4 4
nigel99

Go back to where you came from

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

Exactly, I approve of this post!!!!!!! (But not on behalf of all Canadians)

What I don’t understand is how the republicans are not distancing themselves from Trump. Unless I have missed it other than one person who felt strongly enough to leave and three or four who voted in support of the resolution declaring his statement racist there has been silence. 

In Australia where the PM is changed more often than some people change their underwear and the UK, such behaviour from a leader would receive vocal outcries from within, with granted a rather toxic scramble for power. What is so different in US politics, or is the sad reality that there is genuinely a fairly large racist minority?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, nigel99 said:

What I don’t understand is how the republicans are not distancing themselves from Trump. Unless I have missed it other than one person who felt strongly enough to leave and three or four who voted in support of the resolution declaring his statement racist there has been silence. 

In Australia where the PM is changed more often than some people change their underwear and the UK, such behaviour from a leader would receive vocal outcries from within, with granted a rather toxic scramble for power. What is so different in US politics, or is the sad reality that there is genuinely a fairly large racist minority?

 Apparently, our Constitution is not quite the nifty solution to authoritarianism we've been sold. Go figure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've already explained my position, and summed up my feelings to most of your points.  If you don't agree, no worries... everyone is entitled to their own opinions.  The fact that I'm apparently worse than a racist, per your take on my opinions, means I have no credibility here... which means there's no point in commenting further, lol.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
41 minutes ago, Highradwarrior said:

The fact that I'm apparently worse than a racist, per your take on my opinions, means I have no credibility here...

Well hang on, your whole point is that people who campaign against racism are responsible for the continuation of racism. Now you seem offended at the suggestion that your stance is what actually enables racists. 

 

Do you see the problem there?

Edited by jakee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, nigel99 said:

What I don’t understand is how the republicans are not distancing themselves from Trump. Unless I have missed it other than one person who felt strongly enough to leave and three or four who voted in support of the resolution declaring his statement racist there has been silence. 

Stockholm syndrome

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, nigel99 said:

In Australia where the PM is changed more often than some people change their underwear and the UK, such behaviour from a leader would receive vocal outcries from within, with granted a rather toxic scramble for power. What is so different in US politics, or is the sad reality that there is genuinely a fairly large racist minority?

I think you just explained the reason - self interest and the seriousness of the betrayal. In those various Parliamentary systems the ousting of a current leader brings the opportunity for power. Others within the party can put pressure on the PM to resign, or bring a no confidence vote within the party and force the selection of a new leader. This brings all sorts of options for cabinet posts and promotions even if you’re not in the running for the leadership.

 

In the US the Presidency is separate from the legislature, has a set line of succession and a far more serious process for removing a sitting President. Therefore a revolt against the Pres brings no immediate opportunities for any other elected federal representative and cannot be achieved by any process internal to the party but only by impeachment - and to support that against your own Pres is more like treason against the party.

 

In short, while a PM is a bit more like a first among equals, a Pres is a bit more like a temporary King. By no means a perfect analogy, but has a bit of that vibe. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/26/2019 at 4:19 PM, Highradwarrior said:

“Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came,”

Firstly, I wanna say I’m way outta my lane commenting here.... as I tend to avoid political discussions.  But my take on this topic is this..... If you look at what was actually said, I don’t believe it qualifies as racism.  Depending on how someone feels about Trump, Republicans, or Conservatives... it can be inferred that is was meant with racial undertones..... this is the angle the media immediately pushes by cropping his words to “ Go back to where you came from!”

And because it was commonly used by the KKK to "solve" the "black problem."  'Send them back' was a common refrain during their marches.  It's also been a common refrain for other races and nationalities.  The Irish were all drunks; why not send them back where they came from, where they can drink to their heart's content?  In 1850 the Know-Nothing party (so-called because they claimed to 'know nothing' about politics, and were proud of that) managed to deport 300 Irish back to the UK.  These were black AND Irish; surely the worst possible combination in the eyes of the racist Know-Nothings. "Send them back!"

