The Political Discussion Thread

[Gatefan1976]

No. Denying a judge a vote is no way the same. Especially since shopping around for a specific judge can mean you are WANTING to find one that will rule your way, for what ever reason (often something that SHOULD imo recuse him cause of what ever conflicts of interest there are). Where as there is no conflict of interest in denying a judge a vote.
I mean, would YOU like it if, say i was gonna sue you, that i was able to "Shop around" to find that one judge that has it OUT for you? That's almost what THIS seems like.

I mean filling the post.
Lets say the house flips in 2018, and in 2020, 3 SCOTUS judges want to go and the democrats say "sorry Trump, you are in your lame duck year and push them all off until they can get the 3 justices they want. What will the repubs do? THEY set the precedent of this "lame duck" year.
Isn't shutting down even -discussion- of a replacement judge because you have the house "shopping around?"

A) can we be certain of that?
And B) How long must we wait?

No, you cannot be certain of it, but it is statistically more likely.

PLus Obama did it over the bathroom bill issue. YET NO ONE raised hell that it was illegal for him to do so.

Say what?
Look into that, because you might just find that he did -not- do that, instead delivering a directive (which is not law) and backed it with pre-existing non discrimination laws.

[Coco Pops]

Speaking of the courts lookie here.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/tr...rticle/2621379

Seriously the court is hampering the Republican agenda. So why not just get rid of it?

Cool hey?

What exactly is the Republican Agenda for the USA?

[Falcon Horus]

Is that like denying a SCOTUS judge so you can maybe get one you like?

Mic. Drop.

I think he means the lowering of standards for things like entry into the military and such. We are seeing that here with police and some of our armed forces where they have relaxed some of the fitness standards to get more cops on the beat and soldiers in the field.

I don't think that is right.

Ah... yeah, like that.

Demanding jobs, have demanding standards. I think it's only natural that people applying for them would be able to withstand the demand. Not everyone is cut out to be a cop or a soldier, or a firefighter, or a surgeon or a president of the USA.

Speaking of the courts lookie here.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/tr...rticle/2621379

Seriously the court is hampering the Republican agenda. So why not just get rid of it?

Just the next phase...

What exactly is the Republican Agenda for the USA?

Since #45 is a fan of Putin, Erdogan and Le Pen -- I'd say 1930's Germany is a good place to start looking into.

Did you hear about ICE's newest tool: VOICE

ICE Set to Unveil Office for Victims of Immigrant Crime

Officially: "The Department of Homeland Security on Wednesday will open a new office tasked with highlighting crimes committed by people who are in the country illegally."

Unofficially: this will become the office to report/snitch about your neighbors about.

They had something similar in the Former Republic of Yuguslavia during the war in 1990, and in 1930's Germany.

I'm just waiting for the first star of David or crescent moon patch people will have to wear to identify themselves on the street. Or a red dot on a white background. Or an M for Mexican, or you know... something similar.

If you want illegal criminals out of the country, start with the ones in prison or would that cut into private prison profit?

[Annoyed]

A) can we be certain of that?
And B) How long must we wait?

Nothing is certain. But it's a good bet.
As far as how long, you know as well as I do that every step Trump tries to take will be challenged in every way possible by the left. It will take time.

I'm more concerned with what Trump is actually doing. For example, I heard on the radio this am that he might back off on his stance on scrapping NAFTA. That would be a big problem for me.

I expect opposition to Trump's agenda. But I also expect him to keep pursuing it.

[Annoyed]

Demanding jobs, have demanding standards. I think it's only natural that people applying for them would be able to withstand the demand. Not everyone is cut out to be a cop or a soldier, or a firefighter, or a surgeon or a president of the USA.

That is the point about relaxing standards. There are many examples of fire departments, police, the military, etc. lowering the standards for minority candidates as a form of affirmative action to get more of those minorities into the departments.

[Falcon Horus]

I'm more concerned with what Trump is actually doing. For example, I heard on the radio this am that he might back off on his stance on scrapping NAFTA. That would be a big problem for me.

According to the latest -- this morning anyway -- he doesn't want to pull out but re-negotiate.

The trouble of course, I have no idea how long negotiations lasted last time, so it might very well be this never comes to any fruitation.

