in employment and GDP growth. However, if the spurious correlation works against the case for "Democrats are good, Republicans are bad," like with deaths of Americans in wars and party of the president, or states with the lowest rates of deaths from drug overdoses, then you're willing to dig deeper and look at the fundamentals. So I guess there is a silver lining here. You're doing your homework! And I do mostly agree with you about the War on Drugs and the border crisis as it relates to drug overdoses.

Yeah I was joking about societal design, but I am serious when I say we should all be contributing to some degree and always trying to solve the problems our societies face. As for the border, sometimes I think if they legalized and sold cocaine in USA it would eliminate the earning potential for the cartels and create a legitimate industry for Colombia and Peru where the cocaine is grown. People are doing it anyway. I don't know if that would work, but who knows, maybe? Alcohol and weed is legalized. If border is secured and immigration is made much easier and is regulated, it also eliminates the earnings for the cartels from human trafficking. With no earning potential, the cartels would cease to exist or their power and influence would be drastically reduced. I am also sure if they are earning billions, the logical conclusion is they are paying off politicians and capitalists all over Latin America, USA, and Europe as well.

[Tiny 12]

Thanks, but IMHO, I don't think those data points, apply to my post. In fact I think your post is somewhat antithetical and emblematic of what I wrote about.

Antithetical and emblematic. Is that an oxymoron?

You posted:

But when one political party (Repubs), continues to see the drug problem, not as a problem to be solved as a unified front, but rather as, a bargaining chip, or a hammer with which to beat/pound your political opposition with, or a campaign prop to rally their base, it's clear that Americans will be doomed and subjected to yet another 40+ years of failure.

Essentially, Americans with be stuck in political quagmire quicksand. Which I fear, is just where "no nothing", "do nothing" Repubs, currently don't mind wallowing and politicking.

The solution lies at the state and local level. Communities and states, not the Feds, can change drug laws, and push counseling, rehabilitation and jobs programs for addicts. And, at the state level, apparently the "do nothing Repubs" aren't doing too badly in stemming the fentanyl / opioid crisis in Nebraska, or Texas for that matter. In fact nine of the ten states with the lowest death rates from overdoses are red. Still, I don't believe there's necessarily a correlation between Democratic or Republican policies and the number of addicts and overdoses. If what you say were correct, then you'd think there would be, and a lot more people, per capita, would be dying in red states. But that's not the case.

Yes, I do blame the Reagan administration, for starting the "War on Drugs" (speaking of slogans), but I also blame the CIA. Others have blamed our greedy little hearts and heavy consumption of "all things white and powdery", due to our wealth of capital and abundant demand, which I also agree with.

Nothing wrong with understanding America's history with its drug problem and how it relates to many of the socio-economic conditions of its time in the 1970's, 1980's, 1990's and all the way forward, to current day issues, policies and events. It's equally important that history isn't revised, like Repub revisionists love to do, for example; with the gaslighting of history on American slavery and Black History.

But now that the problem still exists and insidiously persists, to this day, some 40+ years later after that faithless day Reagan proclaimed to Americans, "The War on Drugs", my post focused on "America getting past its differences", if WE are ever going to solve the problem.

Never pass up an opportunity to bring up Republican gaslighting on slavery or Black History when you're focused on America getting past its differences. I believe Reagan's War on Drugs was stupid. Furthermore, I don't believe sealing the border air tight is a practical solution. I far favor something like Checkmate's "Portuguese solution," back when Portugal was devoting sufficient resources to the problem to make it work. Admittedly we could do like some countries and just start executing drug addicts and traffickers. That would be the most effective solution. But not acceptable to me because I don't believe in capital punishment. And for that matter on telling people what they can and can't ingest, unless it's something really destructive like fentanyl.

That said, if anything, Reagan's War on Drugs decreased illegal drug consumption in the USA. But at what cost? Attacking the demand side, preferably through getting counseling and jobs for addicts instead of locking them up, is more productive than going after traffickers in Colombia and Mexico.

