Jump to content

TheAuthority

Established Members
  • Content Count

    8,176
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Posts posted by TheAuthority

  1. 29 minutes ago, Vancvillan said:

    All good points - let me address them in the context of my original post, which was that Biden is certainly not perfect, but still the better choice.

    1. You put "compassionate individual" in bold so I'll address that first.  It's anecdotal from those who have worked with him over the years and from interviews he's done. I think the death of his son Beau was one of many tragedies in his life that have each shaped him in a way that he doesn't look to get to the top by any means necessary - something I would not say of Trump who has a clear cut record of shafting anyone at any opportunity for his own gain.  The story of Trump cutting off medical insurance to his nephew's family (who had a severely disabled infant son) during the contesting of Donald's father's will is especially horrendous.

    2. Bussing - that was in the mid-70's and pressure from both R and D white voters meant a lot of politicians opposed bussing.  I could argue that the policy itself was deeply flawed and used kids as pawns in a game that looked to sweep the root cause of systemic racism (white people's fear) under the carpet, but I'd agree that Biden's actions were probably more pure politics in terms of bending to the will of the electorate.   White people did (and do) shitty things - he was one of them in the '70's.  As was Trump, who was being sued at that time by the Justice Department for racial discrimination.  Biden went on to co-sponsor the Voting Rights Act renewal, Trump went on to take out a full page in four NYC newspapers in an effort to bring back the death penalty for the Central Park 5, who were later exonerated.  His racism doesn't stop there, but I'm sure the Internet has a limit on how much I can type.

    3. 1994 Crime Act - At the time, that bill wasn't controversial at all and had two thirds support of the congressional black caucus. It wasn't a pander to white voters - it was actually pretty indicative of the mood of the country, which was experiencing a tripling of crime between the 60's and the 90's and a crack cocaine epidemic.  Was it the right solution? No - it had a lot of shitty elements, but it also contained other things like the assault weapons ban that would be very popular today.  In fact it's Trump who now wants to be "tough on crime" and put protesters in jail for a decade if they smash a window.  Using the bill as a way to show Biden isn't perfect is a great idea - using it to suggest Trump is better is a mind-boggling arguement.

    3. Glass Steagall - from the horse's mouth "“I’ll be blunt with you: the only vote I can think of that I’ve ever cast in my years in the Senate that I regret—and I did it out of loyalty, and I wasn’t aware that it was gonna be as bad as it was—was Glass-Steagall.”  He **** up, as most people will (regularly) during an almost 50 year career.  Today he wants to tax the rich and increase the power of labour unions. Trumps platform and his actions over the last four years have been to do the polar opposite.  And this highlights another point - Biden will admit when he's wrong. Not always, but a lot more than Trump who will never do anything other than blame someone else.

     4. The Patriot Act - everyone probably associates this with surveillance overreach, but that's a massive simplification. As with most things the truth is a lot more nuanced.  Before I get there I'll get a bit more personal on this one.

    On the morning of September 11th 2001 I was in Miami. I left (by car) after the first plane hit, to head to DC to visit a friend (obviously we had no idea what was going on at that point). By the time we made it to DC all exits off the I-95 were shut, so we carried on and ended up staying with another friend in a small town in upstate NY.  A few days later I was on an Amtrak to NYC to catch the second flight out of JFK to get back to London.  I remember looking out of the window and seeing the skyline (I'd been at the top of the twin towers 10 days before) and the smoke still billowing into the air.  I knew people who lived very close by. I knew people who lost relatives. 

    I say this because I remember vividly what the mood of the nation was at that time.  It was something that had never been seen before on American soil, and I think it's unsurprising that the pendulum would swing too far in terms of the response.  It's easy for Michael Moore to make a documentary three years later to point out all the overreach, but I'd forgive some decision making that in hindsight looks poor given that legislators were to some degree designing a plane while flying it.  Only one senator (Russ Feingold) voted against it.  Maybe you think that Trump would have vetoed it?  Otherwise I don't get the point of bringing it up.

    The bill also included a bunch of things like federal funds for victims of terrorism, as well as increased powers for federal agencies to track and seize money related to terrorist organizations, which I highly doubt that Trump is pushing back on. Again, I don't really see what your point is since the Patriot Act is so broad, and so of a specific time.

    5. The Iraq war - I believe Biden called it "a march to peace" when pushing for the war.  He was influential in getting GWB the authority to go to war.  In hindsight most people would agree that at least the premise (WMDs) was false, and that the war was a bad idea. I don't agree with Biden's stance now. Did I think that way in 2003? I honestly can't remember.  Did Trump oppose the war at that time? No. He was writing about pre-emptive strikes on Iraq in 2000, before 9/11.  He would have made exactly the same decision.

    6. Afghanistan, Libya, Siria - see above.

    7. Opioid epidemic - I'd dispute that it was "on his watch", but either way Republicans did everything they could during the Obama years to regulate pharma in any meaningful way. If you're going to tell me that Trump would have introduced regulations to prevent opioid prescriptions and addiction, I think you're being disingenuous.

    8. Student loans / bankruptcy - you have Biden bang to rights on this one, he voted (along with 17 other Dem senators) to pass a Republican-led bill to abolish certain bankruptcy protections around consumer debt in 2005. You could argue that he did so as credit companies had donated hundreds of thousands to his campaign. Shitty move.  He's since come up with a plan to tackle that issue, and while it's too little too late for a lot of people caught in the crosshairs of that bill, he is looking to right a wrong that Trump would not touch in a thousand terms. So yeah, he made another shitty decision - but of the two on the ballot, he's the only one looking to help correct that.

    9. ACA - I honestly don't have any knowledge of your point there but I'd love to read more. Can you post something?  I personally think the ACA is deeply flawed and building on it vs having a more robust public option is a mistake, but the ACA was on a macro level a net positive.  It was a long way from perfect, but the intent to expand healthcare is something I'll always get behind. Trump's plan right now (after four years in power, two of which he had the house and senate) is "replace is with something better". There's no plan, no policy - just wind.  If I had to pick Biden or Trump to run healthcare reform for four years I'd trust the guy who has been through the process already with the ACA, has a detailed platform and who's intentions I trust a lot more than Trump.

    tl;dr - Biden is deeply flawed (as we all are), but is on almost every level a better choice to be in public office. Biden has **** up many times, but I think Trump under the same circumstances would have been worse.

     

     

     

    Thanks for posting VV. I looked through VK's points and had exactly the reasoned response you did. I would have posted something similar but many times in the past I have done that and the poster either disappears into thin air or writes something contrite.

    On another note I was in Miami on 9/11 - I'd just moved there about a week before. Nice coincidence!

  2. Quote

    Trump supporters held an event Sunday, with people waving flags and driving through the area in a caravan of vehicles, according to TMZ, which reported that various groups, including the Proud Boys and Antifa, also showed up.

    Link

    I mean - a fascist group wants to cause violence and antagonize. What are the people who are being threatened (usually LGTBQ, minorities) supposed to do? Just take it?

    Where fascists are concerned wasn't it proved by McDonald, Baldwin & Chamberlain that appeasement doesn't work?

    Blows my mind we are even having to have this conversation.

    Quote

    Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding it's way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'"

    - Isaac Asimov

     

    • Like 2
  3. 6 hours ago, LondonLax said:

    Mate I don’t want to get your back up but please listen to what you are saying here.

    This is essentially the same thing Trump and his goons say when justifying their attacks on protesters. They label them all ‘Antifa’ radicals and that gives them the righteousness they need to attack their opponents. You have linked an article from a number of years ago saying a group of radicals attacked New York once and seem to be using that as justification for the people in these videos being attacked.

    I have watched the videos again and I can’t see any indication that the family in the black car are ‘Proud Boys’, the dad who gets punched when he’s saying ‘do not go after my daughter’ has a pretty thick New York accent. The woman in the purple coat who gives they guy his flag back doesn’t strike me as a ‘Proud Boy’, there is even a guy wearing a ‘Gays for Trump’ T-shirt standing behind the dude who falls while over taking the flag, my understanding is the ‘Proud Boys’ are pretty homophobic.

    We really have to be better man.

    We have to oppose the violence otherwise it just keeps escalating from both sides.

     

    Mate - just look at the news articles from this past weekend. It was a Proud Boy's rally. They stand for violence just as other fascist groups have in history.

    I posted one article from 2018 to show that it isn't the 1st time they have done this in NYC. A couple of videos of folks getting caught up in the violence does not change the fact that the instigators of this are a fascist group. I have to be better? Come on. 

    • Like 1
  4. 11 hours ago, LondonLax said:

    That’s a bit of a dangerous path to go down, justifying or equivocating attacking people who have a different political view to yourself. 

    I agree, but I didn't say it it's justifiable to attack people who have a different view to myself. You inferred that so please read what I wrote again.

    To clarify: The Proud Boys are not in NYC just to show their support for Donald Trump. They are they to antagonize and one of their stated aims is to cause and provoke violence. The Southern Poverty Law Center classifies the PB's as a hate group. Their leader Gavin McInnes advocates that violence is a way of settling political disputes.

    PB's are based in Portland - I'm not sure if their affiliate membership were present in NYC yesterday. However let's say that even just a few of the PB's leadership were there. They had to fly to NYC, a 5 hour cross country overnight flight and they did that just to wave some flags in Time Square? They have visited NYC before and attacked people (12 on 1) allegedly because they were a "faggot." https://www.thedailybeast.com/far-right-proud-boys-kick-punch-people-in-new-york

    It's pretty clear to me that they aren't just putting up Trump signs on their lawn to show their support for their preferred Presidential candidate. There's a bit more to these groups than that.

    This answer also applies to @Demitri_C response.

    • Like 2
  5. 18 hours ago, snowychap said:

     

    Look it's quite simple:

    "We are testing far too much.If we didn't test, then our infection rate figures would be great."

    This is the 'leaders' of the US & the UK's  argument.  Or am I wrong?

    Please explain to me that I've misunderstood and they aren't imbecilic morons spouting anything to give the appearance that they know what they're doing.

  6. 1 hour ago, maqroll said:

    Notice how the authors German immigrant grandparents bought a Midwestern farmhouse during WW2 while Japanese Americans were sent to prison camps. 

    Martinsville IN is the headquarters of the KKK. 

    About 20 mins from IU Bloomington one of the most liberal places in the Mid-West. 

    The US is a plethora of Dichotomies. 

  7. 32 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

    I’m certainly no fan of Trump and his supporters but you should be able to drive your car or wear supporter gear without being attacked, even if it’s in New York. 

    Hmmmmm. It seems very clear to me that they were there to antagonize not to "support." That's where we are sadly, but that was their intent.

    Could you see a peaceful gay pride parade in Tuscaloosa, AL*  ?**

    *(Insert any pro Trump county)

    ** as an example

    • Like 1
  8. I'm sure the analogy has been made somewhere before, but living in Trump's America is like the ending of the Matrix trilogy. Agent Smith has taken over every person, is everywhere and his persona keeps increasing exponentially.

    You just can't escape Trump, his noise, his chaos, his administration's inept attempts to govern, which is really an attempt to cover up their lust for power, enriching themselves at the trough whilst remaining in the good graces of a narcissist by being sycophants.

    It's exhausting, and honestly feels like some sort of psychological warfare being unleashed on us. I imagine the two years leading up to  Brexit in the UK felt the same. Inescapable, endless discussion, endless news items, endless opinions and "hot takes." Fear, uncertainty, anger. It's relentless.

  9. 6 hours ago, Bizzzle said:

    I liked the new Borat but didn't love it like the 1st. There were a few parts that had me howling tbh 

    The debutant ball was just mind blowingly funny. The film wasn't as revolutionary as the 1st and of course "Who is America" is a similar vibe.

    But the actual 'story' is pretty funny (how they wrap it all up at the end) and of course outing Giulliani as the absolute creep that we all know he is is fantastic.

    • Like 1
  10. 2 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

    Did anyone watching that think keeping McGinn on for 90 minutes was a sensible decision? 

    He played 3 games for Scotland last week and this is his 2nd game this week. Combined with Barclay carrying a knock we just couldn’t compete with their fitness levels.

    If JackS shot doesn’t get cleared of the line or he passed to Ollie after that amazing run it’s a different game.

    oh well, fair play to Leeds. 

  11. 17 hours ago, maqroll said:

    Trump has massive support throughout state and local law enforcement. Its sort of terrifying. 

    During the 90's & 2000's right wingers/fascists/nazi sympathizers would enter the US armed forces to gain access to advanced arms training. Supposedly there was a movement to have them purged from the army etc. but there is evidence that they moved into local law enforcement where they have been welcomed and nurtured.

    The explosion of the internet connecting militias, fascists & gun nut owners with like minded police and other federal officers (ICE, Border Patrol etc.) has created a secret underground army of disparate nut jobs who are itching to do....... Well I don't want to think about it.

  12. 5 hours ago, VillaJ100 said:

    Also how would the promotion/relegation even work? If you won your domestic league do you have to hope a English team finishes bottom of the SKY SPORTS EURO ELITE LEAGUE to get promoted? 

    The 1st step will be running it at the same time as the domestic leagues - so Manure, Ci$y & Plop would still be playing in the English league (which is obviously why they want to have less teams in it.)

    Then, the teams who are getting the revenue from the Euro Super League will be be able to pay the wages of the top players, have massive squads and just play their 2nd teams (B-teams) in the domestic leagues. This is what happened to the league cup, and now has happened to the FA-Cup - both competitions have become completed devalued. (Remember our 5-0 win over Liverpool under 11's last year?)

    And sadly this will happen to the domestic league over the next 20 years as the 'brands' of the big clubs grow and grow essentially becoming franchises. At the same time the FA Premier league will become as undervalued as our domestic cup competitions. 

    The interesting thing will be when the "Manchester City franchise" owners want to move its base to UAE. Or PSG owners want to move the base to Qatar - or any owner wants to move the club to a market where they think it will be more lucrative for the franchise. "The Beijing Gunners of Arsenal" anyone?

    If you think that's impossible, it happens frequently in American sports already.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â