Would you have argued that those people were not racist?  Because they claimed not to be.  They just wanted to improve America.  Even centuries earlier, none other than Benjamin Franklin wrote about making America great again:

Why should Pennsylvania, founded by the   English, become a Colony of Aliens, who will shortly be so numerous as   to Germanize us instead of our Anglifying them, and will never adopt our   Language or Customs, any more than they can acquire our Complexion? . . .Why increase the Sons of Africa, by Planting them in America, where we have so fair an Opportunity, by excluding all Blacks and Tawneys, of increasing the lovely  White and Red?

So none of this is new; it's been going on for centuries.  We have to keep fighting it whenever it reappears.

Quote

If you take his words at face value, to me, it comes across as “ Instead of disparaging the work I’ve done on a national level , you should do a better job in the districts in which you were appointed.”

Well, except he did EXACTLY the same thing during Obama's administration, claiming that the US sucked.  And yet he wasn't told to "go back to where you came from" - because he's white.

Quote

I’m not saying racism should be a none issue, just that we need to leave it behind to reach a middle ground beyond it.  

The US has had some horrendous problems with racism.   The only thing that has ever made it better is a decision to stop tolerating it.  MLK did this, for example.  He continually called out racism where he saw it and "pushed his luck" at marches, lunch counters and prisons.  He was arrested and ultimately assassinated for it, and during his life he was hated intensely by most people, not just white supremacists.  He was called a communist and a socialist.  Indeed; he was hated far more than AOC or any of the rest of the "squad."  The death threats were far more numerous against him than they have been against any of the squad.

And still, he had no use for a "middle ground" where some racism was OK, in return for people liking him more (or even not killing him.)  I think we are all better off today for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/26/2019 at 5:30 PM, billvon said:

It is very fortunate that we didn't have that attitude during World War II, the Manhattan project or the Apollo program. 

Not sure what attitude you are talking about. I did not say not to fund any programs or we don't need research money. All I said was control spending. Look at where the money is going and make sure it is not being wasted.

I can certainly see moving some of the military spending to other uses. How does not spending foolishly translate into scrap the Apollo program and don't build a nuclear bomb?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Rick said:

Not sure what attitude you are talking about. I did not say not to fund any programs or we don't need research money. All I said was control spending. Look at where the money is going and make sure it is not being wasted.

I can certainly see moving some of the military spending to other uses. How does not spending foolishly translate into scrap the Apollo program and don't build a nuclear bomb?

Apollo accomplished nothing in terms of national defense.  The science benefits could have been accomplished with far less cost and far less risk by concentrating on robotic missions and low Earth orbit operations.  We would be farther ahead today in terms of space capability if we spent all that money on a reusable launcher and a better/earlier space station.  (Which we were working on when Apollo came along and cancelled almost everything else.)

We spent $150 billion because we thought going to the Moon was cool (which it was) and so we could brag about it (which we did.)  So that was, in any normal sense of the word, foolish.  I'm glad we were foolish about that.

I agree that we should be careful with how we spend money - most of the time.  However, we should also be very careful not to let that attitude translate into excuses to not go to the Moon (or save the environment, or develop fission, or develop fusion.)  Even if someone calls those pursuits foolish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, billvon said:

I agree that we should be careful with how we spend money - most of the time.  However, we should also be very careful not to let that attitude translate into excuses to not go to the Moon (or save the environment, or develop fission, or develop fusion.)  Even if someone calls those pursuits foolish.

I agree with this. When I said control spending I am looking more at wasteful things. You know like tanks in a parade...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rick said:

I agree with this. When I said control spending I am looking more at wasteful things. You know like tanks in a parade...

Tanks in a parade seem fairly obvious, but also the cost is relatively trivial compared to the total budget.  The problem is that for almost everything one person's "wasteful boondoggle" is someone else's "essential program".  Often this falls along lines determined by whether on not the person offering the opinion is benefiting from the program.