Yes, Reagan's War on Drugs, like Bush's War on Terror, should never have been waged. And perhaps without the Obama / Biden War on Coal and the Biden War on Natural Gas, West Virginia wouldn't be at the top of the chart of states with the most drug overdoses. I imagine poverty and joblessness are correlated with use of fentanyl and opioids, and Obama and Biden took away the West Virginian's jobs.

So if the point or idea of your post/link was too highlight the division of blame and shame in blue and red states, w/r to the overdoses, deaths and whatever else your link highlights (as I did NOT look it, as I felt your post wasn't related to my post and), is YOUR argument and YOURS alone. My post did not make any such argument.

A reminder of the gist of my post:


In the spirit of the Harris/Walz campaign, I'm feeling and basking in the joyous rays of energy, happiness and the uplifting delight, their ticket is bringing back to American politics, with bipartisan support from 200+ Repubs and even more Never Trumpers. It is within that same spirit of joy, bipartisanship (that YOU constantly accuse ISG Dems of not having) and a sense of cooperation that my previous post addresses. So...

Thanks for the post et al., but your antithetical data points, I think is making a different argument and one that belongs in another conversation and perhaps worth saving for another day?

PS: Feel free to re-state the case, you're trying to make with your data points.

Well, please feel free to look at the data. I'm not falling for that one a second time. Re-state my case and you might read my post or look at the data points. I'm not Charlie Brown and you're not Lucy.

You and Tooms are happy to make spurious correlations between the party of the president and employment and GDP growth. And ignore the real, underlying reasons for changes in employment and GDP growth. However, if the spurious correlation works against the case for "Democrats are good, Republicans are bad," like with deaths of Americans in wars and party of the president, or states with the lowest rates of deaths from drug overdoses, then you're willing to dig deeper and look at the fundamentals. So I guess there is a silver lining here. You're doing your homework! And I do mostly agree with you about the War on Drugs and the border crisis as it relates to drug overdoses.

[Tiny 12]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPgW1U0Eidw

Hilarious, especially the second one. Gavin Newsome doesn't appear to have a whole lot of respect for the First Amendment. Or a sense of humor.

[Tiny 12]

So when I say I am not too political, I am not, but I offer my opinion. Especially because it seems like this is not the "American Politics Forum", but the "Support Democrats No Matter What Forum" LOL. There doesn't seem to be too many people engaging in a real discussion based in objectivity, but more like people who support their political party no matter what and the other side is evil, stupid, and corrupt. I analyze and form my opinion on each particular issue even if it doesn't align with the political party I am supporting at the moment. If Kamala wins, even though I will not be voting for her and I truly don't trust her Political Party, I am still her number one fan on day one. I hope she is an amazing President if she pulls it off. I especially hope she figures out a way to get more money into my bank account and make the lives of me and my family and friends better. I could care less about her being a Democrat if she is truly the best person for the job. I have seen nothing to convince that will happen though, she has hidden the last 4 years and it took her a pathetic 40 days to even do an interview. It's sad and disheartening to see. Many people will vote for her though just because they are convinced Trump is a psycho racist due to the racial and socio-economic injustice which has plagued the history of the USA. I don't think many people out there genuinely believe in her abilities as a leader. If so, please show me an interview or speech where she deserves my respect as such. I remember that interview she did with Charlamayne Tha God and it was so cringe I couldn't watch it. If she can't stand up to that guy, how the fuck is she going to lead a country?

Yes, I have seen Rhetoric from republicans to go after the FBI. I don't agree with it strongly, but I do feel they have weaponized the government against Trump. False Russia conspiracy, two bogus impeachments based on nothing, convicting this guy and fining him hundreds of millions because he slandered some chick. That's so stupid. That being said, I don't think anyone should defund the FBI. Also, the defund the FBI campaign was no where even close to as strong as the defund the police campaign. That was very mainstream for a long time. I also think its silly to defund the education system and go after universities. I think that's nonsense and a waste of time and energy.

