Political Discussion

All of this falls under the term restorative justice. I’ve seen it tried at schools, but it requires building a community and that is no easy feat considering the resources at hand.

for me this kind of circles back to the question of how absolute a right should be. We are all trying to build a society that functions as much as it can for everyone. When does one person’s ability exercise a right prevent others from exercising their rights?

Edit: these questions are not always directed at you specifically.

The issue is that sometimes you can’t exercise a eight without adversely affecting different, or even the same right of another. As a result certain rights and certain exercises of rights frump others. It’s known as the hierarchy of rights.
 
Imma bout to get spicy here.

BLM as an idea is a great thing. BLM as an actual organization, not so much. Being forced to give money to help avowed Marxist leaders of a declared Marxist organization but more houses isn’t going to result in the outcome you’re seeking.

I really don’t know this, but how much of BLM is an organization? It seems rather loose (another reason government should not direct funds to them). How did it get tagged as Marxist? They really need to come out with a uniform platform. Maybe I’m just not tapped into the organization. All I’ve really seen is a slogan, some organizing, and protesting
 
The issue is that sometimes you can’t exercise a eight without adversely affecting different, or even the same right of another. As a result certain rights and certain exercises of rights frump others. It’s known as the hierarchy of rights.
That once again leads us to the discussion of what exactly the definition of a right is and the debate of negative rights vs positive rights.
 
I really don’t know this, but how much of BLM is an organization? It seems rather loose (another reason government should not direct funds to them). How did it get tagged as Marxist? They really need to come out with a uniform platform. Maybe I’m just not tapped into the organization. All I’ve really seen is a slogan, some organizing, and protesting
This is a mostly even handed treatment of the issue. PolitiFact - Is Black Lives Matter a Marxist movement?

The way I would break it down is as a movement with various chapters and myriad individuals involved, it can’t be described as a single thing. The national organization incorporated under that name is a different matter entirely. When someone tells you who they are by explicitly stating “I am a ____” you should probably take them at their word.
 
It just might though if their punishment was a fine that was being donated to something like BLM or funds for anti racism of any manner.

So by displaying racist hate they end up paying for efforts to educate against the very thing.

Just a simple punishment wont change their behaviors. But something like the above just might.

With regard to this thought, this would be worth your time to read imo.
 
We don’t often agree, but on this it appears that we do.

The heavier the sanctions one places upon the expression of ideas, even the most terrible ones, the more insular and secretive those holding them become. The more that happens, the more dangerous those people that hold them become. Sunlight is always the best disinfectant. Allow people to publicly make mistakes, express terrible thoughts, and then with calmness, grace and a lack of expectation express why you think their views are wrong. That will garner much more positive and long lasting results. Is it harder, yup. Does it require more from those doing the work, yup. Is it the right way to do it, also yup.

You know I think it’s my small amount of training as a counselor that has me asking questions more than making statements, but also gives me the prospective that you can impose your ideas on another person. 80% of counseling is just asking questions and reflecting back what was said so that the person comes to their own conclusions.
 


Ah, the neverending joy of republicans.

Anyway, the point here is that Mandel sees his path to the GOP nomination as painting himself as the Trumpiest candidate in the crowded field. And because Trumpism isn't about a set of policy prescriptions but rather focused on tone (owning the libs, mostly), the way to demonstrate fealty to the former President is through stunts like, say, burning a mask.

 
This is a mostly even handed treatment of the issue. PolitiFact - Is Black Lives Matter a Marxist movement?

The way I would break it down is as a movement with various chapters and myriad individuals involved, it can’t be described as a single thing. The national organization incorporated under that name is a different matter entirely. When someone tells you who they are by explicitly stating “I am a ____” you should probably take them at their word.

Yea people can always say they are something but that doesn’t mean they are what they say they are. In that article they point to one statement that could be claimed to be Marxist, but that statement could also be linked to many other ideological frameworks.
 
Yea people can always say they are something but that doesn’t mean they are what they say they are. In that article they point to one statement that could be claimed to be Marxist, but that statement could also be linked to many other ideological frameworks.
Hence my tag as “mostly even handed.” There’s a fair amount of equivocation in there to soften the edges of very clear cut statements. So let me state it as “sans clear and convincing evidence to the contrary” I’ll take them at their word.
 
I didn't realize this was in the Texas voting bill:

Adds requirements for people driving voters with disabilities
The bill would not ban Texans from driving multiple non-relatives to go vote. But it would impose new requirements on certain drivers of non-relatives. Specifically, the requirements apply to people who drive three or more non-relatives who are physically unable to go inside the voting location and therefore need a ballot brought out to them at the curb or entrance.
The bill says that such drivers would have to fill out a form with their name, address, and general reason they are providing assistance. That form would have to be quickly delivered to the state secretary of state, who would be required to make it "available to the attorney general for inspection upon request."
Also, the bill says a poll watcher would be allowed to observe "any activity" related to this curbside voting, aside from observing a voter marking their ballot or being assisted in voting. (The bill does not even contain a ban on the poll watcher from entering the driver's car at other moments.) And the bill says that the driver would have to exit the vehicle while the voter votes in the car, except if "other law" would allow the driver to accompany the voter to a voting station.

So if you drive 3 or more people with disabilities to the polls at form needs to be filled out and delivered to the secretary of state and made available to the attorney general by request for inspection?

That sounds like a big deterrence and hoops to jump through. Also sounds like it would stop most of the senior center busses / vans from brining seniors to the polls. There is a lot of that around here, not sure if it's common in
texas.
 
I didn't realize this was in the Texas voting bill:



So if you drive 3 or more people with disabilities to the polls at form needs to be filled out and delivered to the secretary of state and made available to the attorney general by request for inspection?

