• Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, the built environment, planning adjacent topics, and anything else that comes to mind. No ads, no spam, and it's free. It's easy to join!

NEVERENDING ♾️ The NEVERENDING Political Discussion Thread

michaelskis said:
Leave it to the Presidebt to call for more gun control in response to the Dallas shooting.

He really is an idiot.
Click to expand...

So you're not going to mention the officials of the National Police Officers Association giving completely inappropriate responses? And make a glib comment about the "Presidebt"?

http://www.riverfronttimes.com/newsblog/2016/07/08/st-louis-police-union-spokesman-jeff-roorda-blames-dallas-tragedy-on-barack-obama

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/obama-war-on-cops-police-advocacy-group-225291?cmpid=sf

I recommend reading this, because this is how folks are responding where the event happened. Not with militancy. Not with blame. With support for one another.

Good article: https://www.texastribune.org/2016/07/08/analysis-texas-leaders-have-lesson-learn-dallas-at/

And there's also the story of the black man that was carrying an unloaded AR-15 in the march to exercise is 2nd amendment rights. He did the right thing when the shooting started, walking up to a cop and giving him the gun so there wouldn't be any confusion and left the area. His reward? He got his smiling face plastered all over national media as a suspect. I don't think that happens if he is white.
 
Suburb Repairman said:
So you're not going to mention the officials of the National Police Officers Association giving completely inappropriate responses? And make a glib comment about the "Presidebt"?

http://www.riverfronttimes.com/newsblog/2016/07/08/st-louis-police-union-spokesman-jeff-roorda-blames-dallas-tragedy-on-barack-obama

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/obama-war-on-cops-police-advocacy-group-225291?cmpid=sf

I recommend reading this, because this is how folks are responding where the event happened. Not with militancy. Not with blame. With support for one another.

Good article: https://www.texastribune.org/2016/07/08/analysis-texas-leaders-have-lesson-learn-dallas-at/

And there's also the story of the black man that was carrying an unloaded AR-15 in the march to exercise is 2nd amendment rights. He did the right thing when the shooting started, walking up to a cop and giving him the gun so there wouldn't be any confusion and left the area. His reward? He got his smiling face plastered all over national media as a suspect. I don't think that happens if he is white.
Click to expand...


I was not aware of those comments, but I don't think they are appropriate and I don't think that Obama is to blame for the war on cops.

As for the person carrying the AR-15 out in public at the protest, first of all, that is just stupid. I have said it before that that hasn't changed. Second, there is 100% racism still in this world. But this is a perfect example of why you should not pass judgement until all the facts are available. Be it a cop shooting a person in a car or a person handing a cop an unloaded AR-15.
 
lets talk about facts...

From 2013 to 2015, almost half of all people killed by a police officer was white whereas only 30% were African American

Link

Once again, I do think there is racism out there, but it is not as common as the media leads people to believe. The race mongers in the media only strive to create hate and emotion to sell more advertising.

The vast majority of white people and black people and Asian people, and Hispanic people get along just fine.
 
Trump has stated a few times that he plans to break with tradition and announce his running mate before the convention next week. Who do the members of The Throbbing Brain think he will pick?

Another political outsider?
Military Figure?
Another business leader?
A woman?
A sitting (or recent) governor?
A senator?
A minority?
An up and coming member of the House of Representatives?
Another equally bombastic talking head?

Up until a couple of weeks ago, I would have guessed probably Chris Christie but from what I've been seeing lately is that his star is fading fast and nobody really wants to be associated with him anymore.

Generally, I don't think a VP offers much help to a ticket but does have the power to hurt things (ahem, Palin. cough, Eagleton.) and I don't think many folks in the GOP who wan to have a future in the party would really want to hitch their star to Trump. I think now my money is on a relatively boring senator or governor like John Thune of ND or Mike Pence of IN. Both are plenty conservative but not known for blathering on like an idiot on the talk show circuits. For some reason, going this route seems too tame for Trump though and while I don't see it actually happening, I wouldn't be completely surprised if he picked Newt Gingrich.
 
My money goes with a military mind. He needs someone to be able to say is trustworthy with our military, as it is clear he is not smart when it comes to foreign affairs.

A general, etc. would be my guess. A name that is thrown around is Mike Flynn.

In the end though he might just pick Pence and realize that he is going to lose.
 
Looks like "Chaos In Cleveland" is going to be more of the story than "A Cleveland Circus"

In light of the recent events, security and the reactions to protests and group demonstrations are going to be at the forefront.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/13/politics/republican-national-convention-protests/index.html

This paragraph says a lot:
Ohio state law does not regulate the carrying of guns, meaning that entrants to the convention's 1.3 square mile secure zone are prohibited from bringing, among other things, weapons like swords, hatchets, axes, slingshots, BB guns, pellet guns and metal knuckles, but will be allowed to openly hold live firearms.

My prediction:
There is going to be some idiot who wants to make a statement and will be taken out, which will escalate into something resembling the 1968 DNC in Chicago. I hope not, but...

hinky, maister & others, I know you guys not in NE Ohio, but keep your kids heads down.
 
Planit said:
...keep your kids heads down.
Click to expand...
I plan to.

Thankfully, I'm on the far SW edge of the Greater Cleveland/Akron Metro, so...

We just want non-delegate peoples to visit us during the RNC and spend, spend, spend. :D
 
Pence, Gingrich, and Christie on the final Trump VP list.

My money is on Pence. Christie will be the perfect fit for a Trump led cabinet as the AG.
 
I am not optomisitc about the next 4 years regardless of who gets elected. I am also not optimistic regarding race relations in this country.
 
Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump get put on a desert island. Who survives?

America. America Survives.


Best in context joke of the moment.
 
Hink said:
Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump get put on a desert island. Who survives?

America. America Survives.


Best in context joke of the moment.
Click to expand...


If ever there was a moment that both of them would be indicted with something that would prevent them from holding the Office of the Presidency. However, I am not real confident that the two parties would appoint anyone worthy to be the nominees. Both sides are super corrupt.


On a side note, I am super disappointed with Bernie. One of the things that I loved about him was his go against the establishment position. But now he backs a big wall street establishment candidate.
 
michaelskis said:
I am not optomisitc about the next 4 years regardless of who gets elected. I am also not optimistic regarding race relations in this country.
Click to expand...

If Trump wins, he'll be pretty lame duck. All his actions will be executive because no matter what face the GOP is putting on his nomination, they don't want him and the party is deeply divided against him and the Dems will never play ball with Trump. If Hillary wins and somehow the Dems get control, I'd be worried then. I don't think Hillary is as reckless as Trump on the face of it, but behind the scene she absolutely is. With unchecked reign, she could be very dangerous.

michaelskis said:
On a side note, I am super disappointed with Bernie. One of the things that I loved about him was his go against the establishment position. But now he backs a big wall street establishment candidate.
Click to expand...

Me too. I've lost all respect for him at this point. Another Washington shill who can't back up what he says. "I'll take this to the convention!!". Yeah right.
 
I heard an interesting "WHAT IF" on NPR this morning.

What if we had an issue similar to 2000 when Bush & Gore Presidential vote had to be figured out by the Supreme Court? Deadlock - because the Congress has not stepped up to perform their duty to hold confirmation hearings.
 
michaelskis said:
Pence is only 59... :r:


The biggest question is, will Pence hurt or help Trumps chances and is this a way to help unify the right?
Click to expand...

Fine, the oldest President elected ever, and a not quite as old guy!

Huzzah for the Republican party's ability to find any diversity!
 
Hink said:
Fine, the oldest President elected ever, and a not quite as old guy!

Huzzah for the Republican party's ability to find any diversity!
Click to expand...

Sorry about that... I was being sarcastic...



My impression is they wanted to find someone that all the conservatives liked, but someone who still had an antiestablishment twist. I think it is a better choice than Gingrich but I don't think it horrible choice.
 
To me Reagan always seemed old. Trump, at least to me does seem younger. That doesn't have anything to do with anything else, just a stupid observation on my part.
 
Paraphrasing a columnist in the Orlando Sentinel: "We'll be hearing Tim Tebow and Pam Bondi speak at the RNC. One a respected professional, the other our Attorney General."
 
Do you think that race relations are better now than they were 8 years ago? Obama was going to unify us all. Hope and Change? Now it's hope for change!
 