As for BLM, I agree with you 100%. The vast majority of BLM are good people who just want more equality and justice for blacks who have historically seen far more injustice and received much less privilege. BLM is very important and was a noble cause. The few bad apples did spoil the bunch. Here is my problem with BLM. They eventually took the stance that if you don't support our cause, that means your racist and your a bad person. They went so far to even state, if you stay silent and don't offer a public opinion supporting my cause, that means you racist and your evil. That's when BLM lost me and I felt it was more about creating division and chaos than it was actually about advancing the prosperity of African Americans. I don't think Martin Luther King or an older more mature Malcom X would have supported those sentiments.

Anyone reading this is probably already aware that, to call a proud white man or woman racist publicly is like calling an African American the n word. It just shuts us down completely and the level of shame and pain from being called that publicly is overwhelming. For many white males, they experience the emotion of shame very intensely. I believe its why white males are far more likely to commit suicide. It is unacceptable to be unproductive for many white males. I also don't mean to de-value the significance of shame to any other races when I state that. Of course all humans experience shame very intensely. My point is, so when BLM takes the strong stance that it did and falsely played the race card like that, I could no longer support them even though I thought the core of what BLM stood for was of righteous significance.

Here is why I am not big on charts and data and links. In this day and age, you can find a chart or statistic to prove any argument your going to try to make. I think we need to get beyond that because so many statistics are flawed or biased. If its just some barber shop chatter, like this forum, I trust the word of people I know and respect more than some mumbo jumbo analytical data from a biased internet website. The level of bias in the media can no longer be trusted as it was before the age of the internet. Again, this is just my opinion. So I am not going to put any charts up, but I am fairly positive that in the last several decades, tens of millions of illegal immigrants have crossed that border, and yes there was also many positive aspects about that for both the immigrants and American citizens. I think now is the time when we totally secure that border and make much easier to legally immigrate into the country and regulate it. I have seen with my eyes dozens of these caravans of thousands of immigrants breaking into the USA and I have seen many many people in my community affected by Fentanyl and I think its time to divert our resources to sealing up the border once and for all. And yes I m completely aware many Americans disagree with me and no I don't want to see anyone who is here and is working and contributing be deported.

As for me believing it is human nature to take advantage of the system and the laws put forth upon us. I think it is the same with pussy or food. If a man is hungry, he will eat and you can bank on that 100%. If a man is horny, he going to fuck 100%. If a man sees cash on the street, that shit is going right in his pocket! If the law says you can get a comfy bed and some hot meals without working, your going to get a shit load of mother fuckers lining up to take advantage. It is just human nature. So for social services, as I said before, it is a very delicate balancing act you must perform and you cannot offer so much social services that it will incentivize citizens not to work and contribute adequate amounts of taxes which pay for those same services. You also can not offer so little resources that people resort to destitution which then plagues society. The achievement goal for societal design is to get as many people as possible living a high quality of life while also always trying to advance that same society and solve all of its problems until we reach the generation of a true perfect utopia where everyone lives forever and never experiences any pain or trauma LOL. Sorry went on a bit of a side quest rant there LOL.

Excellent, well-written post. The only thing substantive I'd disagree with is Trump's 2nd impeachment. He deserved it, and should have been convicted by the Senate. But yes, the lawsuits and prosecutions in New York were shams. He lost because the cases were tried in Manhattan, and people in Manhattan hate him. The part about societal design and a true perfect utopia is satire, right?

Good you didn't fall for Spidy's request for data and info. He would have just figured out a way to ignore it.

[RamDavidson84]

Okay! So now you want me to believe that you're "not too political...", after providing a your rather long, but politically opinionated post? Yeah...I could hardly tell (...kkkk!)