That sounds like a big deterrence and hoops to jump through. Also sounds like it would stop most of the senior center busses / vans from brining seniors to the polls. There is a lot of that around here, not sure if it's common in
texas.
doesn´t it say it only applies for non-relatives who are unable to get into the location and have to do curbside voting, not anyone who drives someone to a voting location. that should apply only to a fraction of the senior center busses
 
doesn´t it say it only applies for non-relatives who are unable to get into the location and have to do curbside voting, not anyone who drives someone to a voting location. that should apply only to a fraction of the senior center busses

I wasn't clear on if if the curbside voting section was just in the event that curbside voting was needed or if it's required to trigger this law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jan
I obviously didn't read all of the emails but is it just me or are certain right win commentators really grasping at straws to create a scandal out of the Fauci emails? Even the "incriminating" ones seem like some random person emailing him a theory and all of a sudden it's a "he knew!!!".
 
I obviously didn't read all of the emails but is it just me or are certain right win commentators really grasping at straws to create a scandal out of the Fauci emails? Even the "incriminating" ones seem like some random person emailing him a theory and all of a sudden it's a "he knew!!!".

A lot of what I have seen is it's total BS.

Sure Fauci contradict earlier recommendations he gave. But that's because we had new data from the science and he adjusted guidance as supported by the data.

That's how science works. And Fauci was giving the best guidance he could based on what he knew at the time.

It's not a big conspiracy. Then again, Republicans don't believe in science...
 
A lot of what I have seen is it's total BS.

Sure Fauci contradict earlier recommendations he gave. But that's because we had new data from the science and he adjusted guidance as supported by the data.

That's how science works. And Fauci was giving the best guidance he could based on what he knew at the time.

It's not a big conspiracy. Then again, Republicans don't believe in science...
Yeah, that was kind of my impression too. Most of the blowback seems to be from people who don't understand how real life works.
 
COVID-19 may be responsible for eliminated a large portion of affordable housing in the United States.

The vast majority of housing that is considered affordable in our country comes from individuals who rent a property or two. Not large property management companies.

And these individuals who rent only a few properties or less are impacted the most by a tenant not paying rent. Many of them are now in danger of losing their propertie(s).


Some may have been able to apply for forbearance on their mortgage, but that just deffers the money owed further down the road. And only those with federally backed mortgages which is only around 70% of all total mortgages.

Nearly 70 percent of homeowners with mortgages have loans somehow supported by the federal government.

If the properties mortgage is paid off or among the 30% not federally backed they are out of luck on the forbearance.

There are countless stories of the property owner losing their job in the pandemic and their renter not paying rent for more than a year now.

The lost income of the rent combined with losing their job during the pandemic has resulted in them at not just risk of losing their rental property but their own home as well.

The stimulus bill from last December does provide some help, but it contains some catches that hurt small property renters financially if they don't abide by the rules and has hoops to jump through.

First, both the renter and the property owner have to agree to rent assistance funding. Property owns are finding it difficult to get their renters to sign the paperwork for rent assistance. Especially if they haven't paid rent in a year or more now.

Second, the assistance requires that the property owner not evict the tenant. So if the property owner evicts the tenant they get no funding from the assistance. If they evict the tenant after receiving the assistance they have to pay back that assistance if they can't prove a valid reason for eviction that is not related to missing rent during the pandemic.

In most states housing courts have opened back up. But there is a catch. The CDC gave a mandate that evictions can not be carried out through September 2021.

In a interview I watched, when houses courts opened back up a women sought to evict her tenant who has not paid rent in over a year now and for whatever reason has not agreed to sign the paperwork for federal rent assistance. This property owner also lost her job during the pandemic and couldn't afford the mortgage on her house. She had to sell it and move back in with her parents.

The judge sided with her, ordered back rent to be paid and the tenant to move out within 7 days with a caveat. The caveat being marshals could not show up to force the renter to move out until after the CDC mandate ends. The locks could also not be changed.

This was back in the beginning of April. As of today the tenant still has not moved out, paid rent or any back rent. And likely will continue to live in the rental property for several more months without paying rent. And all these additional months of rent not paid are not part of the order that the renter has to pay back to the landlord.

This whole situation has now resulted in a reality group to challenge the CDC authority to issue such a mandate in couts. It's unclear if the legal action will be resolved before September as this lawsuit is likely to find its way to the supreme court.

Many individuals who rent a property or two may end up losing a property or saying enough is enough and selling their rental property after all is said and done.

The result being less affordable housing available on the market.
 
Joe Manchin is the Democrats number one problem with pushing any policy though. He is really frustrating the democrats, especially those more progressive.

With the 50/50 split in the senate, Democrats need his support to pass any legislation.

Manchin is signaling that he will not vote for any infrastructure spending, voter rights reform, healthcare reform, climate change legislation and pretty much anything else without Republican votes.

Manchin:
We can't continue to split and go further apart. We just can't do that, we've got to work together," Manchin told Raju.

Manchin also opposes getting rid of the Filibuster as there is no Republican support for that.



When Joe Manchin says he will only vote for things with Republican votes, does he mean a single vote? Or something that is more bipartisan in nature?

If the Republicans aren't willing to work together with the Democrats on anything at all, we does he believe we need to bend to their will and work with them to get stuff done?
 
Joe Manchin Mitch McConnell is the Democrats number one problem with pushing any policy though.
FIFY. I don’t agree with Joe Manchin on much and I don’t agree with him on the need to keep the Filibuster in place but McConnell has done way more to obstruct the Democratic agenda and effectively grind the legislative branch to a halt over the past 15 years than anyone who caucuses with the Dems.
 
I understand Manchin's sentiment of bipartisanship, but when the other side has shown they have absolutely no interest in working together and their only platform is to smear the other side it's time to tell them to just step aside and let us work.
 
Back
Top