The All Things Political Topic - A politician needs the ability to foretell what is going to happen tomorrow, next week, next month, and next year. And to have the ability afterwards to explain why it didn’t happen

[BruceVC]

6 hours ago, Malcador said:

 

 

It always disappoints me when anyone uses religion as an excuse for societal problems or their own shortfalls

[BruceVC]

18 minutes ago, Gorth said:

Can anyone really understand what communist China has against democracy? It works well for Taiwan...

 

 

Re

 

South Africa too... just for Bruce

 

 

I think democracies have more fun than totalitarian countries

 

Edit: There are better Australian Parliament MMA videos on Youtube, but they were age restricted

I think its appalling to see anyone fighting in public but especially politicians who are paid salaries to represent the citizens of a country

But just for the record that video from SA wasnt a fight. Thats how we engage in robust debate  

But on a serious note  you will see its the EFF, Economic Freedom Fighters the people in red, who are responsible for that violence. Almost every single political problem in SA like that fight is because of them. They are our pseudo-socialist party and believe in policies like mass nationalization of land, banks, mines and everything else that is privatized. Their leader is notorious for offending minority groups that includes white people and he is currently facing numerous criminal charges like assault  and charges for things like hate speech 

[BruceVC]

https://www.enca.com/shows/judge-yourself-dennis-davis-02-june-2022

Unfortunately  exactly as I predicted based on the reality of how many aspects of US society and culture wars end up influencing SA in both positive ways and negative ways CRT has found its way into our debates. This link is a discussion about " should CRT be taught in SA schools "

@Gorthand  @Elerond

What are we going to do about this because both of you have said I must stop being a zealot and crusader and worrying about things like BLM extremism and CRT ...and I took your advice. I thought " BruceVC your friends on the forum are right, these things will never happen in SA " ....and now look?

So the question is " what is our next step  "....Im thinking we get outraged obviously and then protest?

 

[Chairchucker]

Can't view that video in my location so I'll go ahead and assume it's a big nothing burger.

[Gorth]

Hehe, yeah.

Playback Denied: Location

Error Code: PLAYER_ERR_GEO_RESTRICTED

 

I'll save it for later. I do have VPN on my desktop PC

 

[Elerond]

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

https://www.enca.com/shows/judge-yourself-dennis-davis-02-june-2022

Unfortunately  exactly as I predicted based on the reality of how many aspects of US society and culture wars end up influencing SA in both positive ways and negative ways CRT has found its way into our debates. This link is a discussion about " should CRT be taught in SA schools "

@Gorthand  @Elerond

What are we going to do about this because both of you have said I must stop being a zealot and crusader and worrying about things like BLM extremism and CRT ...and I took your advice. I thought " BruceVC your friends on the forum are right, these things will never happen in SA " ....and now look?

So the question is " what is our next step  "....Im thinking we get outraged obviously and then protest?

 

'CRT' probably needs different version if you want to taught it in SA. As it is very specific to USA history, laws and culture

It is similar situation like trying to use other US civic classes outright in SA schools.

CRT = "Critical race theory (CRT) is a cross-disciplinary intellectual and social movement of civil-rights scholars and activists who seek to examine the intersection of race, society, and law in the United States and to challenge mainstream American liberal approaches to racial justice."

CRT itself is academic way to look things and challenge general academic narrative, so as it is it can't really be taught as it is way to do and argue academic research. I am not sure why academically solid results of CRT research is such boogie man for people that they feel that people hearing about them is much worse than censoring teachers, media, books etc.. And make people protest even idea of looking if there is any value in the results.

[Gfted1]

9 hours ago, BruceVC said:

It always disappoints me when anyone uses religion as an excuse for societal problems or their own shortfalls

Religion is the source of several societal shortfalls. Homophobia, removal of choice, unending warfare, etc... all indoctrinated at birth. We would be better off outlawing religion.

[Hurlshort]

If South African schools aren't critically examining the cultural and societal frameworks of race and racial justice within their own country, I don't know why they even exist. If education is supposed to lead to the betterment of society, then race should be ground zero in a country recovering from apartheid. 

[BruceVC]

3 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

Religion is the source of several societal shortfalls. Homophobia, removal of choice, unending warfare, etc... all indoctrinated at birth. We would be better off outlawing religion.

I have heard that sentiment before where their is  some valid criticism towards all religions where non-believers will point how religion has led to wars and its a form of control 

But can I tell what I realized with my travels in Africa and the ME, if you  could somehow prove their was no god and all the religious people in the world believed you the world would become immeasurably worse on almost every level because for many people who are born into poverty and die in poverty or live in failed states the belief that their is something  better than their reality matters. They can accept their circumstances because as religious people this time on earth is nothing but a sojourn and what really matters  is eternity and happiness in the afterlife but you must be a good person and not kill others or steal or rape or do anything you want because you will be judged on this when you die

So I predict much more lawlessness, civil unrest and immoral behavior because some people would now say " well if it doesnt matter anymore why cant I just take what I want " or similar things

Of course you still have many law-abiding citizens that are good people without religion but things would get worse

 

[BruceVC]

11 minutes ago, Hurlsnot said:

If South African schools aren't critically examining the cultural and societal frameworks of race and racial justice within their own country, I don't know why they even exist. If education is supposed to lead to the betterment of society, then race should be ground zero in a country recovering from apartheid. 

