• Welcome to PurpleFlock! Sign up here so that you can chat with your fellow Ravens fans.

The Well-Mannered Politics Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Also - its speaks volumes about our country that the Democrats at Trumps speech could never stand up and clap and be happy for some things Trump said, even things that are good for all Americans. They have to hate anything and everything he does even when it’s something good.
 
rossihunter2 said:
"To everyone still recovering in Texas, Florida, Louisiana, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, California, and everywhere else– we are with you, we love you, and we will always pull through together. Always."

isnt it hypocritical to suggest that "we" will pull through together and reference puerto rico given how they've been abandoned by Trump's administration... especially when FEMA stopped distributing aid around Puerto Rico just yesterday without forewarning the puerto rican government - a third of puerto rico is still without power...
Click to expand...
Did you see the equipment they got there working to restore power and the army of electricians? They are going to be back up and running real soon. My hat is off to those workers! When interviewed, they seemed like a dedicated bunch.
 
DeVito52 said:
I feel really bad for people who are sheep to the liberal media. All they do is slam Trump and therefore that’s all some people know.
Click to expand...

it's the exact thing for people who are sheep to the conservative media - all they do is defend trump no matter what and slam hillary and generalise "liberals" - i feel really bad about how many of those people never learn to think for themselves...

see it works both ways...
 
DeVito52 said:
Also - its speaks volumes about our country that the Democrats at Trumps speech could never stand up and clap and be happy for some things Trump said, even things that are good for all Americans. They have to hate anything and everything he does even when it’s something good.
Click to expand...

how do you define good for all americans - trump saying something is good for all americans is not a fact... especially when a lot of the times his claims about the future seemed incongruous with all the things his government has been saying outside of the SOTU and also are the antithesis to facts...

im not saying they arent partisan and were right to sit down the whole way through but im also gonna say that they have every right to disagree with trump and not stand and cheer just because he says something is great...
 
cobrajet said:
Did you see the equipment they got there working to restore power and the army of electricians? They are going to be back up and running real soon. My hat is off to those workers! When interviewed, they seemed like a dedicated bunch.
Click to expand...

no i havent seen any of that - i mean it's cool that they are there still (if they are) and my (and others) complaints are absolutely not against the feet on the ground... in fact many of the feet on the ground are veterans and current military who are working essentially for nothing and yet many of them have been critical of the government response

i absolutely raise my hat to those guys because ive never even dreamt of a situation like that and yet they have gone in with the greatest will in the world

my criticism is in the sluggishness of the government response and the lack of support it sent to a part of it's own country - my problem is that the Trump administration has treated puerto rico through this crisis as if puerto rico is a minor 3rd world country to whom they owe nothing yet puerto rico is in fact a territory of the USA
 
The Raven said:
Since you seem to have missed it, here again is my post with a couple questions. How would you reconcile these logical inconsistencies?
Click to expand...
As far as the eight GOP investigations. I did not follow them. I am not sure how those congressional investigations even work because I don’t think they are part of law enforcement. I can’t imagine how those can be as thorough as compared to trained law enforcement agencies and attorneys working together pounding the pavement and digging through all the paper trails to determine all the facts in a case that take months and even years to put together. Can they bring charges or do they just make recommendations to the DOJ? I know they can subpoena people they want to speak to, but do they produce them or do they ask the DOJ to get them?Are there different rules that apply when it comes to speaking to a Congressman compared to a Grand Jury regarding being forced to testify and perjury? I admit whole heartedly, I need to do a lot more research on the power Congress has there.

By the way, I thank you for the first sentence in your post. I appreciated it. I do have a couple questions. First, don’t the liberals hate Comey for reopening the Hillary investigation? So why all the freak out over his firing? Second, can you say without a doubt that Hillary was not guilty of obstruction of justice? Do you believe if it was you or I that ignored a subpoena to turn over evidence and we ignored the order and deleted them so we could not get in trouble that Comey would let us go?
 
cobrajet said:
By the way, I thank you for the first sentence in your post. I appreciated it. I do have a couple questions. First, don’t the liberals hate Comey for reopening the Hillary investigation? So why all the freak out over his firing? Second, can you say without a doubt that Hillary was not guilty of obstruction of justice? Do you believe if it was you or I that ignored a subpoena to turn over evidence and we ignored the order and deleted them so we could not get in trouble that Comey would let us go?
Click to expand...

ill answer from my perspective but it's probably more important for an actual american liberal to respond...

as far as my perspective goes i dont hate comey for reopening the investigation - my wish is that the timing had been better and that the investigation had been resolved or whatever well before or well after the vote occurred - i dont hate comey, i dont like what he did but i can empathise with the political pressure put on him so that the only choice he could make was the only choice that made no sense whatsoever

as to that last bit i have no idea at all
 
cobrajet said:
As far as the eight GOP investigations. I did not follow them. I am not sure how those congressional investigations even work because I don’t think they are part of law enforcement. I can’t imagine how those can be as thorough as compared to trained law enforcement agencies and attorneys working together pounding the pavement and digging through all the paper trails to determine all the facts in a case that take months and even years to put together. Can they bring charges or do they just make recommendations to the DOJ? I know they can subpoena people they want to speak to, but do they produce them or do they ask the DOJ to get them?Are there different rules that apply when it comes to speaking to a Congressman compared to a Grand Jury regarding being forced to testify and perjury? I admit whole heartedly, I need to do a lot more research on the power Congress has there.