Thanks, I appreciate you stating, most of what you say is just an opinion. Again, I just want to repeat what I said before, about you expressing that's just the way you feel about certain issues, as an opinion and that it's perfectly okay with me. As many of us have the same or similar world experiences, while many millions more have different and opposite reactions, thoughts and beliefs to our lived world experiences.

However, I would argue that much of what you feel to be "true", can also be very much antithetical to how the majority of the Americans feel about the same issues.

Do you have any data/info on these unchecked millions? And over what length of time or time period are we talking about, years? Decades? Or is this just another opinion?

Luckily the vast majority, were able to go home that peacefully and NOT locked up, in a paddy wagons. Also of the nearly +10K, insurrectionists and rioters, that stormed the Capital Building, the vast majority were NOT prosecuted (only about 10%), as Trump and his cronies made sure, inadequate police and LE were NOT present.

BTW, much what you believe about the the pipe-bomb welding J6 insurrectionists, could be said about BLM protestors, which IMHO is a truer statement. And that would be, "the vast majority" are there to peacefully protest, and that the bulk of the violence is perpetrated by a few numbskulls, outside agitators and/or agent provocateurs.

May I suggest you re-read the Wiki page to your link again. It seems your understanding of what is written, is clouded.

Yes, while the BLM (a typically leftist) movement may have popularized the slogan, Repubs and right-wing MSM, have always tried to associate the slogan with Dems (and rightly so), but no one from the Dem party has campaigned to "Defund the Police".

The Wiki article in your link bears out that "association", but no evidence Dems called for a defunding:

• "Many sociologists, criminologists, and journalists have criticized aspects of the police defunding movement. In the United States, despite support for defunding being largely associated with left-wing, Democratic Party policies, politicians from both the Democratic and Republican parties have spoken against defunding, although Republicans have sought to link Democrats to the movement in congressional races."
  
  "Among the general public in the United States, the concept of defunding the police is unpopular. According to a 2024 study, there is no evidence of police defunding in major US cities in the aftermath of the 2020 BLM protests while cities with large Republican vote shares tended to increase police budgets in the aftermath of the protests."
  
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defund_the_police.
  
  Note that several of us, provided you with several examples of Repubs "Defunding the Police/FBI".

Meanwhile, "Defund the FBI", is another slogan that was perhaps popularized by QAnon/MAGA enthusiasts (piggy-backing of the BLM slogan), and likewise, Dems have tried to associated the slogan with Repubs. However, the Dems, rightly so it would seem, are justified. As in this case (see article below), many Repub candidates have called for the federal LE and FBI agency to be defunded or abolished..

So when I say I am not too political, I am not, but I offer my opinion. Especially because it seems like this is not the "American Politics Forum", but the "Support Democrats No Matter What Forum" LOL. There doesn't seem to be too many people engaging in a real discussion based in objectivity, but more like people who support their political party no matter what and the other side is evil, stupid, and corrupt. I analyze and form my opinion on each particular issue even if it doesn't align with the political party I am supporting at the moment. If Kamala wins, even though I will not be voting for her and I truly don't trust her Political Party, I am still her number one fan on day one. I hope she is an amazing President if she pulls it off. I especially hope she figures out a way to get more money into my bank account and make the lives of me and my family and friends better. I could care less about her being a Democrat if she is truly the best person for the job. I have seen nothing to convince that will happen though, she has hidden the last 4 years and it took her a pathetic 40 days to even do an interview. It's sad and disheartening to see. Many people will vote for her though just because they are convinced Trump is a psycho racist due to the racial and socio-economic injustice which has plagued the history of the USA. I don't think many people out there genuinely believe in her abilities as a leader. If so, please show me an interview or speech where she deserves my respect as such. I remember that interview she did with Charlamayne Tha God and it was so cringe I couldn't watch it. If she can't stand up to that guy, how the fuck is she going to lead a country?