That is the point about relaxing standards. There are many examples of fire departments, police, the military, etc. lowering the standards for minority candidates as a form of affirmative action to get more of those minorities into the departments.

What minorities?

Do you mean women? Cause I can see how they would lower certain standards, but you probably missed that BBC documentary about the Norwegian Special Forces and their all-female team training alongside the men, and sparking quite the competition.

[Coco Pops]

Did you hear about ICE's newest tool: VOICE

ICE Set to Unveil Office for Victims of Immigrant Crime

Officially: "The Department of Homeland Security on Wednesday will open a new office tasked with highlighting crimes committed by people who are in the country illegally."

Unofficially: this will become the office to report/snitch about your neighbors about.

They had something similar in the Former Republic of Yuguslavia during the war in 1990, and in 1930's Germany.

I'm just waiting for the first star of David or crescent moon patch people will have to wear to identify themselves on the street. Or a red dot on a white background. Or an M for Mexican, or you know... something similar.

If you want illegal criminals out of the country, start with the ones in prison or would that cut into private prison profit?

That sounds an awful lot like the brown shirts or Nightwatch if you are a B5 fan.

[Annoyed]

What minorities?

Do you mean women? Cause I can see how they would lower certain standards, but you probably missed that BBC documentary about the Norwegian Special Forces and their all-female team training alongside the men, and sparking quite the competition.

Women, Blacks, most of the "specially protected groups" have been given lowered standards by one agency or another. It's really quite rampant. garkhal follows this more closely than I do, maybe he'll chime in later.

I don't care who it is, they should not change the standards for ANYBODY.

[Annoyed]

Only straight, white men are good enough for Annoyed

That's BS and you know it.
How do you justify lowering standards? For example, a fire dept. has a series of standards that they test applicants for because you need to have those skills/attributes to do the job.

What possible justification could there be for lowering those standards?

Would you like to go into a burning building if your backup was someone who benefited from lowered standards? Someone who might not be able to carry you out if needed?

[Coco Pops]

Republicans want this.......

And back we go to the grim days of Yugoslavia in the 1990s or 1930s Germany.....

https://www.usnews.com/news/national...mmigrant-crime

Or the Nightwatch on Babylon 5


They are getting smashed on Twitter now.

Check this out.

http://mashable.com/2017/04/26/trump.../#8pR1PkYnRkqd

[Annoyed]

But you just said they're lowering the standards for women and minorities. You're clearly strongly opposed to them being hired.

That leaves you with your white men.



But you want a more serious answer?

The fire brigade don't pump the water by hand, I hear they use fire engines now to drive to the location. Even the ladder is operated mechanically, brute strength isn't as much of a requirement as it was in the olden days. And have you seen the women they hire?

Have you ever wondered why the best athletes in the Olympics are black? The fastest sprinters, the strongest US football players? It's because they're naturally bigger and stronger than your beloved white guys. Do you want to keep someone stronger out of the fire brigade because of your old timey racism? Would you refuse to be carried out of a burning building because your rescuer wasn't as good at maths as some white guy you wished was holding you?

The police force has changed since the days of yore. In the US it's more "shoot first, shoot later, ask questions if anyone survived", even toddlers can fire a handgun, strength isn't needed there, the police also use cars to get around, and they have new-fangled security cameras to record evidence. No bulging biceps necessary to analyse a recording. And I'm sure you know that your police force actually wants more lower IQ people to join. You can be rejected for being too smart. So your "lowering standards" argument really makes little sense here.

The nature of your military has changed. You have more drones than horses now. But it's stronger than ever.

Your fear of technology and the modern world is showing again

At 5'6 and 130 lbs I can comfortably lift around 70-80 lbs. I can lift a 100 lb person but not for long. That's strong enough to drag your racist, misogynistic ass out of a fire. But I would rather leave you there to burn.

You know, you really ought to come out of that self-imposed black hole of ignorance you live in.

I've said this many times. I don't care what race or gender a person is. If they can pass the tests a job requires, I have no objection whatsoever to anyone doing whatever job they are qualified for. But it is wrong, as well as detrimental to whatever profession you want to talk about to lower the bar for certain people.