Oh no need to worry about that , we constantly discuss racism and history and the end of Apartheid. The reality is most South Africans dont really have in interest in history and when some raise history its often not accurate or misunderstood. But the schools do what they can, the Apartheid  history  is definitely taught and their are institutions like the Apartheid Museum that have school tours. I am not sure what else you can expect from any society and the idea of CRT really being taught in our schools is not going to happen, no one knows what its about or how you teach it at school level  but  their is the university course thats part of law that university students can study 

And we will generally have an incident of real  racism, meaning white vs black racism, every 3 months or so. Like this incident below. But its not common, we grapple with many other societal woes like corruption, crime, illegal foreigners, GBV, service delivery failure, job losses and weekly electricity load shedding in some areas where people dont pay. These occur on a daily basis so racism is not something that we really deal with often despite what some South Africans may believe 

But here is an example of terrible racist behavior that the majority of people will condemn 

https://www.sabcnews.com/sabcnews/the-stellenbosch-urine-incident-is-one-of-the-most-vile-and-extreme-forms-of-racism/

 

 

 

[Guard Dog]

So the guy who was trying to assassinate Justice Kavanaugh because he supports the 2A was carrying a gun to do the deed. I don't know if it's appropriate to chuckle about that or not but I generally find irony to be very humorous. 

Just in case anyone was wondering, the Supreme Court has rendered 0 decisions on 2nd Amendment cases since Kavanaugh joined the court. 

[Malcador]

33 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

So the guy who was trying to assassinate Justice Kavanaugh because he supports the 2A was carrying a gun to do the deed. I don't know if it's appropriate to chuckle about that or not but I generally find irony to be very humorous. 

Just in case anyone was wondering, the Supreme Court has rendered 0 decisions on 2nd Amendment cases since Kavanaugh joined the court. 

Should have used a beer bottle.

[Gromnir]

50 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

So the guy who was trying to assassinate Justice Kavanaugh because he supports the 2A was carrying a gun to do the deed. I don't know if it's appropriate to chuckle about that or not but I generally find irony to be very humorous. 

 

you shouldn't, if you were a bit more self reflective. consider if the guy had successful killed somebody using a knife, bomb or a freaking bow and arrow. you would no doubt see that as ironic as well. after all the guy so angered at the dangers o' an unrestricted 2a managed to kill people anyways, sans a gun, 'cause is people who kill and not guns, right?

second amendment idolaters and no compromise folks is rare capable o' critical self reflection.  

HA! Good Fun!

ps just in case anybody is wondering, J. Kavanaugh's second amendment views is not so ephemeral as gd suggests.

https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/DECA496973477C748525791F004D84F9/%24file/10-7036-1333156.pdf

Edited June 9, 2022 by Gromnir

[Pidesco]

More supreme court fun:

And apparently:

 

[Raithe]

 

[Gromnir]

2 hours ago, Pidesco said:

More supreme court fun:

 

hmmm. kinda a misleading read. this case is 'bout suing feds for torts committed during scope o' their duties. facts o' the case involved a property literal straddling the border which were noteworthy for the majority as it raised (specious in our opinion given the facts) national security issues. could the courts somehow read the opinion so it applies to any 4th amendment TORT claims made in the 100 mile zone? maybe. is a perilously slippery slope being conjured, but am admitted discouraged by the curiously extreme narrow reading o' bivens and the hand wave to ziglar by the majority. regardless, the referenced decision is offering no implied freedom to violate the 4th amendment save to note the monetary damages one may recover for such violations as set forth in bivens has been seriously limited.

HA! Good Fun!

[Darkpriest]

I wonder what our US friends think of this view. 

https://realinvestmentadvice.com/social-security-whistling-past-the-96-trillion-graveyard/

It's largely within my predictions view as the changes to demographics and workforce participation have been not really in line with economy growth built on perpertual debt and a vision that you can borrow more and more currently and expect to offset it with future revenues.

 

Economy started looking more like a Ponzi scheme and you milk while you can and invest in hard, tangible assets. 

[Pidesco]

3 hours ago, Gromnir said:

hmmm. kinda a misleading read. this case is 'bout suing feds for torts committed during scope o' their duties. facts o' the case involved a property literal straddling the border which were noteworthy for the majority as it raised (specious in our opinion given the facts) national security issues. could the courts somehow read the opinion so it applies to any 4th amendment TORT claims made in the 100 mile zone? maybe. is a perilously slippery slope being conjured, but am admitted discouraged by the curiously extreme narrow reading o' bivens and the hand wave to ziglar by the majority. regardless, the referenced decision is offering no implied freedom to violate the 4th amendment save to note the monetary damages one may recover for such violations as set forth in bivens has been seriously limited.

HA! Good Fun!

Here's Elie Mystal's take on the case. 

Insightful thread. 

[Gromnir]

1 hour ago, Pidesco said:

Here's Elie Mystal's take on the case. 

 

Insightful thread. 

not accurate. am sympathetic to elie's pov and we already noted how the Court opinion represented an implausibly narrow reading o' bivens, and were improbable dismissive o' ziglar, but am suspecting the wailing and face rending some is promoting with this thomas opinion (whom as you by now are likely aware we got an an increasingly jaded view) is only possible 'cause folks like ellie realize his audience don't know what is the 4th amendment and they are even less likely to be aware o' sovereign immunity. 

"the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

w/o embracing a wholly unsupported parade of horrible and as current read, the thomas opinion says that if you have property on the border with mexico or canada, and if fed agents violate your fourth amendment rights, you cannot sue the feds for money damages. sure, you will have your papers and other illegal seized property returned, and most important, evidence gathered in violation o' the 4th amendment breach cannot be used against you in a criminal proceeding, but the feds cannot be sued for their negligent and even reckless behaviors, 'cause in most cases the feds cannot be sued for negligence unless Congress passes a law to such an effect. sovereign immunity, like it or not, is the common law norm going back before the US were a thing, and sans some kinda legislation changing, or a case such as bivens, you don't get money when the government screws the pooch. 

the victim in the present case were the owner o' an inn on the border with canada who legit interfered with a border patrol agent s'posed pursuing a suspect. the inn owner complained to the US government 'bout being roughed up (he was thrown to the ground) by the border patrol agent and in response the a-hole agent sicks the irs on the inn owner. the irs found no wrongdoing by the inn owner, but the plaintiff had to hire an accountant and pay him $5000 to deal with the irs audit. inn owner wanted the government to pay his $5000... and if the inn owner had won, his lawyer fees woulda' been paid.

btw, the a-hole agent were fired as a result o' the inn owner's complaint.

look, am agreeing the case is representing a wrong, but is not the wrong as described. is not making so victims 'o 4th amendment violations have no recourse. the case in question does not eliminate the vast majority o' 4th amendment claims one is gonna seek to make v. the government; you can get your stuff back and you won't have illegal seized evidence used against you. unfortunate, sovereign immunity is kinda the status quo and state and fed need enumerate the exceptions if you wanna sue for money damages. 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited June 10, 2022 by Gromnir

[BruceVC]

So it looks like a bipartisan agreement, in principle, on gun control has been reached. This is good news and shows again how Congress and specifically the Senate  can work together when required over difficult issues

https://edition.cnn.com/videos/politics/2022/06/12/senate-gun-safety-legislation-agreement-democrats-republicans-sotu-vpx.cnn

 

[rjshae]

On 6/9/2022 at 7:39 AM, Guard Dog said:

So the guy who was trying to assassinate Justice Kavanaugh because he supports the 2A was carrying a gun to do the deed. I don't know if it's appropriate to chuckle about that or not but I generally find irony to be very humorous. 

Just in case anyone was wondering, the Supreme Court has rendered 0 decisions on 2nd Amendment cases since Kavanaugh joined the court. 

Regardless of how you feel about Kavanaugh, physical attacks on the judicial branch are not a good trend for a democracy. I don't find it amusing.

[BruceVC]

38 minutes ago, rjshae said:

Regardless of how you feel about Kavanaugh, physical attacks on the judicial branch are not a good trend for a democracy. I don't find it amusing.

Well Im glad someone else is concerned. I raised how their were protests outside both Kavanaugh and Roberts private  home  because of Roe vs Wade and how it is completely unacceptable. The radical left always goes too far 

And I dont see how it changes the final outcome for R vs W

But their is a  real problem in some US states where protestors now believe they can protest and almost do what they want with no legal consequences, you will see this with some of the BLM marches. The only way you end this culture of "protest entitlement  " is to nip it in the bud in the beginning. Allow people to protest as its their Constitutional right in all our countries but act decisively on anyone who breaks the law

 

[Hurlshort]

Yes, the BLM protesters are the real problem.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61773358

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/drag-queen-story-hour-disrupted-men-shouting-slurs-authorities-say-rcna33184

[Gorth]

18 hours ago, BruceVC said:

But their is a  real problem in some US states where protestors now believe they can protest and almost do what they want with no legal consequences, you will see this with the January 6th insurrection

There, fixed it for you....

[majestic]