World is Falling Apart Thread (Locked forever)

[marurun]

Oh, and just for CRT, because he's the only one who thinks Trump's immigration ban is identical to what Obama did, here's what Foreign Policy Magazine has to say about that.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/01/30/sor ... ation-ban/

The title of this article says it all:

"Sorry, Mr. President: The Obama Administration Did Nothing Similar to Your Immigration Ban"

[jp1]

@Sarge, honestly that is a tough question. I'd like to say I'd draw no line at all...but I understand that isn't a realistic goal.

I believe the process should be made easier and more accessible rather than the other way around. That much I'm certain of.



Sent from my LG-D851 using Tapatalk

[Sarge]

I think we may be closer than we think, jp1. I can certainly appreciate your point of view.

[CRTGAMER]

I think one reform that should be done to our immigration system would be to state unequivocally that any illegal immigrants who manage to enter our armed forces and serve with distinction(ie. without facing courts martial or dishonorable discharge) should automatically be granted US citizenship out of gratitude for their service.

Second, considering where some illegal immigrants are coming from and why(such as El Salvador), I believe we should instead consider granting them refugee status.

For LEGAL immigrants an absolute YES. Take it a step further as a mandated U.S. Citizen requirement after serving the first year honorably while still on active duty. As a military man myself, I have had mixed feelings of non citizens gaining access thru out the ship. A question of loyalty to the U.S. or their own country, especially if a conflict broke out. Most that I worked directly with were from U.S. territories or countries that have Armed Forces Agreements with our ship pulling into a base in the immigrant's home country. Best Topside Cat Hookup PO I had was an immigrant. You really have to be sharp "head on a swivel" during carrier quals shooting off planes at 30 second intervals. Not mentioning the country he was from, but his mom would send per-boiled cans of condensed milk, great pudding. Also learned how tasty black beans and rice were, my staple today instead of pinto beans with the tacos.

As to illegal immigrants that served honorably, this is a touchy situation. Already has a mark in Military protocol by lying upon entry to active duty. However, that topside PO I would back even if an illegal immigrant.

[CRTGAMER]

With the latest in what has been happening in Chicago, I was reminded of this older post. I have thoughts about the latest turn of events exposing the ACLU and the Police Department in the windy city and will post later, hope others as well do too. The University of Chicago Crime Lab study released today reinforces the ACLU contract problem already been known, hopefully will finally get News coverage to stop or at least reduce the killing.

I posted that Litmus Test several pages back to get dialog on this sensitive issue. When Time did that story concerning the "misplaced MLK bust", I thought about posting it back then. It is absolutely nuts how so many of the News jumped on that.

Do we also do this at times; yell out racist for another group just to brag that we are not racist?

1. I found the idea of a white caucus highly problematic.

2. I still found the idea of a white caucus highly problematic, but when the word white was transposed to black, I found that the black caucus serves a very important purpose in helping an oppressed minority.

3. If past injustices have ongoing consequences that persist today, absolutely groups like the black caucus are justified. It's not like the abolition of slavery and the civil rights act magically fixed society to make it all hunky-dory even-keel.

4. If the caucus is designed for black lawmakers, and that white lawmaker is not a black lawmaker, then no. That he represents a district that is 60% black doesn't help fix the under-representation of black lawmakers in congress.

5. If the caucus is intended to support minority lawmakers who are under-represented in congress, no, the caucus should not be open to other lawmakers, even "if for positive purpose to get and give all the data for their constituents."

Now, why don't you answer your own 5 questions?

Apologies for taking so long, I have been waiting for the Educators take on the questions. Never happened, oh well.

1. Ask yourself honestly. What was your first reaction before opening the Spoiler?
My first reaction since I already knew about the Congressional Black Caucus was: yes now a caucus for the whites making it equal. My second thought was it would never fly, no way will a Congressional White Caucus last. Then checked my self and realized that a gathering for just one race is wrong.

2. With the spoiler opened, how did your reaction change?
After reading the bait and switch was a bit disappointed there was not an equal level White Caucas to make it fair. I never liked the idea of any organization that gathers strictly because of their race. NO group should be given a greater or lesser priority over all others. By forming a Caucus not all constituents are represented equaly during the time spent in the closed meetings and even after a group disassembles. The topics discussed will still weigh leaning away from representing all.

3. Do past injustices justify creating unbalanced groups or situations such as shown in the Litmus test?
No. Never forget the wrongs of the past, get over it and move forward. Organizing groups to just one race closes up to the openness of all ideas and moving forward. Deal with the racial injustices and divide today with ALL groups.

4. In that test showing a real event, Should that Tennessee White Congressman representing 60% black constituents be allowed to join the Black Caucus to have an equal representation for his district?
This would be a conflict to me. On one hand YES and of course not to go in just to disrupt the CBC. More of just to bring in a voice for his constituents back in his home state. On the other hand as in the thought mentioned earlier, a NO should not join. Not all the constituents would be represented during the time spent in the CBC. Even for the ones that are represented, the discussion limited locked to the passion of just the movement. Represent all the people taking in and presenting all ideas out in the open.

5. Should anyone be allowed to join any designated Caucus including Black, Asian, Hispanic, etc; if for positive purpose to get and give all the data for their constituents?
The same as my answers above. However, if the groups are allowed to assemble, there should never be a closed discussion. ALL should be allowed to join so all voices are heard.

