Remember how much we detested GWB when he was president, or at least i did. But he seems almost harmless after DJT-and he was not in the least bit harmless. He was awful or maybe Cheney was awful and GWB was too lazy or inept to make decisions on his own.
Just because he is no longer in power doesn't mean we have to forgive him, nor forget. He was a loathsome piece of shit as President, and has made no effort to atone after leaving office.
I can't thank you enough Stephen for your perspective, and for so much more. wrt Maxine Waters' statement, my gut said that her comment had the potential to negatively impact the conviction of Chauvin, or cause grounds for appeal/mistrial and so I felt it was ill timed. It was a surprise to me that almost no one here seemed to feel that way. And if all the Wonkers are disagreeing with me, I know my reasoning could use some additional perspective. I in no way diagreed with Maxine, it was strictly the timing I questioned.
I apologize that this is off topic for your comments here, but it is related to the main topic. Another perpective that I was grateful for, that I wanted to share, was this at Axios.
The overall idea that most "defund" proponents push--reassigning many current police actions to other agencies more suited for them--is a good one, but I agree that "defund" is a very misleading way to describe that. Also, unfortunately any reform will be hollow if our overall culture towards policing doesn't change. We already have review boards, IA departments, etc., but the police are united behind protecting themselves from accountability, seeing all of this as unappreciative backseat driving and second guessing, the prosecutors and judges are biased towards the police because they have to work with them and want their 'tough on crime" cred, and the public is skittish about questioning the cops. All of this makes accountability very difficult, so we need not just major reform but the community to become more invested in it.
Sure, but having worked in corporate America, I can tell you that when we say we’re going “rightsize” or “overhaul” a department, that means everyone’s getting fired. Cops aren’t stupid. They know what “overhaul” means. The corporation is still providing the same service but the people working there are all gone or how they work is very different. (I saw something similar in journalism.)
If the idea is that a better slogan will win over white suburbanites or POC moderates, then I certainly agree. But I saw a lot of Democrats who were running scared from the police and hoping that a better slogan would get the police on board. That seems like a fantasy.
I think my issue with the Waters backlash is that I can’t imagine politicians are expected to remain silent if cop killers are on trial. They would be talking about making the prosecutor a WalMart greeter if he failed to get a conviction, etc.
the cynic in me says that he'll get off and Ms. Waters gets the blame for no fucking reason other than saying words.
she could have sung Itsy Bitsy Spider to the exact same effect because the wingnut outrage machine is conditioned and has its audience conditioned to go into full outrage mode whenever someone with a D- in front of their name tells the truth in public.
also, I don't care what anyone says, despite my initial hesitance, I think that it has become and is becoming more and more apparent that "defund the police" is exactly what needs to happen.
To which the response is something like "but we instituted an Oversight Board! Problem solved!" (psst oversight boards are necesssary. But insufficient.)
Agreed about the police, and especially the police unions--they'll resist any reform whatsoever and think the biggest problem here is that the public just doesn't understand and we're getting a skewed picture of what's happening (also the Fox News spin on it). I think the battle here is among the remaining majority, people who are very much in favor of "overhaul" and the mushy middle who can be persuaded (and helped provide the solid majorities in favor of the BLM movement last year). Among them there's no argument that the status quo is intolerable, but the disagreement or at least confusion is "what should be done about it". I don't have an ideal slogan--I guess "overhaul" or "something stronger than reform" is the best I got--but "defund" has the downside of not only turning off the persuadables (I think David Shorr had some data on how it turned off Hispanic female voters even) without even the benefit of being an accurate depiction of what its proponents are calling for. You're right though that the police--and a big chunk of the general public--will not get on board with anything short of "turn the cameras off and let the police do what they like".
Yep. The Jackson State students never got the same attention, right from the start. It was probably partly because of the iconic photo, but mostly because they weren't white and the country is racist. It's like no one could imagine a Black parents saying OMG, that could have been my daughter. Only white people deserved thoughts and prayers. And it was an era of civil unrest, so it was easy to categorize Black protesters as just another bunch of rioting, looting thugs. It was horrible.
Because Repukes are desperately trying to pretend trump never happened, and that they're not full on Fascists, so, after running fast and far from Bush, they're trotting his stupid ass forward again in an attempt to show how "Moderate" and sane they are.
Forgetting, as usual, that this dumb cowboy poser was the one who forced protestors into "free speech zones" (Cages) and told the country, "You're either with us, or with the terrorists".
PJ O'Rourke put it best when he explained why he was supporting Hillary in 2016, despite being a conservative--"she's bad, but she's bad within the normal range. Trump is bad on a different level". This is true of Bush, and other Republicans, which is why I wince a bit when liberals try to say Trump is bad but so were other Republicans--it detracts from just how uniquely beyond the pale Trump is. That doesn't mean others weren't "bad" but that we really don't want to normalize his level of bad. He is a psychopath with nothing but the ability to destroy and ruin. Way beyond the level of Bush, Reagan, or (if you're conservative) Clinton bad. Way, way beyond.
Boy do I relate to this.
Remember how much we detested GWB when he was president, or at least i did. But he seems almost harmless after DJT-and he was not in the least bit harmless. He was awful or maybe Cheney was awful and GWB was too lazy or inept to make decisions on his own.