The issue is that agencies are LOWERING the standard, deliberately allowing people who cannot pass the tests that everyone else has to pass in order allow minorities who do not qualify for the job to do it anyway.

Regarding your argument that the job has changed, and no longer requires the skills / attributes tested for, why don't they just lower the standards for EVERYONE?

And then there is this bit at the end:

At 5'6 and 130 lbs I can comfortably lift around 70-80 lbs. I can lift a 100 lb person but not for long

Didn't we discuss the average weight of the population when talking about the airlines and the seat space issue? Wasn't it about 180Lbs on average? How is your skinny little arse going to carry a person of even average weight out of a burning building? Let alone a larger person over 200Lbs? At your weight and hauling capacity, you would not be qualified to be a fireman. Neither would I, because at my age, even though I could have done so 30 years ago, I couldn't carry someone of average weight either. But I'm not stupid enough to try to do a job I have no ability to do. Or maybe they should relax the standards for old farts, too?

The world doesn't adjust itself to match what you think it ought to be. Real life is a royal b***h, but that's what we have to live in. We can't live in an artificial world where the rules are made to be fair to everyone. Real life ISN'T FAIR. It never has been, and never will be.

[garhkal]

I mean filling the post.
Lets say the house flips in 2018, and in 2020, 3 SCOTUS judges want to go and the democrats say "sorry Trump, you are in your lame duck year and push them all off until they can get the 3 justices they want. What will the repubs do? THEY set the precedent of this "lame duck" year.
Isn't shutting down even -discussion- of a replacement judge because you have the house "shopping around?"

The lame duck thing was set back during reagan's era iirc..

That is the point about relaxing standards. There are many examples of fire departments, police, the military, etc. lowering the standards for minority candidates as a form of affirmative action to get more of those minorities into the departments.

Hell, i remember all the chatter this thread had about that Fire dept in NYC doing just that, cause they wanted to get more black firefighters, and got SUED for it..

But you just said they're lowering the standards for women and minorities. You're clearly strongly opposed to them being hired.

Pharo. If they can meat the EXISTING standards, i care no if they are black, white, martian, russian, prussian or Unuchs from tembucktoo..
IF they have to lower the standards just to get them qualified, i don't want them. PERIOD!

[Falcon Horus]

How do you justify lowering standards? For example, a fire dept. has a series of standards that they test applicants for because you need to have those skills/attributes to do the job.

You either never met a firewoman or you simply don't know what you're talking about.
I know the fireman drills cause I have a friend who's a trained fireman, and it seems when you're not a lame ass piece of couch potato anyone could easily pass those tests. Whether you would want to pass them is another matter, seeing as he's also told us about the times they take their buckets out to go and collect human bits and pieces from the train tracks.

Now, that's something you need to be build for, and there's no standard that can prepapre you for that.

What possible justification could there be for lowering those standards?

The only one I can think of is the lack of candidates.

Would you like to go into a burning building if your backup was someone who benefited from lowered standards? Someone who might not be able to carry you out if needed?

It's surprisingly easy to carry someone: The Truth About Little Women Carrying Big Wounded Men in Combat

Here's a funny one (not for the guy but well, getting drunk wasn't his best idea):
Hilarious moment woman throws drunk man over her shoulder and carries him to safety after he refuses to come down from river's edge


Here's a picture if you don't want to read about the fireman's carry:

https://www.usnews.com/news/national...mmigrant-crime

The hilarious thing about it was that yesterday people flooded the agency with calls about aliens and UFO's

[Annoyed]

FH, I've said many times over that if someone, male, female or orangutan qualifies for a job, he, she or it is entitled to do that job. There is absolutely no reason a woman can't be a firefighter (for example) as long as she can cut it.
My objection is that many agencies, such as fire departments (for example) are lowering the standards because they can't find enough women (for example) who both want the job and can pass the required tests. So their solution is to relax the standards for whatever minority group they're trying to please at the time (women, for example) so that UNQUALIFIED people are admitted to the program.

[SoulReaver]

With the SCOTUS shifting to the right, that particular court is going to be rendered impotent because its excesses will be overturned.

iirc the 9th circuit is also the court in charge of defending citizens' civil liberties right?
defending the commoner's rights vs the Elites Establishment government etc.

man are the american commonfolk about to suffer (can't wait till that happens)