By the way, I thank you for the first sentence in your post. I appreciated it. I do have a couple questions. First, don’t the liberals hate Comey for reopening the Hillary investigation? So why all the freak out over his firing? Second, can you say without a doubt that Hillary was not guilty of obstruction of justice? Do you believe if it was you or I that ignored a subpoena to turn over evidence and we ignored the order and deleted them so we could not get in trouble that Comey would let us go?
Click to expand...
They technically can bring charges -- to the president. It's impeachment. For folks other than the president the investigations is just for fact gathering purposes, which could result in the executive or the FBI or DOJ doing something.

http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/outlines/...ess/congressional-powers-of-investigation.php

Comey: We're freaked about the timing of the firing. If he was fired for re-opening Hill's investigation, we'd be chill. But he was fired by Trump after he was onto something about Trump's ties to Russia. It's less about James Comey the man being fired and more about the FBI Director investigating possible Russian ties to the president being fired.

I can't say that without a doubt that she obstructed justice because I am not a legal scholar, but considering the FBI and DOJ haven't brought charges, I think it's clear how legal minds evaluated the case.
 
The Raven said:
They technically can bring charges -- to the president. It's impeachment. For folks other than the president the investigations is just for fact gathering purposes, which could result in the executive or the FBI or DOJ doing something.

http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/outlines/...ess/congressional-powers-of-investigation.php

Comey: We're freaked about the timing of the firing. If he was fired for re-opening Hill's investigation, we'd be chill. But he was fired by Trump after he was onto something about Trump's ties to Russia. It's less about James Comey the man being fired and more about the FBI Director investigating possible Russian ties to the president being fired.

I can't say that without a doubt that she obstructed justice because I am not a legal scholar, but considering the FBI and DOJ haven't brought charges, I think it's clear how legal minds evaluated the case.
Click to expand...
I hear you but I guess I am not being clear enough with this question to you. Be honest, you already went as far as saying you can’t say without a doubt that she obstructed justice, so is it not conceivable that there was enough evidence to convict her but because she was a Presidential candidate and former First Lady that they CHOSE to ignore her crime and not prosecute her?

And as far as impeachment, that may be a charge to take away a job, but being a law enforcement guy, for me, it does not mean all that much if you don’t sleep in a prison cell.
 
Last edited:
rossihunter2 said:
how do you define good for all americans - trump saying something is good for all americans is not a fact... especially when a lot of the times his claims about the future seemed incongruous with all the things his government has been saying outside of the SOTU and also are the antithesis to facts...

im not saying they arent partisan and were right to sit down the whole way through but im also gonna say that they have every right to disagree with trump and not stand and cheer just because he says something is great...
Click to expand...
Oh I don’t blame them for not cheering for EVERYTHING. But when Trump mentions something like unemployment for blacks is way down and all the Dems just sit there and look pissed lol it’s just like....you hate the man so much you can’t be happy for anything?
 
rossihunter2 said:
it's the exact thing for people who are sheep to the conservative media - all they do is defend trump no matter what and slam hillary and generalise "liberals" - i feel really bad about how many of those people never learn to think for themselves...

see it works both ways...
Click to expand...
Not really...a lot of conservatives don’t like Trump. And about the bolded part, I’m glad we agree. People definitely need to think for themselves.

But there’s one thing everyone should agree on. It’s that Hillary Clinton is a corrupt pos
 
DeVito52 said:
Oh I don’t blame them for not cheering for EVERYTHING. But when Trump mentions something like unemployment for blacks is way down and all the Dems just sit there and look pissed lol it’s just like....you hate the man so much you can’t be happy for anything?
Click to expand...

i think they are unhappy about his insinuations that black unemployment is down because of his policies when the facts suggest that all that's happening is a continuing trend that started during obama's presidency (it was fact-checked by a British newspaper - i posted all their fact checks of the state of the union earlier in this thread) - so i think its more a case of them not endorsing trump's continued "fake news" than them disagreeing and looking miserable about the results just because it's trump
 
DeVito52 said:
Not really...a lot of conservatives don’t like Trump. And about the bolded part, I’m glad we agree. People definitely need to think for themselves
Click to expand...

ah you see but i didnt say all conservatives...
i think its sad that people are so stuck in their echo chambers that they cant even fathom that the "other side" might be right once in a blue moon (or more often) - and i think that's the case on both sides - i personally dont agree with most (or nearly all) conservative policies but its not because of media...