I'm praying that Donald Trump actually names Mike Pence as his Veep nominee. And I'm praying he doesn't. I am, so he will leave his post as Governor of Indiana, but I'm praying that he doesn't because if Trump wins, Pence will be a heartbeat away from being POTUS. Social conservatives scare the sheet out of me.
 
This is going to sound very anti-Socialist of me but I think it's time that France took some kind of Military action against the so called Islamic State and secured (not closed, secured) their f#%king borders.

Thank you Bush/Cheney for creating this nightmare scenario, but it is here now, and needs to be eridacated mercilessy. WWIII is on our horizon.

Its not going to be Man vs. the Machines that ends the word in this century.

We're doomed.
 
MD Planner said:
To me Reagan always seemed old. Trump, at least to me does seem younger. That doesn't have anything to do with anything else, just a stupid observation on my part.
Click to expand...

Me too.

I had to go and check the stats and was surprised that Trump is as old as he is and that Clinton isn't actually a little bit older. But looking back on it, Reagan probably seemed so old to me when I was younger precisely because I was so much younger. Just like these days, half of the teachers in my daughter's school seem so young and I don't ever recall there being any teachers who might have been in their 20s or 30s when I was little. All teachers were ancient! That's just the way it was!
 
michaelskis said:
Do you think that race relations are better now than they were 8 years ago? Obama was going to unify us all. Hope and Change? Now it's hope for change!
Click to expand...

I don't know if they're better or worse, but awareness of the issues has definitely increased. Activism related to issues of racial equity has increased, which has fueled more coverage. I think all of the issues we're seeing now have just been laying dormant for the last several years. The Civil Rights era was a wave of political activism to improve equity across racial barriers. We don't see outright racism in the mainstream anymore (well, maybe now we do, but most people disapprove of it) - it's become much more subtle. I think we're experiencing another wave of political activism to now deal with the more systemic and institutional issues. That's perhaps causing more opportunities for conflict, but I don't think it's a sign that race relations have gotten worse. It's the outward display of what a lot of people have been frustrated with that is now finally reaching a boiling point.
 
Gedunker said:
I'm praying that Donald Trump actually names Mike Pence as his Veep nominee. And I'm praying he doesn't. I am, so he will leave his post as Governor of Indiana, but I'm praying that he doesn't because if Trump wins, Pence will be a heartbeat away from being POTUS. Social conservatives scare the sheet out of me.
Click to expand...

Mike Pence is a hilariously bad choice. One of the poorer choices of governors. Social conservatively he is strong, which isn't going to help him in the country as the social conservative vote is weakening and beginning to fade fast.

Wow. Who would have guessed he would go with a poor choice? Trump make bad choices? Not him. He has a strong brain.
 
Any names out there for Hillary's VP candidate? Warren's name has been floated, but I don't see Hillary picking her. She lost a huge portion of Sanders' supporters when she refused to endorse him.
 
AG74683 said:
Any names out there for Hillary's VP candidate? Warren's name has been floated, but I don't see Hillary picking her. She lost a huge portion of Sanders' supporters when she refused to endorse him.
Click to expand...

Tim Kaine sounds like he's the most likely pick at this time.
 
I don't see Clinton picking Warren. I know that's like a wet dream for some on the left but with the ability Warren has for getting under Trump's skin, I think Clinton is better off by having Warren unrestrained by being in the actual campaign.
 
Sorry but there is absolutely no way the Democratic Party has two women on the ticket. It's just not going to happen. End of story. Sexist? Maybe. But that's the reality.
 
Apparently the lives of people is political, so I have to post it here...

All Lives Matter. All of them. Not just one race or group... ALL lives. Why is it that we should not say that? Yesterday 3 cops were murdered by a person who was angry over police brutality of black men. So he took it upon himself to shoot 6 cops, killing 3. Yet, I was called a racist by a neighbor yesterday because I said that I agree with the idea that all lives matter and the shooter was just getting even? TOTAL BS.

On FB, a person who I have known for years, said that my comment should be changed to Lives Matter. I agree, but I was deliberate in saying ALL lives matter because I don't think it is a time to segregate or highlight any one particular race, ethnic background, profession, political group, or any other label that people might use. ALL lives matter because they ALL do.

On Saturday night there was a rally in a large city in Michigan that was mostly young people with the question "Am I next" in response to police, but they invited the police and from what I have been told by a cop who was there, it was a great experience and they thought that there was wonderful dialogue showing that the police and everyone else can work together without conflict or violence. According to the news, the Black Lives Matter people were invited by the civilian group who hosted the event but declined the invite because the police were also invited to be there and participate. Then several of the BLM members who did show up anyways, help up signs and tried to block the stage with their signs anytime the police chief was speaking.

Once again, I was raised to ignore the color of one's skin and focus on who they really are. That is why I say All Lives Matter and personally, I don't care if people agree with me or not.
 
Reminds me of the Martin L King Jr "I Have a Dream"

one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.
Click to expand...
 
JNA said:
Reminds me of the Martin L King Jr "I Have a Dream"
Click to expand...

And I think that people need to realize that in today's society, that needs to be universal. There are good cops and yes, there are even bad cops out there. But it is no less wrong to judge someone on the uniform they wear than it is to judge them on the color of their skin. It is wrong in both situations.
 
BLM is highly decentralized and lacks a unifying foundation, so you are seeing a TON of variability from place-to-place in their approach. This is a contrast to the 1960s era, which achieved its strength in large part because they were well organized and stayed on-message with strong leadership. In the city where I live, BLM coordinated reasonably well with the police--they wanted police walking with them. It is a city with very low excessive force complaints, etc. But they also asked for SWAT to be available/positioned so that they could respond quickly to incident but also not be visible. I'm friends with one of the senior SWAT officers who spent part of his Sunday hanging out in a sniper position in downtown.

I read an article that did a good job of addressing the fundamental problem: I get the benefit of the doubt in all interactions. That is privilege, and it isn't always readily visible. Minorities often receive the "deficit of doubt" in their interactions--a subtle racism that some people don't even realize they are committing. A cop mentally notes four black men standing together outside a convenience store differently than the cop might note (or not even care to note) four white men in the same position. This appears to extend to use of force. Cops are more likely to "work with" the white suspect to avoid deadly force as compared to the black suspect in the same position.

The Baton Rouge incident isn't so much a BLM-related killing as it was a "Sovreign Citizen Movement" killing. And this is a big part of the problem--BLM lacks the organization to prevent people from "borrowing" their cause as an excuse for theirs.
 
The underlying racism is the hard part to comprehend since most people I know, being white, have never faced it. You don't see women grab their purse when I walk down the same isle in the supermarket (had a lady complain to me about a scary Mexican one time). I still catch a lot of overt racism around here more than other places I've lived (although SC was the worst I've been in). I also get a lot of unintentional stuff like the elected official who still uses the term colored. I honestly don't think he means it in any bad way, but he's been told and doesn't change his language so I'm a little disappointed in him for that among other things.

People also need to sort out crazy people from protest movements. The guy in Dallas may or may not have been associated with BLM, but I think just plain crazy is the better answer. BLM didn't make him shoot people, the crazy did that.
 
dvdneal said:
The underlying racism is the hard part to comprehend since most people I know, being white, have never faced it. You don't see women grab their purse when I walk down the same isle in the supermarket (had a lady complain to me about a scary Mexican one time). I still catch a lot of overt racism around here more than other places I've lived (although SC was the worst I've been in). I also get a lot of unintentional stuff like the elected official who still uses the term colored. I honestly don't think he means it in any bad way, but he's been told and doesn't change his language so I'm a little disappointed in him for that among other things.

People also need to sort out crazy people from protest movements. The guy in Dallas may or may not have been associated with BLM, but I think just plain crazy is the better answer. BLM didn't make him shoot people, the crazy did that.
Click to expand...

I think there is some of that out there and there is no question about it. But I think the solution starts with people not only refusing to play the race card, but ignoring the color of one's skin all together and teaching our kids to do the same. I know my kids don't see someone who looks different then them when they are at the playground or the pool. They see a fun kid to play with, and that kid is likely to see the same. But this is also how I was raised and how my wife was raised. My brother-in-law (wife's sister's husband) is a black guy and they have two kids together. When I am around him, I don't see him as anything but family. His kids are great and my kids have a ball every time we are all together.
 
For me it just comes down to respecting the other person and understanding how they lived their life. It all comes down to walking a mile in their shoes. I'm not going to treat someone different because of race, religion, or whatever, but I will respect how that might affect them and understand that what might be normal to me might be offensive to them. It all comes down to understanding why a group is offended by something that happened. Taking the easy example, as a southern, redneck, white guy I might take pride in the confederate flag representing a failed country and heritage and not understand why other people see it differently. That's the easy example, but there are hundreds of small examples out there as well including years of police brutality which has led to where we are today. A great small example is appropriating the BLM statement. Saying All Lives Matters can mean to things. It means what it says that I care about everyone, but at the same time it's insulting to the group who is trying to bring light to their problem by saying they weren't smart enough to include others and they think only they matter. It all goes back to the person saying it, the person hearing it, and the context behind it. With no context anything can be assumed. I also generally don't like the All Lives Matters statement because it's an absolute. You can't argue against the idea that every life is important so because I support one group more makes me automatically wrong. It's like smart growth. What else would you do? Stupid growth?
 
dvdneal said:
For me it just comes down to respecting the other person and understanding how they lived their life. It all comes down to walking a mile in their shoes. I'm not going to treat someone different because of race, religion, or whatever, but I will respect how that might affect them and understand that what might be normal to me might be offensive to them. It all comes down to understanding why a group is offended by something that happened. Taking the easy example, as a southern, redneck, white guy I might take pride in the confederate flag representing a failed country and heritage and not understand why other people see it differently. That's the easy example, but there are hundreds of small examples out there as well including years of police brutality which has led to where we are today. A great small example is appropriating the BLM statement. Saying All Lives Matters can mean to things. It means what it says that I care about everyone, but at the same time it's insulting to the group who is trying to bring light to their problem by saying they weren't smart enough to include others and they think only they matter. It all goes back to the person saying it, the person hearing it, and the context behind it. With no context anything can be assumed. I also generally don't like the All Lives Matters statement because it's an absolute. You can't argue against the idea that every life is important so because I support one group more makes me automatically wrong. It's like smart growth. What else would you do? Stupid growth?
Click to expand...

You are correct that All Lives Matter statement is absolute which is not a bad thing. For me, it does not matter if is a black person or a cop, their life matters to me, and it should matter to everyone, including each other. It transcends racial perceptions and encourages an open dialogue to understand each other.

When I say all lives matter, does it exclude back lives? Does it imply that one group's life matters more than another? What about black cops, does it not cover them too?

I agree 100% that there needs to be an open dialogue between all people. I also think that there needs to be some cultural shifts too, away from on the street violence amongst gangs (not just black but all gangs) and some of the police departments that have corruption in them need to be totally gutted and those who are racist need to be held accountable for their actions.

The situation in MN where the guy (who had a legal permit to conceal carry and notified the officer of such) is a perfect example of this. I am waiting to hear if there was a dashboard camera or something to get the complete story. I know from personal experience that the cop who pulled me over when I was concealed carrying asked me to put my hands on the steering wheel after I informed him that I had a pistol on my right hip and my conceal carry permit in my wallet. He then had me step out of the vehicle with my hands up, I then was instructed to put my hands on the vehicle and he informed me that we would be removing my pistol for his safety. I followed all the instructions and was respectful the entire time, and he let me go with a warning to slow down, after he returned my gun, unloaded with the magazine removed. If the cop asked him for his licence and did not tell him to put his hands on the steering wheel, but shot him anyways, then without question the cop should be tried for murder. But until we know for sure what happened, it is only media speculation making the situation worse.

As for stupid growth... Politics and Wal Mart... need I say more?
 
Looks like troubles a brewing with some rogue delegates at the RNC...

In light of the RNC sh*tshow happening right now, lets look on the bright side and talk about how Donald J Trump will make America great like frosted flakes!

Like tony the tiger, Trump know's how take the one only breakfast with the one and only taste and make America grreat! how exactly? who cares! He's got allot of money so that automatically means he's SMRT.

First of all, wall construction will be a boost to our domestic concrete production, which will mean more jobs for Joe the Plumber and his buddies down at the corner bar on Main Street USA.

Trump, being the real-estate luminary that he is will probably outlaw Zoning, so that will make our jobs as planners a bit easier!

And having the Nuclear briefcase, he'll very may well bring on the apocalypse meaning we all get to meet Jesus! and who wouldn't want to meet Jesus!

How do you think Donald Trump will make 'merica more than good, but GRRRREAT (like frosted flakes!)
 
A question.....

Even the military isn't allowed to fire until fired upon in "peacekeeping" operations. I'm waiting for someone to explain how and why the population of a dictatorship under UN/US peace keeping gets more latitude than American citizens.

So why can a police officer fire at a suspect without CLEARLY first establishing a weapon is VISUALLY brandished? Either a knife or gun of some kind? I'm old enough to recall a time when there was a (written/unwritten?) rule- NO GUN/KNIFE, NO SHOOT.

It seems to me that we are applying military (combat situation) rules to policing these days. How about someone from the military explain this to us?
 
The One said:
Even the military isn’t allowed to fire until fired upon in “peacekeeping” operations. I’m waiting for someone to explain how and why the population of a dictatorship under UN/US peace keeping gets more latitude than American citizens.

So why can a police officer fire at a suspect without CLEARLY first establishing a weapon is VISUALLY brandished? Either a knife or gun of some kind? I'm old enough to recall a time when there was a (written/unwritten?) rule- NO GUN/KNIFE, NO SHOOT.

It seems to me that we are applying military (combat situation) rules to policing these days. How about someone from the military explain this to us?
Click to expand...

You know, that might be one of the single best questions that I have heard regarding all of this. I don't have an answer.





On a total side note, WTF was with Stephen Colbert's skit at the RNC yesterday. Personally I thought it was hilarious and 100% true!
 
Easy way to write a speech.... steal it. :D

 
The One said:
It seems to me that we are applying military (combat situation) rules to policing these days. How about someone from the military explain this to us?
Click to expand...

Cut-and-paste from a Finnish-American guy I know - served in the Finnish Army, and is now a history professor at a college in the metro ATL area:

This is an issue of police recruiting and training, first and foremost. In some municipalities/states, training lasts only four weeks. Nowhere I know it lasts more than six months. In Europe, with a fraction of the police shootings we have, police academy usually lasts two to four years.

Additionally, so many of the cops come from the military, where they have been taught to patrol enemy streets and think of every situation as potentially life-threatening. Retraining from that mindset to protect and serve -thinking is very difficult.
Click to expand...
 
The One said:
Even the military isn’t allowed to fire until fired upon in “peacekeeping” operations. I’m waiting for someone to explain how and why the population of a dictatorship under UN/US peace keeping gets more latitude than American citizens.

So why can a police officer fire at a suspect without CLEARLY first establishing a weapon is VISUALLY brandished? Either a knife or gun of some kind? I'm old enough to recall a time when there was a (written/unwritten?) rule- NO GUN/KNIFE, NO SHOOT.

It seems to me that we are applying military (combat situation) rules to policing these days. How about someone from the military explain this to us?
Click to expand...

I was taught not to shoot unless there was motive, means, and opportunity. It must be all three or no shoot.

If you have no motive to shoot me than you aren't a threat. A guy walking down the street with an open carry side arm is not a threat. Although police do need to assume some low level of motive when pulling people over or approaching people. It's not always as simple as giving me a ticket.

You have to have the means to hurt me. As long as you're in the car you have no means to hurt me. As long as the gun is in the back seat out of reach you have no means to hurt me. Basically you have to have a weapon.

You have to have the opportunity to hurt me. A guy with a pipe wrench 100' away may have the motive and means, but he doesn't have the opportunity. He's 100' away. Now switch that wrench to a gun and he has all three.

In a traffic stop I can assume motive, but I see no means or opportunity until a weapon is produced.



Now I need to write an important speech. Anyone know where I can steal one from?
 
dvdneal said:
Now I need to write an important speech. Anyone know where I can steal one from?
Click to expand...

Speechs 'R Us - There's this speech writing company out there now and they have endorsements you might want to read:

Michelle Obama (2008) - this company does great work and actually reflects my personal feelings.
Mrs. I. Trump (2016) - The Speechs 'R Us company does great work and reflects my own personal feelings.
 
Back
Top