Senate The US Politics discussion

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

OMG that is the worst argument. Not only did they abolish it first, they did so without a civil war, and beyond that YOU DONT GET CREDIT FOR WHAT PEOPLE DID AFTER. They did not freaking lay a foundation that america could one day abolish the people THEY OWNED. Like owned as property, they could have freed them. That was a thing they could do, some did, some never had any, one and only one overtly opposed slavery on all counts and they left him to die in France.

Washington demanded the return of american "property" from the British, they laid the foundation for america to demand their "property" be handed back over and enslaved.

You know who had a revolution and ended slavery? the Haitians, the Black Jacobins. Jefferson chose to suppress that revolution because he wanted slavery here preserved and to discourage abolitionists. A founder, the big writer of that "foundation of america that could be free of the british to one day abolish slavery" fought to make sure a revolution against slavery was suppressed.

He pledged to starve out the revolutionaries, and only rescinded cause he decided that letting them die at French hands might stifle Napoleon. He proposed an alliance against the revolutionaries but Britain declined due to not feeling up to it. That was a founding father, oh how freedom supporting and "eventually" supportive of slavery he was. He made private statements about gradually ending slavery, but stopped even that when he decided that Haitians did not deserve to be free. This expanded slavery in the US and made it even worse.

The constitution has the Three-Fifths Compromise. That enshrines slavery and the dehumanizing of black people. "Liberty for white landowning men" cannot be contrived into "look they said liberty so they get credit for the abolition of what they overtly supported"

The War of Independence has its roots in an attempt to circumvent abolition which was beginning in Britain.

https://www.zinnedproject.org/materials/slave-nation/

Fantastic piece by Counterpunch from just days ago, funnily I didnt see this till looking up some stuff right now

it does not matter if it is not as unambiguous. The ambiguity exists because of a narrative constructed. Your point is essentially "well it is separate cause one propaganda campaign was more effective than the other". The difference is also irrelevant to all those Natives murdered, or to fundamentally what the revolution was for, or more directly WHO it was for.

It was not an oversight, the problems with the founders are intrinsic to why they fought. This is not like if idk Jackie Robinson was homophobic. This specifically has to do with the entire reason they are important

 

You may say defund the police, but you don't speak for everyone who lives in high crime low income neighborhoods . As I've said there are many who complain about a lack of police presence.
I find it ironic that liberals cry and scream when the protesters are criticized for looting and burning, it's only a few agitators, you can't condemn the protesters for actions of a few scream the Libs. But yet it's perfectly fine to condemn the whole police force for the bad actions of a few, isn't it? Spitting in the face of men and women who probably have never done anything wrong is OK. They wear a badge, they must want to kill blackmen.

 

Bob: What do you think defund the police means for most people?

It means taking money allocated to certain parts of the police budget and reallocating it to other services.

These services are designed to reduce, prevent or in some cases eliminate the very circumstances that result in high crime and low income neighborhoods. They are the treatment for the actual issue. They include but are not limited to: affordable housing and assistance, increased social worker hiring, more afterschool programs to keep at risk students in school, etc.

This does not mean abolishing the police entirely. It means changing their operating structure, changing their training and reforming the police to be better able to handle the specialized situations that only they can handle while shifting items that should go to others to those areas. Police are not social workers with guns. But for many places that is currently the case. And as we have seen, an officer's presence can take a manageable scene and make it ten times worse. Police should be a last resort for many situations but over the years as other valued services were defunded and eliminated, it shifted to being the responsibility of the police. The proposals for defunding you are seeing are primarily about reinvesting in those services and reducing the demands on police so they can better focus on what they need to do. Why is that a bad thing?

 

So another book about Trump , this one written by his niece. She's not keen on him apparently.

 

I am curious , are you OK with protesters spitting on police officers for just being police officers? They have no idea if this officer ever did anything wrong, but's it's OK to spit on him just because ?

 

and your not anti-police? I hate to see what you would condone if you were. Many cops have condoned bad behavior, have you seen 1 support the Minnesota cop?

 

and those 3 have been arrested.

 

That assertion was made by the New York Times's 1812 Project. However, it is certainly not universally accepted. Primarily because there was no intention of spreading the rulings against slavery within Britain to the empire in general. We see a parallel example in France, where even before the Revolution, the Bourbons had royal courts banning slavery in France leading to a renaissance of colored citizens (the Chevalier of St Georges, Thomas Alexander Dumas, etc) even while they elaborated the largest, cruelest and most economically important examples of slavery in the Caribbean.

But more to the point, history directly contradicts you. The slaves who escaped and served in the War of 1812 were largely shipped to Nova Scotia, one of the furthest flung corners of the British empire. They were restricted to unfavorable lands even there. The actual slave trade wasn't even banned until some time near the War of 1812. Slavery itself continued in British-controlled territory until 1834. You were so over-eager to make a point about romanticized Americans that you've fallen into a dumb bit of imperialist propaganda. Yes, American colonists were concerned about the trend away from slavery. No, there was not a mad rush for the exits driven by notion that the UK was days away from banning slavery entirely.

 

You're ****ing kidding, right?
The head of the city police union - the guy who created "Cops For Trump" - not only is fighting for all the accused cops to be exonerated, but for them to also get their jobs back.

 

That made me really upset. Is that guy still in the hospital?

 

.
cops need their day in court to argue their side not be damned by politicians who are controlled by PC mobs. Maybe that's why the 57 are upset.

 

In a democracy, of course, that is also known as public officials who are held accountable by their constituents, as they should be.

 

So it is a new allegation that Trump hired someone to take the SAT for him or has this rumor been floated before? It would be great to see that corroborated. And finally maybe a shot at blowing the lid off Trump's alleged extremely low GPA that he has kept hidden for decades under threats of lawsuits. Not that anyone thinks the guy is smart.

 

Right: Libs want to defund police! Look at what’s happening in New York and Chicago!
Left: But there are already plenty of police there and they apparently don’t get the job done anyway.
Right: *Throws nonsensical straw man arguments to see what sticks*

 

Well, police culture shouldn't consist of hotheads who are unqualified to serve. The motto is supposed to be "protect and serve," not "obliterate and intimidate." After the first Boston bomber was killed, his brother would have surrendered when captured, given that he was surrounded, but they unloaded rounds of gunfire onto the boat house where he was staying. He wasn't moving. He was hiding, and he was taken alive, anyway. That illustrates that their first instinct, or the instinct of most of them, is to shoot and/or brutalize first and ask questions later. Police unions help prevent police officers from getting psychological counseling, and that's one of the many problems we are addressing.

 

as far as Tucker is concerned,

 

We'll be lucky of America survives even one term of Trump....

But seriously... It took even Dubya a full 8 years to completely wreck the country and trash the economy, so I doubt many Americans would take a chance on yet another Republican president any time soon.

 

Ah dang dude, ya really wanna get into a contest about who's more wrong between protestors and police. Because, I tell ya, that's a battle you're gonna lose.

Here are literally just five from my own state:

Video shows a woman being body slammed by an Atlanta police officer as she was handcuffed

Atlanta bike officer slams his bike into protestors unprovoked

Police taze two bystanders and drag them out of their car

Police assault man on ground, then tackle bystander

Photographer covering the protests tackled to the ground by four officers

Ah yes, I forgot that it's PC to *checks notes* want attempted murderers to be kept secure until their trial. Hell, i've seen non-violent drug offenses get far more severe treatment than actual real attempted murderers who were caught on camera.