Yes, I have seen Rhetoric from republicans to go after the FBI. I don't agree with it strongly, but I do feel they have weaponized the government against Trump. False Russia conspiracy, two bogus impeachments based on nothing, convicting this guy and fining him hundreds of millions because he slandered some chick. That's so stupid. That being said, I don't think anyone should defund the FBI. Also, the defund the FBI campaign was no where even close to as strong as the defund the police campaign. That was very mainstream for a long time. I also think its silly to defund the education system and go after universities. I think that's nonsense and a waste of time and energy.

As for BLM, I agree with you 100%. The vast majority of BLM are good people who just want more equality and justice for blacks who have historically seen far more injustice and received much less privilege. BLM is very important and was a noble cause. The few bad apples did spoil the bunch. Here is my problem with BLM. They eventually took the stance that if you don't support our cause, that means your racist and your a bad person. They went so far to even state, if you stay silent and don't offer a public opinion supporting my cause, that means you racist and your evil. That's when BLM lost me and I felt it was more about creating division and chaos than it was actually about advancing the prosperity of African Americans. I don't think Martin Luther King or an older more mature Malcom X would have supported those sentiments.

Anyone reading this is probably already aware that, to call a proud white man or woman racist publicly is like calling an African American the n word. It just shuts us down completely and the level of shame and pain from being called that publicly is overwhelming. For many white males, they experience the emotion of shame very intensely. I believe its why white males are far more likely to commit suicide. It is unacceptable to be unproductive for many white males. I also don't mean to de-value the significance of shame to any other races when I state that. Of course all humans experience shame very intensely. My point is, so when BLM takes the strong stance that it did and falsely played the race card like that, I could no longer support them even though I thought the core of what BLM stood for was of righteous significance.

Here is why I am not big on charts and data and links. In this day and age, you can find a chart or statistic to prove any argument your going to try to make. I think we need to get beyond that because so many statistics are flawed or biased. If its just some barber shop chatter, like this forum, I trust the word of people I know and respect more than some mumbo jumbo analytical data from a biased internet website. The level of bias in the media can no longer be trusted as it was before the age of the internet. Again, this is just my opinion. So I am not going to put any charts up, but I am fairly positive that in the last several decades, tens of millions of illegal immigrants have crossed that border, and yes there was also many positive aspects about that for both the immigrants and American citizens. I think now is the time when we totally secure that border and make much easier to legally immigrate into the country and regulate it. I have seen with my eyes dozens of these caravans of thousands of immigrants breaking into the USA and I have seen many many people in my community affected by Fentanyl and I think its time to divert our resources to sealing up the border once and for all. And yes I m completely aware many Americans disagree with me and no I don't want to see anyone who is here and is working and contributing be deported.

As for me believing it is human nature to take advantage of the system and the laws put forth upon us. I think it is the same with pussy or food. If a man is hungry, he will eat and you can bank on that 100%. If a man is horny, he going to fuck 100%. If a man sees cash on the street, that shit is going right in his pocket! If the law says you can get a comfy bed and some hot meals without working, your going to get a shit load of mother fuckers lining up to take advantage. It is just human nature. So for social services, as I said before, it is a very delicate balancing act you must perform and you cannot offer so much social services that it will incentivize citizens not to work and contribute adequate amounts of taxes which pay for those same services. You also can not offer so little resources that people resort to destitution which then plagues society. The achievement goal for societal design is to get as many people as possible living a high quality of life while also always trying to advance that same society and solve all of its problems until we reach the generation of a true perfect utopia where everyone lives forever and never experiences any pain or trauma LOL. Sorry went on a bit of a side quest rant there LOL.

[Spidy]

Blame everything on the Republicans. There's no correlation I can see between whether a state is blue or red and the rate of deaths by overdose. Four blue states are in top ten for most deaths per capita, while the four states with the lowest death rates, South Dakota, Iowa, Nebraska and Texas, are all red.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/s..._poisoning.htm

Thanks, but IMHO, I don't think those data points, apply to my post. In fact I think your post is somewhat antithetical and emblematic of what I wrote about.