I tend to think that the problem is more along the lines that most people want the government to maintain programs that benefit them, but no-one wants to actually pay for those programs.  Generations of politicians have discovered that the easiest path is to maintain government programs and at the same time promise tax cuts.  No-one wants to be the politician who killed social security, or sold off the national parks, etc; nor do they want to confront people with the actual cost of those programs.  An easy way to kill your political career is to campaign on cutting the military, you'll immediately be painted as unpatriotic or a terrorist lover by your opponent, who does not need to ever explain how they plan to pay for yet another billion or two in new military spending.

Don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, nigel99 said:

What I don’t understand is how the republicans are not distancing themselves from Trump. Unless I have missed it other than one person who felt strongly enough to leave and three or four who voted in support of the resolution declaring his statement racist there has been silence. 

In Australia where the PM is changed more often than some people change their underwear and the UK, such behaviour from a leader would receive vocal outcries from within, with granted a rather toxic scramble for power. What is so different in US politics, or is the sad reality that there is genuinely a fairly large racist minority?

Well, a big part of the problem comes from the R base. 
They like Trump's attacks on immigrants and minorities. 

They are the ones chanting "And make Mexico pay for it" (in reference to building a wall) or "Lock her UP!!!" or "Send her BACK!!!" at the rallies. 
They are the ones who will be almost certain to vote in the primaries. When the less vociferous (and less idiotic) won't go the to trouble. 
Look at Alabama. They had Ray Moore as a final Senate candidate. And it was a fairly close election. 

 

The R congress creatures know full well that they will face serious consequences for attacking or condemning Trump. The senators know that they would face the same if they voted for impeachment (one of the reasons the D congress isn't doing it). 

I noted this during Trump's early rise. Obama's presidency really pissed off a lot of 'old school' conservatives. They had to 'play nice' since the early 70s and couldn't publicly air their racist views without consequences. Once Trump came along and started publicly stating all of his garbage, these people crawled out of their caves and from under their rocks and were very happy to support him. 

And also, the "military-industrial complex" is a really bad place to look for 'wasteful spending'. Not that it doesn't happen (it's the worst place for it), but because it's so different from the rest of the government. 

Defense contractors and arms makers (and planes and missiles, and on and on) make incredible amounts of money from the government. They hire former high ranking military to become 'lobbyists' and then bribe the shit out of congress to get the  military to buy their stuff. 
Because the money is so much, and the stakes are so high, pretty much anything goes, as long as they don't get caught (and they don't, much). 

Any other budget/appropriations process pales in comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Stumpy said:

Watch how quickly they do the second he is out of power.

Don't bet on it.

Again, look at Ray Moore in Alabama.
He's not the only one.

During the mid-term campaign, there were a LOT of Rs campaigning on 'stopping illegal immigrants from taking our jobs', or 'stopping the Muslim terrorists', or banning abortion or halting the advance of gay rights (hidden under the code of 'religious freedom') or any of that garbage.
The "alt-right" has come to the forefront and has a fair amount of power.

Don't think the Rs don't see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎7‎/‎29‎/‎2019 at 11:44 AM, Rick said:

 Look at where the money is going and make sure it is not being wasted.

I can certainly see moving some of the military spending to other uses.

Absolutely. During the height of the wars, money was taken from State and given to Defense -- and State already had a small percentage of the budget compared to DoD.  Once things started progressing in Iraq, the military started getting the "nation building" tasks (what we are not at all suited to perform), as the ones who are supposed to do that did not have the resources to do so. We had the money, so we got the added responsibility.

Instead, the right answer is to give the people who know how to do this stuff (State, USAID, etc) the resources to do their jobs, and military requirements will shrink anyway.  Security isn't always -- or more accurately, usually is not -- found at the end of a weapon. But, it takes an educated, experienced group of people (legislature, executive) to implement those courses of action.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

4 4