there are so many unresearched false narratives that get tossed around - as a liberal myself one of the most frustrating things is seeing liberals go after conservatives with crappy arguments or insults because it gives ammunition for those conservatives to throw those insults back in all of our faces and ignore the valid points that were made

it's what disappoints me most about the conservatives on both sides of the pond - they are much better at manipulating the narrative when the other side goes wrong - they're much more cutthroat and i think liberals need to be better prepared to deal with it
 
rossihunter2 said:
ah you see but i didnt say all conservatives...
i think its sad that people are so stuck in their echo chambers that they cant even fathom that the "other side" might be right once in a blue moon (or more often) - and i think that's the case on both sides - i personally dont agree with most (or nearly all) conservative policies but its not because of media...

there are so many unresearched false narratives that get tossed around - as a liberal myself one of the most frustrating things is seeing liberals go after conservatives with crappy arguments or insults because it gives ammunition for those conservatives to throw those insults back in all of our faces and ignore the valid points that were made

it's what disappoints me most about the conservatives on both sides of the pond - they are much better at manipulating the narrative when the other side goes wrong - they're much more cutthroat and i think liberals need to be better prepared to deal with it
Click to expand...
I think the problem with conservative and liberal policies/views is that it seems to me that people tend to look at these policies/views as being right or wrong. It is not that black and white, good or evil. You are not wrong for thinking the way you do and I am not wrong for thinking the way I do. I think that is where the fighting starts with a lot of people and the lines in the sand start getting drawn and then it starts getting downright ugly. It gets to the point where you may be taking your life in your hands if you go into certain areas wearing a certain hat or t-shirt. How many times do we see on here - “your facts are wrong, you have to go by my facts” or “my facts are better than your facts” when in reality neither side can definitively prove their argument and the facts are closer to opinions than they really are to being true facts. It is the same thing in the case of religion. That is why the old boards said no politics or religion, because it is a very sensitive subject.
 
Last edited:
cobrajet said:
I think the problem with conservative and liberal policies/views is that it seems to me that people tend to look at these policies/views as being right or wrong. It is not that black and white, good or evil. You are not wrong for thinking the way you do and I am not wrong for thinking the way I do. I think that is where the fighting starts with a lot of people and the lines in the sand start getting drawn and then it starts getting downright ugly. It is the same with religion. That is why the old boards said no politics or religion, because it is a very sensitive subject.
Click to expand...

i dont necessarily agree with this though - for many people i think policies/views do make a life/death difference which is why the line gets drawn
and while there are many elements of policy-making that are debatable i think the fact that the line gets drawn is partially to do with a modern emphasis on specific issues i.e. things like immigration, discrimination, gun crime etc. are viewed on both sides as dangerous for different reasons and the life/death element means people are inevitably going to be pushed further apart

so you're right that in some/many cases it is just a particular viewpoint e.g. the difference on a basic level in method about how to stimulate economic growth on a macro level
but also in some/many cases these policies do make a life-changing/life-destroying difference and in those cases i do think its understandable for lines to get drawn in the sand
 
rossihunter2 said:
i dont necessarily agree with this though - for many people i think policies/views do make a life/death difference which is why the line gets drawn
and while there are many elements of policy-making that are debatable i think the fact that the line gets drawn is partially to do with a modern emphasis on specific issues i.e. things like immigration, discrimination, gun crime etc. are viewed on both sides as dangerous for different reasons and the life/death element means people are inevitably going to be pushed further apart

so you're right that in some/many cases it is just a particular viewpoint e.g. the difference on a basic level in method about how to stimulate economic growth on a macro level
but also in some/many cases these policies do make a life-changing/life-destroying difference and in those cases i do think its understandable for lines to get drawn in the sand
Click to expand...
I guess there are a few exceptions to the rule. Slavery was a good political reason to draw a line in the sand over to stop.
 
im sorry but the more i read about Nunes's memo the more disgusted i am with him
now even the director of the FBI, christopher wray (who was nominated by trump over other candidates btw) has come out and said the memo has left out important facts crucial to the context of the facts that have been left in the document
the fbi were also only allowed to view the memo the day before it was voted on despite potential national security implications to do with state secrets - the justification for this by nunes was that he didnt want the subject of an investigation to be reviewing the information involved - which is ridiculously hypocritical given that this memo is exactly that i.e. he is literally allowing the subject of the FBI investigation to review the information pertinent to the investigation surrounding him...
Nunes did not even allow Wray to come in and brief the committee on the underlying evidence involved and is still purporting to put this memo into the hands of the public despite the fact that only 2 committee members have actually been allowed to directly view it because the information involved is that sensitive...

Essentially Nunes is bypassing any real legal system of fairness in trying to put the FBI on trial here as far as i can see - except in most trials the defendant is allowed to defend themselves yet in this case that does not seem to be the case
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top