Yes, I do blame the Reagan administration, for starting the "War on Drugs" (speaking of slogans), but I also blame the CIA. Others have blamed our greedy little hearts and heavy consumption of "all things white and powdery", due to our wealth of capital and abundant demand, which I also agree with.

Nothing wrong with understanding America's history with its drug problem and how it relates to many of the socio-economic conditions of its time in the 1970's, 1980's, 1990's and all the way forward, to current day issues, policies and events. It's equally important that history isn't revised, like Repub revisionists love to do, for example; with the gaslighting of history on American slavery and Black History.

But now that the problem still exists and insidiously persists, to this day, some 40+ years later after that faithless day Reagan proclaimed to Americans, "The War on Drugs", my post focused on "America getting past its differences", if WE are ever going to solve the problem.

So if the point or idea of your post/link was too highlight the division of blame and shame in blue and red states, w/r to the overdoses, deaths and whatever else your link highlights (as I did NOT look it, as I felt your post wasn't related to my post and), is YOUR argument and YOURS alone. My post did not make any such argument.

A reminder of the gist of my post:

Like most problems in society, they can be solved, if the political will power and true political bipartisan buy-in, occurs.
...

If/When America ever gets past, an "us" vs."them" mentality, and comes to terms with it's "our America's problem", and adopts more hybrid combination of the Portugal European model with better holistic approaches to punishment, drug rehabilitation and addiction healthcare. To succeed, naturally, these programs should be given the proper resources, support, funding and time to properly mature and become viable solutions to decreasing drug usage and crime problem. ...

In the spirit of the Harris/Walz campaign, I'm feeling and basking in the joyous rays of energy, happiness and the uplifting delight, their ticket is bringing back to American politics, with bipartisan support from 200+ Repubs and even more Never Trumpers. It is within that same spirit of joy, bipartisanship (that YOU constantly accuse ISG Dems of not having) and a sense of cooperation that my previous post addresses. So...

Thanks for the post et al., but your antithetical data points, I think is making a different argument and one that belongs in another conversation and perhaps worth saving for another day?

PS: Feel free to re-state the case, you're trying to make with your data points.

[MarquisdeSade1]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPgW1U0Eidw

[Sirioja]

Our world which need peace wish for no Trump, to get rid of Netanyahou and Putin death and we will all live better after them. In US, I couldn t understand how a woman could vote for Trump, from his lack of respect for women, or they are really 0 neuron.

[Tiny 12]

Luckily the vast majority, were able to go home that peacefully and NOT locked up, in a paddy wagons. Also of the nearly +10K, insurrectionists and rioters, that stormed the Capital Building, the vast majority were NOT prosecuted (only about 10%), as Trump and his cronies made sure, inadequate police and LE were NOT present.

BTW, much what you believe about the the pipe-bomb welding J6 insurrectionists, could be said about BLM protestors, which IMHO is a truer statement. And that would be, "the vast majority" are there to peacefully protest, and that the bulk of the violence is perpetrated by a few numbskulls, outside agitators and/or agent provocateurs.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the 10,000+ figure is the number of people estimated to have attended Trump's rally in Washington D.C. on January 6. Yeah, he probably said there were millions, but 10,000+ is the AP's estimate. It could have been as many as 80,000 according the Army Secretary.

https://www.latimes.com/politics/sto...-6-anniversary

The FBI estimated between 2000 and 2500 entered the Capitol Building. According to a January, 2024 NYT article, 1240 people had been arrested in connection with the attack. And the NYT speculated that may represent only half of the total indictments which will ultimately be filed. So apparently they're going to charge everyone they can identify who entered the building, and some people who didn't.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...stigation.html

This is another example of how the criminal justice system in the USA is screwed up. The Republicans want to put all the Democrats in jail, and the Democrats want to put all the Republicans in jail. If you're going to compare January 6 to BLM protests, you'd have to say the Democrats have been more successful prosecuting their opponents, probably because they mostly control Washington D.C. and other large cities where the protests occurred.