d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Portland Antifa Shooting
Prev1212223242543Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 54,184
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,945.67
Sep 2 2020 08:39pm
Quote (Goomshill @ 3 Sep 2020 04:33)
The Tea Party wasn't running around assaulting police officers for 100 nights in a row and getting away with it because the DA refused to charge them
This simply circumvents the state DA


Quick reading comprehension question: what do you mean when you say "state DA"? What's the difference between a normal DA and a state DA?!
Member
Posts: 61,688
Joined: Mar 14 2006
Gold: 28.77
Sep 2 2020 08:40pm
Quote (Goomshill @ Sep 2 2020 07:33pm)
The Tea Party wasn't running around assaulting police officers for 100 nights in a row and getting away with it because the DA refused to charge them
This simply circumvents the state DA


The Tea Party executed cops.
Member
Posts: 61,688
Joined: Mar 14 2006
Gold: 28.77
Sep 2 2020 08:40pm
Quote (Black XistenZ @ Sep 2 2020 07:39pm)
Quick reading comprehension question: what do you mean when you say "state DA"? What's the difference between a normal DA and a state DA?!



He's using language incorrectly. It's either a DA or an AG. DAs are district attorneys, AGs are for the state.

This post was edited by inkanddagger on Sep 2 2020 08:40pm
Member
Posts: 34,649
Joined: Jul 2 2007
Gold: 273.37
Sep 2 2020 09:02pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ Sep 2 2020 09:10pm)
Obama initially tried to reach across the aisle, but by the end of his first term it was clear Republicans were not willing to conceded on ANYTHING. There were several leaked memos saying "All Republicans vote against everything Obama wants, no matter what it is", and they held up his judge appointments for years. By the end Obama said fuck it and did a bunch of EOs, when he should have taken it to the people and pointed out how the GOP was holding up the court system for politics.

The deporter in chief thing was only ever rhetoric. He didn't exactly make deporting a priority, he just abused Bush's change to the way they count to make himself look better so he could try to sway Republicans. Again, not really pushing things where they needed to go.

Obama's foreign policy was mostly a continuation of Bush's drone campaign, which Trump has also continued. But you won't hear about the drone campaign under Trump, because Republicans only cared about it because Obama did it. It was Obama being a pussy and not being willing to push the status quo where it needed to be.

Obama had a consistent theme, and it was trying to work across the aisle and then giving token resistance when it didn't work. He was too much of a pussy to take his cause to the people even when he had overwhelming support. He could have taken the obstruction of his judicial appointments to the people and gotten support, he could have pushed for a public option which is still hugely popular, etc. etc. But he didn't. He largely folded when faced with opposition and just did what Democrats always do. Give corporate interests what they want.


"We have to pass it to know what's in it."

"Elections have consequences."
Member
Posts: 61,688
Joined: Mar 14 2006
Gold: 28.77
Sep 2 2020 09:05pm
Obama was center-right. He didn't even support gay marriage until his second term and he was forced to (https://www.cnn.com/2012/05/10/politics/obama-same-sex-marriage/index.html), and the conservative Supreme Court legalized it, not him or Democrats in Congress. The healthcare bill bearing his name is based on the market-based alternative to "Hillarycare" that Republicans and the Heritage Foundation came up with (https://khn.org/news/gop-1993-health-reform-bill/) in 1993. It remains a HUGE giveaway to the largest health insurance companies. He endorsed TARP and pushed Democrats to vote for it (https://www.politico.com/story/2009/01/obama-gets-first-major-win-with-tarp-017504) at the end of Bush's term (he also voted for it in the Senate), which bailed out the largest, most predatory financial institutions and banks instead of the people during the economic crash. He also expanded the power of the executive (https://fortune.com/2017/01/18/obama-trump-abuse-executive-powers-presidency/), kept the Bush wars going while skirting Congress to wage even more war (https://time.com/3326689/obama-isis-war-powers-bush/), kept CIA black sites open (https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2009-feb-01-na-rendition1-story.html), droned American citizens without trial (https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/12/president-obamas-weak-defense-of-his-record-on-drone-strikes/511454/), and even tried to open more offshore area to oil and gas drilling (https://abcnews.go.com/WN/Politics/obama-opens-offshore-drilling-oil-gas-exploration/story?id=10249811) before the BP oil spill forced him to take it back. Globally he was a neoliberal of the Reagan/Thatcher school, supporting corporate globalization and not socialist internationalism. I honestly can't think of anything "left wing" he did while in office.

He did everything Republicans had been trying to do for decades, and he got away with it by being a black face with a D next to his name. Identity politics trump reality in the American mind.