Just because he is no longer in power doesn't mean we have to forgive him, nor forget. He was a loathsome piece of shit as President, and has made no effort to atone after leaving office.
I can't thank you enough Stephen for your perspective, and for so much more. wrt Maxine Waters' statement, my gut said that her comment had the potential to negatively impact the conviction of Chauvin, or cause grounds for appeal/mistrial and so I felt it was ill timed. It was a surprise to me that almost no one here seemed to feel that way. And if all the Wonkers are disagreeing with me, I know my reasoning could use some additional perspective. I in no way diagreed with Maxine, it was strictly the timing I questioned.
I apologize that this is off topic for your comments here, but it is related to the main topic. Another perpective that I was grateful for, that I wanted to share, was this at Axios.
https://www.axios.com/derek...
Thanks again Stephen, and to this whole dam community.
The overall idea that most "defund" proponents push--reassigning many current police actions to other agencies more suited for them--is a good one, but I agree that "defund" is a very misleading way to describe that. Also, unfortunately any reform will be hollow if our overall culture towards policing doesn't change. We already have review boards, IA departments, etc., but the police are united behind protecting themselves from accountability, seeing all of this as unappreciative backseat driving and second guessing, the prosecutors and judges are biased towards the police because they have to work with them and want their 'tough on crime" cred, and the public is skittish about questioning the cops. All of this makes accountability very difficult, so we need not just major reform but the community to become more invested in it.
thanks, Stephen!
Sure, but having worked in corporate America, I can tell you that when we say we’re going “rightsize” or “overhaul” a department, that means everyone’s getting fired. Cops aren’t stupid. They know what “overhaul” means. The corporation is still providing the same service but the people working there are all gone or how they work is very different. (I saw something similar in journalism.)
If the idea is that a better slogan will win over white suburbanites or POC moderates, then I certainly agree. But I saw a lot of Democrats who were running scared from the police and hoping that a better slogan would get the police on board. That seems like a fantasy.
I think my issue with the Waters backlash is that I can’t imagine politicians are expected to remain silent if cop killers are on trial. They would be talking about making the prosecutor a WalMart greeter if he failed to get a conviction, etc.
the cynic in me says that he'll get off and Ms. Waters gets the blame for no fucking reason other than saying words.
she could have sung Itsy Bitsy Spider to the exact same effect because the wingnut outrage machine is conditioned and has its audience conditioned to go into full outrage mode whenever someone with a D- in front of their name tells the truth in public.
also, I don't care what anyone says, despite my initial hesitance, I think that it has become and is becoming more and more apparent that "defund the police" is exactly what needs to happen.
I want to eliminate modern military-style policing. If we don't start with that, I worry the rest is just talk.
To which the response is something like "but we instituted an Oversight Board! Problem solved!" (psst oversight boards are necesssary. But insufficient.)
Agreed about the police, and especially the police unions--they'll resist any reform whatsoever and think the biggest problem here is that the public just doesn't understand and we're getting a skewed picture of what's happening (also the Fox News spin on it). I think the battle here is among the remaining majority, people who are very much in favor of "overhaul" and the mushy middle who can be persuaded (and helped provide the solid majorities in favor of the BLM movement last year). Among them there's no argument that the status quo is intolerable, but the disagreement or at least confusion is "what should be done about it". I don't have an ideal slogan--I guess "overhaul" or "something stronger than reform" is the best I got--but "defund" has the downside of not only turning off the persuadables (I think David Shorr had some data on how it turned off Hispanic female voters even) without even the benefit of being an accurate depiction of what its proponents are calling for. You're right though that the police--and a big chunk of the general public--will not get on board with anything short of "turn the cameras off and let the police do what they like".
Create a new traffic enforcement apparatus (unarmed), take that completely out of the hands of the police.
Yep. The Jackson State students never got the same attention, right from the start. It was probably partly because of the iconic photo, but mostly because they weren't white and the country is racist. It's like no one could imagine a Black parents saying OMG, that could have been my daughter. Only white people deserved thoughts and prayers. And it was an era of civil unrest, so it was easy to categorize Black protesters as just another bunch of rioting, looting thugs. It was horrible.
Because Repukes are desperately trying to pretend trump never happened, and that they're not full on Fascists, so, after running fast and far from Bush, they're trotting his stupid ass forward again in an attempt to show how "Moderate" and sane they are.
Forgetting, as usual, that this dumb cowboy poser was the one who forced protestors into "free speech zones" (Cages) and told the country, "You're either with us, or with the terrorists".
Fuck this idiot.
PJ O'Rourke put it best when he explained why he was supporting Hillary in 2016, despite being a conservative--"she's bad, but she's bad within the normal range. Trump is bad on a different level". This is true of Bush, and other Republicans, which is why I wince a bit when liberals try to say Trump is bad but so were other Republicans--it detracts from just how uniquely beyond the pale Trump is. That doesn't mean others weren't "bad" but that we really don't want to normalize his level of bad. He is a psychopath with nothing but the ability to destroy and ruin. Way beyond the level of Bush, Reagan, or (if you're conservative) Clinton bad. Way, way beyond.