It is unlawful to assemble and exclude race for any official event; Congress needs to clean its own house of the unlawful locked to race assemblies. In order to do this, they need brave thru the answer to my query at the top Quote.

When do we, as a society, decide that past sins are no longer a valid reasoning for said groups if the goal is a color-blind society? Do we ever actually hit that point? What metric do we use to gauge whether we are successful? I think that it's important to keep these discussions in the forefront. Just asking the question gives a chance to explain why things are the way they are, and educate those that might not understand why we do these things. The less we lambast people for broaching a topic that is taboo, the more I think we can advance as a people.

Oh and to lighten up the Saturday Night Live Skit was hilarious! The props sequence!

Sean Spicer Press Conference (Melissa McCarthy) - SNL - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWuc18xISwI

[jp1]

I think we may be closer than we think, jp1. I can certainly appreciate your point of view.

Perhaps.

It is a complex issue, it's easy to have ideals and much harder to offer solutions.

[Sarge]

I think we may be closer than we think, jp1. I can certainly appreciate your point of view.

Perhaps.

It is a complex issue, it's easy to have ideals and much harder to offer solutions.

True dat. If only life were easy!

[ZeroAX]

http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21 ... s-campaign



Meanwhile the first true battle between democrats and fascists is building up.

The candidate of the right wing party has been KOed by a scandal ("employing" his wife, which is legal in France, though she never did the job that she was being paid for, which is what the entire scandal is about).

This means this won't be about "old tired party vs newcomer", it's really going to be a battle fought on the grounds of democracy vs fascism. I hope macron wins.

[CRTGAMER]

Meanwhile the first true battle between democrats and fascists is building up.

The candidate of the right wing party has been KOed by a scandal ("employing" his wife, which is legal in France, though she never did the job that she was being paid for, which is what the entire scandal is about).

This means this won't be about "old tired party vs newcomer", it's really going to be a battle fought on the grounds of democracy vs fascism. I hope macron wins.

Why does every conservative come across to many on the left as a fascist? Really, not trying to light a fuse to create an explosion, but why the fascist label? In the U.S. I find some ideas on both sides sound, but lean to the right on most issues. I do not consider the left as an evil empire, though the violent protests not open to free speech do make me wonder.

I watched CNN when the Europe desk aired. They showed a bit of the French election focusing on Marine Le Pen polling her as the win, though the news has proven unreliable as far as polls go. A mention of her advocating closing borders and looking out for France issues over other countries, appears to me as a Populist style of Candidate.

Looked up on Wiki, appears to be a conservative open to liberal ideas even expelling her own father. How much of this is true?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_Le_Pen

Described as more democratic and republican than her nationalist father, Le Pen has led a movement of "de-demonization of the Front National" to detoxify it and soften its image, based on renovated positions and renewed teams, also expelling controversial members accused of racism, antisemitism, or pétainism. She finally expelled her father from the party on 20 August 2015 after new controversial statements. She has also relaxed some political positions of the party, advocating for civil unions for same-sex couples instead of her party's previous opposition to legal recognition of same-sex partnerships, accepting unconditional abortion and withdrawing the death penalty from her platform.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A fire started, this could lead to huge changes in Union structure in other states. The bill puts Missouri at an advantage drawing in companies from other states. Should employees be allowed to "cross the lines" and given the option not to join mandated Unions? I lean to the individual employee should be allowed to decide on joining a Union or not, employee rights that Unions strive for should include that.

To be continued as other states take notice and if the decision turned over to the voters.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... dbd1a.html

Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens signs 'right-to-work' into law
Businesses and their organizations, which typically donate to Republicans, support the legislation. Unions, who more typically back Democrats, contend the inability to collect dues keeps them from bargaining for important rights and benefits for their workers and curbs their political influence. At each event, he was flanked by lawmakers who have been biding time for a GOP governor willing to sign the pro-business measure, which prohibits labor unions from collecting dues as a condition of employment.

Greitens, like the legislators who cheered him Monday, is hopeful that the change will lure business to Missouri and keep the state competitive with 27 other states that have adopted similar laws. But for the state’s unions, the signing is an event they had previously been able to delay. Greitens’ predecessor, Gov. Jay Nixon, blocked similar efforts with his veto pen and argued, along with fellow Democrats, that the measure was a political ploy to weaken Missouri labor. Experts take issue with both arguments, saying the bill won’t necessarily serve as a job creator nor a death sentence for unions, but debate around the issue has always been inherently political.

On Monday afternoon, Missouri AFL-CIO President Mike Louis and Missouri NAACP President Rod Chapel filed a petition with the secretary of state’s office that would to put right to work on the ballot. Louis has previously filed petitions that would invalidate the law after it takes effect, but this petition is different — it’s a seldom-used tool that allows citizens to block legislation approved by lawmakers and the governor before it goes into effect.

[marurun]

Meanwhile the first true battle between democrats and fascists is building up.

Why does every conservative come across to many on the left as a fascist? Really, not trying to light a fuse to create an explosion, but why the fascist label?

CRT, the language used in European politics is different from the language we use here in the US. Europe has different left and right issues in some ways, and their candidates arrange differently. Don't assume that this democrat / fascist split he refers to mirrors democrat / republican in the US.

ZeroAX, care to explain the political left/right divide a little further? Are all conservative views fascists in this example or is it more about democracy vs fascism?