This post was edited by inkanddagger on Sep 2 2020 09:08pm
Member
Posts: 34,649
Joined: Jul 2 2007
Gold: 273.37
Sep 2 2020 09:25pm
Quote (inkanddagger @ Sep 2 2020 11:05pm)
Obama was center-right. He didn't even support gay marriage until his second term and he was forced to (https://www.cnn.com/2012/05/10/politics/obama-same-sex-marriage/index.html), and the conservative Supreme Court legalized it, not him or Democrats in Congress. The healthcare bill bearing his name is based on the market-based alternative to "Hillarycare" that Republicans and the Heritage Foundation came up with (https://khn.org/news/gop-1993-health-reform-bill/) in 1993. It remains a HUGE giveaway to the largest health insurance companies. He endorsed TARP and pushed Democrats to vote for it (https://www.politico.com/story/2009/01/obama-gets-first-major-win-with-tarp-017504) at the end of Bush's term (he also voted for it in the Senate), which bailed out the largest, most predatory financial institutions and banks instead of the people during the economic crash. He also expanded the power of the executive (https://fortune.com/2017/01/18/obama-trump-abuse-executive-powers-presidency/), kept the Bush wars going while skirting Congress to wage even more war (https://time.com/3326689/obama-isis-war-powers-bush/), kept CIA black sites open (https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2009-feb-01-na-rendition1-story.html), droned American citizens without trial (https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/12/president-obamas-weak-defense-of-his-record-on-drone-strikes/511454/), and even tried to open more offshore area to oil and gas drilling (https://abcnews.go.com/WN/Politics/obama-opens-offshore-drilling-oil-gas-exploration/story?id=10249811) before the BP oil spill forced him to take it back. Globally he was a neoliberal of the Reagan/Thatcher school, supporting corporate globalization and not socialist internationalism. I honestly can't think of anything "left wing" he did while in office.

He did everything Republicans had been trying to do for decades, and he got away with it by being a black face with a D next to his name. Identity politics trump reality in the American mind.


Socialist dictatorships have been an abysmal failures everywhere; right-wing authoritarian states by contrast quickly transition into first world, economically developed societies.

Obama, for all his flaws, was not an complete idiot, of course he didn't support international socialism.
Member
Posts: 61,688
Joined: Mar 14 2006
Gold: 28.77
Sep 2 2020 09:28pm
Quote (bogie160 @ Sep 2 2020 08:25pm)
Socialist dictatorships have been an abysmal failures everywhere; right-wing authoritarian states by contrast quickly transition into first world, economically developed societies.

Obama, for all his flaws, was not an complete idiot, of course he didn't support international socialism.


A "socialist dictatorship" would have to be a dictatorship of the proletariat by definition, which has never happened in the history of planet earth. USSR, China, Cuba, Venezuela, etc are all examples of state capitalism with a stated goal of eventual socialism in the same vein that Republicans promise eventual trickle down prosperity for the working class by subsidizing billionaires. Why do you think the monopolist capitalists were so friendly to the "communists" - it's because they're all monopolist capitalists faking people out with bullshit labels.

Social democracies have been overwhelmingly successful. I'd prefer actual socialism, but we do have a real world working model.

This post was edited by inkanddagger on Sep 2 2020 09:31pm
Member
Posts: 34,649
Joined: Jul 2 2007
Gold: 273.37
Sep 2 2020 09:33pm
Quote (inkanddagger @ Sep 2 2020 11:28pm)
A "socialist dictatorship" would have to be a dictatorship of the proletariat, which has never happened in the history of planet earth. USSR, China, Cuba, Venezuela, etc are all examples of state capitalism with a stated goal of eventual socialism in the same vein that Republicans promise eventual trickle down prosperity for the working class by subsidizing billionaires. Why do you think the monopolist capitalists were so friendly to the "communists" - it's because they're all monopolist capitalists faking people out with bullshit labels.

Social democracies have been overwhelmingly successful. I'd prefer actual socialism, but we do have a real world working model.


"Socialist dictatorships" are products of the far-left. What does anyone care whether it's "true socialism" or not? When the radical left is given power, they create horrid dystopias. When market-oriented rightists are placed in power, they start the transition towards civil society and long-term economic growth.

The left is a philosophical dead-end. Its role is to temper the excesses of right-wing government as rightists lead human society down the promised path.

This post was edited by bogie160 on Sep 2 2020 09:34pm
Member
Posts: 54,184
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,945.67
Sep 2 2020 09:33pm
Quote (inkanddagger @ 3 Sep 2020 05:28)
A "socialist dictatorship" would have to be a dictatorship of the proletariat, which has never happened in the history of planet earth. USSR, China, Cuba, Venezuela, etc are all examples of state capitalism with a stated goal of eventual socialism in the same vein that Republicans promise eventual trickle down prosperity for the working class by subsidizing billionaires. Why do you think the monopolist capitalists were so friendly to the "communists" - it's because they're all monopolist capitalists faking people out with bullshit labels.

Social democracies have been overwhelmingly successful. I'd prefer actual socialism, but we do have a real world working model.


You consider Cold War shenanigans and CIA-led coups all across Latin America "so friendly"? :wacko:
Member
Posts: 61,688
Joined: Mar 14 2006
Gold: 28.77
Sep 2 2020 09:35pm
Quote (bogie160 @ Sep 2 2020 08:33pm)
right-wing authoritarian states by contrast quickly transition into first world, economically developed societies.


In other words, right wing dictatorships lead to left wing revolutions which create prosperity for all. OK cool, we agree.
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1212223242543Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll