🏀 KuBuckets Archive

Just because the left is dangerous to democracy and to our way of life.

7/26/18 - Typical tripe from the left. I always love the little bubble where the Hollywood elites reside -- but this is the idiot left. So a black woman is stabbed by a white man. And it's automatically racial. And it's white privilege. The left cries when blacks are grouped together, but hypocritically feels it fine when whites (in this case evil white man) are grouped together. One of the more entertaining contrasts is how silent the left is related to the horrific atrocities by black men in our society. The crimes stats are undeniable. But it is always someone else's fault. But what we hear from the left are the excuses, the things we hear from the apologists. The left is famous for its lack of insisting on personal responsibility. But of course, they run their mouth, feeling it necessary to attack white men on a regular basis. Have at it. Makes me smile.

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2018/07/26/anne-hathaway-calls-out-white-privilege-in-wake-black-woman-stabbed-to-death-at-bart-station.html ↗

7/26/18 - A Kansas City Start special. Purposefully avoid putting favorable Trump headlines on the front page. And then water down and misrepresent by use of a headline that ignores the real story. The left obviously is so histrionic related to any the "Trump", all objectivity is lost. The trade and tariff issue is a great example. Trump knows that free trade is the best result. The goal of Trumps long-needed tactics are to balance the trade field. For too long, the US has been a willing victim to unfair trade practices. Trump's efforts are to level that playing field for American companies and workers. The way to do that, if other nations won't agree, is to make them hurt. Significant story related to the EU's recent concessions .. only because of Trump's tactics. Nowhere near the front page. Big item. It's not "pulling back from the trade war", it is the EU's reaction to our policies that are now hurting the EU. The EU, economically, is much more fragile. This is winning.

https://www.kansascity.com/news/business/national-international/article215481800.html ↗

Maybe you should take a semi-regular dump and you wouldn't be so full of shit?

Jesus. The poor white male snowflake getting attacked relentlessly by meanie liberals.

@DanR I think this is his dumping grounds and I respect that. It's what this forum is here for. let's talk.

@HighEliteMajor Regarding the first post from Fox News, you've quoted an editorial that was hand-selected with the intent of enraging you and strengthening your biases and generalizations. This isn't a representative sample of anything. What does it prove, other than that Anne Hathaway, as seen through the lens of Fox News, has half-baked opinions about social issues? What did you expect?

Would a pacifist choose to watch MMA? No. So why would you read that gutter rag? Seems equally counterintuitive and masochistic.

I like your second story a lot better, it has some meat to it, and is more representative of your actual thought process and not just an emotional response to a stimulus.

I was thinking this morning about the Senate Foreign Relations committee, led by Republicans, getting visibly irritated with Pompeo. He basically told them that the things Trump says aren't policy, and that we should look entirely at what this administration is doing as their actual policy.

I thought about that... Do words matter? Are words policy? And I decided, yes, yes they are. What you say as President of the United States is policy unto itself, because it shapes the court of public opinion, and what is socially acceptable and what isn't.

And maybe, why I get angry at Trump is similar to why you get angry with Anne Hathaway in that respect. Both are running their mouths. Both stand on a platform that has an audience. The difference is, one is an actress and the other is President of the United States.

Someone's prescription needs refilling.

@HighEliteMajor I think as the United States abandons trade partners they will just trade with someone else. That's not winning.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/making-sense/as-trump-inflames-trade-battles-other-countries-make-deals-that-leave-u-s-behind ↗

The European Union finalized the largest trade agreement in its history earlier this month. The deal with Japan covers nearly a third of the global economy and creates one of the largest free trade areas in the world.

The $12 billion bailout of American farmers getting hit by fallout from the trade wars isn't winning.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-administration-to-announce-12-billion-in-aid-to-farmers-affected-by-tariffs/ ↗

Sen. Ben Sasse, a Republican from Nebraska, was highly critical of the plan in an interview with CBS News. "At no point have I heard a farmer or rancher say we want more bailouts. We want more welfare," said Sasse. "What they want is less trade war. There's no ambiguity about this from the producers in my state."

Sasse called trade wars "stupid," and said the president misunderstands the economic forces at play.

"The president often talks as if governments are at the center of this transaction. They aren't. And American families and American producers would like governments to get out of the way so they can buy and sell the stuff they want and so that our farmers and ranchers can feed the world," he said. "The president's tone regularly suggests somehow that the government has created this bounty. It's not true. Workers have created this bounty and governments are the ones messing it up."

Digging into Trump's policies does not seem to illuminate a hidden, misunderstood brilliance that the mainstream media neglects. It usually does the opposite for me. The more I learn, the more it is apparent that Trump is a bullshit artist, and in reality isn't getting much useful done, but creating plenty of chaos everywhere, and taking credit for grandiose interpretations of his actions.

I guess I was the only one to read the first posts before they were edited.

@mayjay

Pharmacy calling @mayjay, your Rx is ready for pick up.

Ahem. Just emulation-kidding you.

Puhlease, can we get beyond the drug smearing of posters to some substance, or at least to some drug-smear-free misdirects?

Drug smears always make the board rat using the drug smear appear:

a.) clueless about the topic; or

b.) misdirecting during a shill-lighting shift; or

c.) suffering Peyronnie’s Syndrome and unwilling to man-up about it.

😀

Rock Chalk!

Rock Chalk again!!!

@jaybate-1.0 Doesn't smearing the smearer perpetuate the smear?

I'd love to hear you weigh in on the issues brought up, other than pills and fecal matter (I didn't see the original @DanR. Sounds like it got walked back successfully. The luxuries of anonymity!)

@HighEliteMajor “White privilege is a myth for black people to be lazy” one of my best friends who grew up in the same shitty neighborhood as me who is black. Don’t get me started on the laughable bs that is white privilege, when I lived on the shit side of town the common denominator was single parents not race. The funniest thing to me thinking back to those days was my mom worked 2 jobs, as a bank teller til mid afternoon then JcPenny til 10 but my as formly mentioned my black friends mom didn’t work but when he stayed the night at my house we’d always go raid his house for snacks because they had way more food than we ever had, shoot they also had hot water (it sucks to boil water on the stove and dump into the bath tub if you didn’t wanna freeze in the winter). One of my other best friends is 1/4 Hispanic, he went to the same college as me but at half the price because he got a minority scholarship (we actually joke about it because he doesnt look Hispanic at all, in fact he’s whiter than a ghost). But some how I’m the only one in this group that is privileged. Now racism unfortunately does still exist and it ain’t just a black deal but that’s another issue. In terms of politics, Democrats are lying bastards but so are republicans. The media twists what actually happened to make their side look better regardless of the side.

@kjayhawks Privilege in this usage doesn't mean having money, or things, or a good job, or education, or anything you are focused on. It means that you can walk into virtually any store or building in the country and no one will think twice. A black American is immediately under suspicion.

The real lesson of your stories is how economic level is a weird factor in racial relations. Poverty affects many more whites in total in this country than blacks, yet poor whites have allowed themselves to be deluded into thinking it is in their interest to continue supporting rich whites. Poor whites and poor blacks should be banding together, but TPTB continue to successfully turn the two groups against each other.

@jaybate-1.0 I took all my meds, thank you, but mine are not to prevent lunatic verbal assaults on entire groups of people just because they are of different color or political bent. If I rant, it is really still just the medicated me.

@mayjay I guess I don’t really think that way, maybe it’s because I grew up kids that were several different races. I’m not saying what you said doesn’t happen but I’m not worried or keeping an extra eye on anyone because they are black or any other race. I work with mostly white people and Hispanics, we don’t point out a black person or treat them any differently when they come in. Like I said I think racism is still a thing for sure but me being white in Atlanta or Indianapolis wasn’t a good thing at all. I was experiencing what you’re talking about where you walk in and everybody in the place is mean mugging you.

mayjay said:

@jaybate-1.0 I took all my meds, thank you, but mine are not to prevent lunatic verbal assaults on entire groups of people just because they are of different color or political bent. If I rant, it is really still just the medicated me.

————————

No buts. 😀

@approxinfinity one of the few things I'd agree with Trump on is the tariffs. It has yet to hit consumer items. $12B subsidy is a drop in the bucket compared to the overall message being sent.

Besides how he has handled Russia, I can't say that he has done as bad of a job with foreign diplomacy as many like to paint the picture of.

It is honestly refreshing to see someone be a hardass with the rest of the world when we have the leverage. NATO falls apart without us. He should be a dick to NATO members not on pace to meet their agreed upon spending. He should put Iran in their place. He should put China in their place and force them to start making ethical business practices apart of the norm.

Free trade will come back at some point. But the only major market to still be down since the tariffs have been implemented is the Shanghai Stock Index. American investors still have plenty of confidence.

7/27/18 - The national anthem issue is a simple one. The employer dictates the workplace. It's that simple. As an employer, it's bad business for me to permit my receptionist to wear a "never Trump" shirt or "Lock her up" shirt. I can determine if I permit that. But I can dictate employee apparel so it coincides with my wishes for my business -- MY business. Not my employees' business. The NFL is the employer. The players the employees. The employees, however, can shape the rules to the extent that they have power and leverage. They don't. Whether their value can convince the owners to cede control. We don't see this issue in the NBA or MLB, and of course not in hockey. Never mind that that the players that participate in this faux protest, this undeniable show of weakness, are sorely misguided at best and purposefully dishonest at worst. This is about employers being able to control their workplace so as to ensure that customers aren't alienated. And, of course, Trump is on the right side of this issue. The Cowboys are leading here. I may become a Cowboys fan.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/24207562/stephen-jones-players-stand-cowboy ↗

@Kcmatt7 I don't disagree with holding countries responsible for meeting their agreed upon spending in NATO but I don't know if there was ever a discussion of pace to meet the 2% by 2024 that was already agreed upon before Trump. Was there? And suggesting that we may not come to military aid of a Nation that isn't paid up is not the right way to do it. Global interdependence and security is important. I frankly don't want a free wheeling gambler as President. I don't want to cast doubt on our alliances and our global positions.

@HighEliteMajor do you make your employees stand and stare at a flag while the national anthem plays and you film them and stream it on YouTube?

I will guess that the product in your case is not the employees. In the case of the NFL the product IS the players.

This really speaks to the disconnect with some fans not recognizing that. They want what the player can do but not who the player is.

Frankly who cares if the players want to kneel? The resistance in this case imo is not the players. The resistance is the fans who want to piss and moan about something minor and the demagogues that take up the pitchfork and megaphone and stoke the fire, because they know it will make Fox news viewers fall in line.

@approxinfinity There was not an agreed upon pace but all have projections and many countries said they would not meet the 2% by the deadline.

I have no issues with NFL owners not hiring guys who don't stand for the National Anthem. The Fans are the customers and if the owners are losing money (opportunity cost-wise, of course they are still turning a profit) I have no issues with them shipping off players to teams or fanbases that are ok with that. But there are a ton of Chiefs fans that are veterans and I can't blame them for protesting the protests by not watching.

My dad, a veteran and a guy who has not missed a Chiefs game for probably 40 years, didn't watch a single game last season. He dropped the NFL cable package and now spends his events budget on the Royals and Sporting and may never watch another Chiefs game.

I don't think that there is a disconnect from the fans. I think they have just as much right to be pissed about it as the players have to do it. If enough fans quit watching football because of it, the players will ultimately be the ones hurt by the protests. If the sport ever stops growing, it is players salaries that will take a nose-dive. I think that is where the disconnect is. The players do not recognize that. Especially when considering that their main demographic is exactly who they are pissing off. Middle-Class, Middle-Aged White Men are those people who are most likely to buy season tickets, pay for $30 Parking, $150 jerseys and $12 beers. They are the people who prop the sport up. And they are the same reason that you can buy Chiefs season tickets for $200 right now. I can't tell you how many Fire Fighter and Cops I know that gave up there tickets this season. There used to be a couple of groups my family knew of (about 50 in each) and they gave up there seats this season. That is at least $50k in yearly revenue lost.

I guess my question really is for those who think the players should be allowed to do what they want, why can't the fans also do what they want? Why must the fans be the ones who get over it? It comes off hypocritical. Especially when the fans are the ones paying for the product. The truth is that the kneeling, albeit a minor part of the product, completely changes the product for some people. Football is American as it gets, and the uber patriotic f-ing love football. So, when football no longer is patriotic (in their eyes) the product has changed. They have every right to not watch it. Owners have every right to be pissed when fans no longer spend money because a player is doing something to cost them money.

I will watch all 20+ Chiefs games this season, but I have no issues with anyone who won't because of National Anthem protests.

@approxinfinity And does HEM get paid surreptitiously by the military for playing the anthem and having sponsored patriotic celebrations every game?

Every totalitarian state in history has coerced kneeling, oaths, or salutes from its subjects, and drastically punished independence of expression. How on earth can any American support doing it here? What good does it do? Aldous Huxley, George Orwell, and Sinclair Lewis are all spinning in their graves, weeping while crying, "We tried to warn you!"

I don’t agree with the protests and haven’t watched much NFL games since. The problem is I don’t wanna see some millionaire whining about he’s oppressed. If things are that bad for you in this country, move out. I don’t get it man up, people are just too lazy to leave, no ones got a gun to their head holding them here. Not to mention if people of race have it so gosh darn bad how are you making millions? How was our last president black? It flat out doesn’t add up. Once again I’m not saying racism doesn’t exist but it several non white folks that have came from shit backgrounds and made it by not point fingers and wasting time. Its tough in the world these days no doubt but most white folks I know gotta grind and work just like everyone else.I don’t want to deal with politics everytime I turn on the TV or drive down the road. Obviously oppression is defined differently by people as @mayjay said but I just a Twitter post today that said all you have to do is mark caucasian on a job app and you get it. From what I see on Facebook and Twitter, hundreds of thousands of people, maybe even millions think because I’m white I went to the same college as my dad for free, got a BMW and a $500,000 house, I’m just waiting for pop to retire so I can be CEO. Some of it is flat-out laughable and it’s funny to me because these athletes got more opportunities and chances than most because they were good at silly game. I personally don’t care if you wanna fight for what you believe in but not standing while we present our flag,which stands for those freedoms you are using to protest is pretty idiotic when you think about it. If you want to change the world, be the the change. If you see something wrong, try and do something constructive to fix not get media attention after all you’re millionaire (I give Kaepernick credit because he actually has put money forward to help kids in bad neighborhoods, but he’s still a fool because he opposes oppression while wearing Castro shirts). That and as stated the country pays these teams to show our colors and flag. @approxinfinity So would it be ok for you to tell off Trump or Hillary supporters at your job causing lost business and be pissed if you got fired?

I suggest you guys watch the movie Gladiator (again?). This isn't remotely similar to what a receptionist does at a small business.

Again with the hypocritical word. Our president can't stop spewing late night contradictory messages on Twitter. Would anyone argue that this is the fully endorsed proper channel for a President? Clearly our age embraces freedom of expression in unconventional channels.

@approxinfinity Now I think most that folks would agree that Trump runs his Twitter like a pissed off-teenager. That and the protest started before Trump was elected. But I really think it’s a little extreme to compare the situation to Gladiator, let’s not blow it way outta proportion people ain’t dying because of it. It’s very similar to a business, because it is a business. It’s entertainment, people are mad so they are spending their time and money on other entertainment. The players are losing customers by doing it.

@kjayhawks I think it was people dying that generated the protests in the first placce, so yes, for the protestors, it is a life and death issue.

@mayjay some people were killed by police if that’s what you mean but it had fart fire nothing to do with the people actually protesting. Several people couldn’t follow simple rules In those cases as well. If you play stupid games, you win stupid prizes. I’m not gonna say I side with the police everytime but about 80 percent of the time from the videos and stuff I’ve seen. I don’t break laws so I don’t have many encounters with police. It’s like not the people protesting are being killed, that’s why it’s different than gladiator. It’s a real a simple concept.

@HighEliteMajor CNN actually gave Trump some credit for the economy. I know this story is kind of a flavorless acquiescence and might be necessary to smooth out the consistency of their liberal brand of stew, but i found it relevant to your criticism that MSM does not give Trump credit.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/27/politics/donald-trump-economy-trade-gdp-growth-credit/index.html ↗

@Kcmatt7 Your dad's interpretation of the playing of the national anthem differs from the interpretation of the players. Let me ask a direct question. Does your Dad watch Fox News and support Trump?
I ask because I think if it weren't for the spin artists stoking the fire here and galvanizing voter groups into a single voting block, the story would be "hey, the players have an issue with standing, but they say they have nothing but respect for the troops". That story is drowned out by the my-way-or-the-highway "NO! THE NATIONAL ANTHEM CAN ONLY MEAN ONE THING! THEY SHOULD ALL LEAVE THIS COUNTRY!" logic.

More than one perspective can be valid. It is, at the end of the day, an opinion of what the National Anthem means, nothing more.

You say the fans can be pissed off if they want to be. I believe they don't want to be pissed off. Nobody wants to be angry all the time. It's the noise they listen to that is making them mad and intolerant of other perspectives.

@approxinfinity absolutely my dad is a Fox News drone. But, to his credit, he was pissed before it became a Trump rallying cry.

And while the players say that, my dad is also a police officer. So it is more of a slap in his face than just being a former vet.

I don’t think, in my dads case, Trump would have anything to do with him being pissed about this.

I mean, imagine serving your country and community for over 30 years of your life, and then people don’t appreciate that.

To you and me, the issue is small and stupid. And I truthfully believe that we are probably numb to it at this point. But to him it is a spit in the face of his entire life’s work.

@Kcmatt7 I'm sure he'd be pissed given his background but I would hope he'd get over it and find resolution if not for Fox galvanizing and encouraging intolerance. On the other side, the players probably would have felt heard with a President inviting them to the White House to talk or whatever and would have desisted by now.

These guys are not letting divisions heal, they're pouring salt in wounds.

@approxinfinity well I think it should have never been a presidential issue. But I also think neither side is doing anything wrong?

It is not wrong for players to kneel and use the platform they have earned.

It is not wrong for anyone, including the president, to use their platform to get people to boycott games and teams that have players kneeling.

And, to be honest, why would the president stop hitting on this? He has won the battle. Players who would easily make a roster if not for the kneeeling are not even signed. The players have essentially lost the battle. The public has spoken. Stand or lose millions.

@approxinfinity and again, why are the police officers and veterans the ones who have to get over it? Sorry, I just can’t wrap my mind around it. I mean, it MATTERS to them. They are getting flipped the bird basically.

And you want them to get over it and give money to the people flipping them the bird every Sunday? Not happening man.

Especially when they are the ones with leverage right now.

@Kcmatt7 the two groups are not acting the same.

Group A - Players
Interpreting honoring national anthem with "hand over breast" as an acceptance of injustices in our culture, and making slight variation in how they honor national anthem to signify that police brutality toward black people is not acceptable.

Group B - Insulted People
Interpreting honoring national anthem with "hand over breast" as a salute to our military, and any variation in how it is honored as a grievous insult to their values.

Group B (Insulted People) is reacting to Group A (Players) here. They are being encouraged to react in an intolerant manner... ARE acting in an intolerant manner.

Conversely, based upon what their cause is, the case that Group A (Players) is intolerant is if you think that they aren't being tolerant enough of police crimes against black people.

Wait... did someone actually say police officer should get over it?? Wow!

@approxinfinity What are they doing that is intolerant, specifically?

@Woodrow resolving a conflict like this takes acknowledgement that there is an issue, communication and collaboration.

Again, saying "these people protest specific acts of police violence, therefore they hate all cops and I need to be offended!" Is not the right conclusion but you will never hear Fox News make that distinction.

@Kcmatt7 they are intolerant of peaceful protest.

I want to continue to point out that it is not the people that are the problem here, as I see it. An emotional response as a police officer to people protesting the acts of police officers makes sense. It is the media encouraging the perpetuation of single-threaded thoughts on the issue that is a big problem, keeping people from more nuanced stances, compromise and understanding.

All right everyone group hug! Let’s just leave it where it is!

@kjayhawks We had a yard sale today in 83 up to 95 heat. Maybe a group handshake would be better than a hug!

@mayjay lmao we may stick together if you’re involved

@kjayhawks My contribution to unity!

7/31/18 - Lebron James, a complete sham. He now attacks Trump, claiming Trump is using sports to divide the country. Of course, Trump did no such thing. Trump did not kneel on an NFL field during the national anthem. That singular act is the act of division -- it is an attack on our country and what a great majority hold important and sacred. That's the act of division, so we're clear. That was the act of injecting politics into sports. What James is irritated with is that someone with a national voice has the temerity to speak out against this woefully ignorant and misguided behavior. We've seen the histrionics here -- referencing totalitarian regimes and such other alarmist baloney. No one is required to march, bow, salute, place hand over heart, sing, or curtsey, which is a purposefully false narrative promulgated by leftists. Remember that -- it is purposeful dishonesty. No, the truth is that all that is asked is that an individual, during work hours, at his place of employment, not show disrespect for the national anthem and just stand quietly. That is all. Nothing affirmative or objective. Just stand quietly. Anything suggested beyond that is the classic "fake news." Made up. It's exactly what we expect from the left. Guys like Lebron get to talk because they have a microphone in their face. They never debate, they never get challenged. That's how the left operates best. No debate or discussion.

Of course, others, like Dak Prescott, get it: "I never protest during the anthem, and I don't think that's the time or the venue to do so. The game of football has always brought me such peace, and I think it does the same for a lot of people ... When you bring such a controversy to the stadium, to the field, to the game, it takes away. It takes away from that."

@HighEliteMajor

If this issue is so important, I always wondered why is it that all these players that kneel on company time don't do it on their own time? They have the money, resources and connections to set up events like town hall meetings or press conferences to discuss the issue outside the football field but I just don't see this happening. I know of many players that quietly do a lot of outstanding community work without looking or asking for the limelight or credit but the more vocal protesters do nothing. Something to think about.

Here is an article I found ↗ that uniquely describes the current situation and points out the real issues in the black community.

@HighEliteMajor said:

Guys like Lebron get to talk because they have a microphone in their face. They never debate, they never get challenged. That’s how the left operates best. No debate or discussion.

Isn't that exactly what you are doing here? Every post you've made has been a declaration with no acknowledgement of anyone's response.

@JayHawkFanToo

Read this ↗. Or this ↗. Or this ↗, this ↗, this ↗, this ↗, this ↗, this ↗, this ↗, this ↗, this ↗, this ↗, or this ↗.

When you finish that, then read this ↗, this ↗, this ↗, this ↗, this ↗, this ↗, and definitely this ↗.

@justanotherfan lol, that I like!

@justanotherfan

Cute. Perhaps you should re-read my post where I said...

“I know of many players that quietly do a lot of outstanding community work without looking or asking for the limelight or credit but the more vocal protesters do nothing.”

I don’t need you to tell about the good work players do. My comment was about the protesting football players and most of your references are about basketball players.

Again, this is what I wrote...

“If this issue is so important, I always wondered why is it that all these players that kneel on company time don’t do it on their own time? They have the money, resources and connections to set up events like town hall meetings or press conferences to discuss the issue outside the football field but I just don’t see this happening.”

Here, I was talking about discussing the issue at the center of the protest, not charity work, and I don’t see that happening other than ranting and raving against Trump which does nothing to solve this issue that has been there since long before Trump jumped into politics and will likely be around long after he is gone.

Now, maybe you can give your opinion on the article I cited.

@JayHawkFanToo thats why he posted links to storied about the "more vocal protesters" doing things...

@JayHawkFanToo What about the one entitled "Anquan Boldin and Malcolm Jenkins speak at congressional forum on community-police relations. For the second time in six months, NFL players visit Capitol Hill to push for change"

That sounds like doing something off the field to me.

@approxinfinity

You also need to re-read my post in which I already indicated that many players do great community/charity work so there is no need to lecture me on something I readily acknowledged on my original post. All the links except one about ride alongs are about charity work and most about basketball players.

The “football” players protest was not and is not about charity but about the claim that police kill black people indiscriminately and I don’t see much being done by the players to address this particular issue.

Maybe you took the time read the one article I cited and would care to comment on it?

😴

@JayHawkFanToo ah, but you did admit it wasn't about disrespecting the flag. I would never and my boys would never not stand for the NA. But, I've coached a lot of kids and witnessed 2 black kids on my team treated like pos! The other white kids were completely left alone. This was in Wisconsin. These 2 kids were as good as gold, so until you walk in someone's shoes or have seen such injustice, maybe you can't get it. Believe me, I asked for the manager of the place and let them have it. I have no place in my heart for people who are racist!

@Crimsonorblue22

No, that is not what I said. Unfortunately the protest chose to carry out their protest by disrespecting the flag on company time.

Racism and discrimination are the result of ignorance and abhorrent in all their forms and by anyone and should never be tolerated; I certainly do not condone or tolerate it. That is not to say that racism does not exist, it does, but the best way to defeat it is by education, teaching understanding and tolerance and not by one sided confrontation. I commend you for speaking out agains racism.

@JayHawkFanToo I think where there seems a disconnect is that you aren't acknowledging that the charity work these players are doing is in many ways directly attempting to address the problem of relationships between the black community and police. For example, this one from @justanotherfan s list:

http://themalcolmjenkinsfoundation.org/tag/community-service/ ↗

They are clearly trying to make a difference through channels they believe make a difference.

@JayHawkFanToo I read the link you posted, and i think we can agree that systemic crime is a complicated thing, with many causes, and needs to be addressed from many angles. Certainly law enforcement needs to be a friend to the people and not positioned oppositionally, and that is why the charity work these athletes do can't be understated. But it isnt everything.

This isn't just about police violence against black people. It's about profiling, and assumption of guilt, and about black Americans feeling safe.

Malcolm Jenkins, on why he raised his fist instead of kneeling:

"The reason I don't kneel is not because I think it's disrespectful. It's because I think it's misunderstood," Jenkins said. "I want my demonstration to be effective and received. I think whatever that is is going to be to the individual, but everybody's saying the same thing: We need change. We want to be that vehicle to change our communities, and we need to use the platform that we have to do that. So, hopefully, people can begin to listen to some of those issues."

What's so wrong about that? What does it say that people feel the need to break this mentality down and make it stop?

JayHawkFanToo said:

@justanotherfan

I don’t need you to tell about the good work players do. My comment was about the protesting football players and most of your references are about basketball players.

For those who didn't click through my links, I linked to three articles about Colin Kaepernick, 4 about Malcolm Jenkins, 2 about Marcus Peters, 1 about Brandon Marshall, 2 about Michael Bennett, 1 about Martellus Bennett and one about Arian Foster. I also linked to four articles each about Lebron James and Steph Curry.

So @JayHawkFanToo, that's 14 articles about football players and 8 about basketball players. 14 is more than 8. Your statement was either outright false or at least misleading.

Again, this is what I wrote...

“If this issue is so important, I always wondered why is it that all these players that kneel on company time don’t do it on their own time? They have the money, resources and connections to set up events like town hall meetings or press conferences to discuss the issue outside the football field but I just don’t see this happening.”

The Kaepernick article about his donations shows the types of organizations he has supported, including organizations that work on things like fighting mass incarceration, assisting single mothers, mental health treatment for former inmates, and organizations combating police brutality.

Malcolm Jenkins and Anquan Boldin spoke to congress about police brutality.

Malcolm Jenkins' foundation works with high school students in New Orleans to improve graduation rates and provide resources for under-resourced communities.

Jenkins also did a ride along with Philadelphia police.

Brandon Marshall met with Denver police to begin a dialogue between urban communities around Denver and the police.

Martellus Bennett and Michael Bennett donated all of their profits from 2017 jersey sales to after school programs and inner city garden projects, as well as inner city schools as a way of expanding education opportunities.

Kaepernick, Jenkins, Marshall and the Bennett brothers have been among the most consistent protesters.

Again, the articles I linked to addressed what you said specifically. Your statements were, again, either outright false, or at least misleading.

Now, maybe you can give your opinion on the article I cited.

I will give my opinion on the article you cited, but only after you acknowledge that the statements that you made, which I cited above, were either outright false, or at least misleading. Otherwise, you do not merit my response to your question.

Is it me or is it getting hot in here? LOL

@DoubleDD did you escape the 'nados in Iowa? 🌪

8/1/18 - A march in Chicago against violence is scheduled in favor the poor and those victimized by rampant inner city violence. But where oh where are the black athletes that speak vehemently against the killing fields in our inner cities? Where are the black athletes challenging and demanding that young blacks stop the killing, maiming, robbing, and violent behavior in our inner cities? Where are the black athletes that actually demand personal responsibility among inner city blacks? Where are the black athletes that stand up for the victims of black inner city crime (ironically, the victims are mainly black)? Where are the black athletes demanding changes among their own race? Where are they? If the inner city black culture of violence doesn't change, nothing will change. The baloney you see above is that of an apologist. One that favors victimhood over personal responsibility and accountability. One that will use "black power" as his avatar, but in the same breath makes post after post demonstrating the weakness of those that kneel and insult our nation. Real "black power" is looking inward and demanding change -- personal responsibility. Not whining the whine of the perpetual victim. Just like the millions of blacks that aren't in this inner city culture of violence, and who don't buy the victim mentality -- the ones that achieve. The ones that seize opportunity. Where are these wonderful black athletes? Do they stand up for the nightly victims of black inner city violence? No. They cower just as the leftists do. Blame others. It's a convenient and pathetic exercise. They focus their efforts on a symptom of the inner city black culture, not the cause. I don't want cops killing innocent people. But a sure fire way to decrease that chance is to have less need for contact with the police (Odd how that works). You know, when you there are crime ridden sh--holes, the innocent residents need protection. Otherwise, they die. Remember that. Without the police, innocent inner city blacks die at even a greater rate.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-met-lake-shore-drive-shutdown-protest-20180723-story.html ↗

Let's start w/LeBron and his new school. Education. Please don't get personal. I know you don't care what anyone thinks, so I'm just asking. It's very ugly.

@justanotherfan

Again, you are conveniently changing the subject and showing mostly charity and contributions, something that I acknowledged in my original post. You listed a number of links but they refer to only a handful of individuals and not the 100s of players that actively participated on the football protest. This was the gist of my post that you conveniently ignore.

Lets go over some of the items...

The Kaepernick article about his donations shows the types of organizations he has supported, including organizations that work on things like fighting mass incarceration, assisting single mothers, mental health treatment for former inmates, and organizations combating police brutality.

And none shows where he attempted to reach out and start a dialog with the other side. Instead he insulted lae enforcement agencies and wore sock with pigs dressed as police men creating a greater divide instead. He also praised Castro and Che Guevara, two blood thirsty sociopaths that have done more to oppress people including black and along with North Korea represent the most repressive regimes in the world and whose security forces make the worst alleged police crimes look like a walk in the park. I know this first hand. This is the epitome of hypocrisy when you condemn institution that, while not perfect, are by and large good and praise a totalitarian regime that is orders of magnitude more oppressive, repressive and bloody. Google "El paredon Cuba" and you will learn first hand what a real repressive regime is like.

Malcolm Jenkins and Anquan Boldin spoke to congress about police brutality.

Excellent, there is one that wants to make a difference although change will not come from congress where members are more interested in their own welfare and r-election that solving issues.

Malcolm Jenkins’ foundation works with high school students in New Orleans to improve graduation rates and provide resources for under-resourced communities.

Great work, but how is this addressing the issue at hand?

Jenkins also did a ride along with Philadelphia police.

Excellent. I posted on different thread before that everybody should do this one time to understand what being a police officer is like. I did one and I now how a lot more admiration and respect for the work they do.

Brandon Marshall met with Denver police to begin a dialogue between urban communities around Denver and the police.

Again, excellent and a good step toward finding common ground and a solution to the problem.

Martellus Bennett and Michael Bennett donated all of their profits from 2017 jersey sales to after school programs and inner city garden projects, as well as inner city schools as a way of expanding education opportunities.

Great charity work that I acknowledged before but does not address the police or flags issues.

So we have what...a small handful of players, 3? 4? 5? addressing the issue? Where are the rest of the hundreds that protested during games? I can post 100 links about 3 or 4 people and it is still about 3 or 4 people and not 100, right?

If every one of the players involved would go to his home town and organize a town hall meeting with police and local residents and organizations then we would to see the intent of wanting to find a solution and maybe the beginning of one but I have not seen that. Having the issue appears to be more important than finding the solution.

Now perhaps you will address the article I originally cited although I am not holding my breath.

@JayHawkFanToo
https://www.sbnation.com/2017/9/29/16375378/nfl-players-charity-donations-jj-watt-hurricane-harvey-patrick-peterson-foundation ↗

Don't forget many White players knelt to support their teammates

I should also include @wissox. So many educators are working in the inner cities and so underpaid. @wissox choses to do this.🙏

@JayHawkFanToo

I am a lawyer. Because of that, I read and analyze things a certain way.

Your first statement, which I refuted with a few minutes on Google was as follows:

I know of many players that quietly do a lot of outstanding community work without looking or asking for the limelight or credit but the more vocal protesters do nothing.

You even wrote it in bold so it would stand out.

So I looked up the most vocal protesters - Colin Kaepernick, Malcolm Jenkins, the Bennett brothers, Brandon Marshall, plus Marcus Peters for some local flavor - and posted links that I found after doing a simple Google search about stories of them doing community service.

You attempted to respond in two ways. First you tried to re-frame your statement, saying you were talking not about community work, but work focused specifically on the police violence issue. You said:

Here, I was talking about discussing the issue at the center of the protest, not charity work,

That would have been a good argument, except that, as you yourself had to admit

Malcolm Jenkins and Anquan Boldin spoke to congress about >police brutality.

Excellent, there is one that wants to make a difference although change will not come from congress where members are more interested in their own welfare and r-election that solving issues.

I can't help that Congress is lousy. They make our laws. These players went to try and make change happen, which was something you specifically said they did not do.

Jenkins also did a ride along with Philadelphia police.

Excellent. I posted on different thread before that everybody should do this one time to understand what being a police officer is like. I did one and I now how a lot more admiration and respect for the work they do.

Brandon Marshall met with Denver police to begin a dialogue between urban communities around Denver and the police.

Again, excellent and a good step toward finding common ground and a solution to the problem.

These were things I directed you to. Yet, you said in your initial response that I hadn't cited any of that work.

You also said that:

I don’t need you to tell about the good work players do. My comment was about the protesting football players and most of your references are about basketball players.

That was easy to dispel because, well, math.

These were false or misleading statements that I called you on, but that you don't want to acknowledge.

You then tried the old tactic of moving the goal posts, claiming that you were talking about all protesters, not just the "more vocal protesters":

So we have what…a small handful of players, 3? 4? 5? addressing the issue? Where are the rest of the hundreds that protested during games? I can post 100 links about 3 or 4 people and it is still about 3 or 4 people and not 100, right?

There were a number of players that met with the NFL regarding donations and charity work to address this issue. You can find stories about that here ↗, here ↗ and here ↗.

But that doesn't change the fact that this is not what you initially said. A timeline:

1. You said "the more vocal protesters do nothing"
2. I disproved your statement
3. You claim I didn't address your initial statement, and said I provided more links to basketball players.
4. Several other posters on this board point out that the links I posted address those concerns.
5. I point out that 14 is more than 8.
6. You claim that it's not just the more vocal protesters, but all protesters.

It sad, honestly. If we were two opposing lawyers dealing with an issue in court and that same scenario played out as I listed above, you would likely be in line to be informally admonished by the court, or possibly formally sanctioned.

It's okay to be wrong if you own up to it. It's not okay to be wrong and change the topic.

So, given that, are you now ready to acknowledge that your statements were either outright false, or at least misleading, or will we continue to have to wait?

I do have a response about that article, by the way. But it can wait.

@justanotherfan

Once again. In my original post I did mentioned about players that do charity work precisely because I wanted to concede that and did not want to mix the charity or community work with the stated reason for the protest. My point about the more vocal protesters is that they do not do much about what they are protesting, i.e the alleged one side killing of black people by the police. If it was not clear in my first post I repeated the same thing again in every post since then and you keep merging the two issues which was not at all my intent. Basketball players are not even part of the conversation because the protest took place on the football field and not on the basketball court.

You can spin it any way you want but I have consistently maintained the same point and did agree with you about some of the things a few out of hundreds of players involved are doing to address the issue in question, namely killing of black people by the police but it does not fit your narrative and you keep steering back to what it does. I get it. You just don’t want to address the items in the article I cited so you accuse me of changing the gist of my post and use it as an excuse not to address it..it’s ok, you really don’t have to do it and don’t need an excuse.

This horse has been beaten to death...

!0_1533168607055_upload-765ca1a9-cab1-45d9-b2d5-bbcf3d415893 ↗

I nominate @jayballer73 to be the judge of this raft between @JayHawkFanToo and @justanotherfan. May the odds forever be in your favor lol

By Dr. Seuss From The Sneetches and Other Stories Copyright 1961 by Theodor S. and Audry S. Geisel:

One day, making tracks In the prairie of Prax,

Came a North-Going Zax And a South-Going Zax.

And it happened that both of them came to a place

Where they bumped. There they stood.

Foot to foot. Face to face.

“Look here, now!” the North-Going Zax said, “I say!

You are blocking my path. You are right in my way.

I’m a North-Going Zax and I always go north.

Get out of my way, now, and let me go forth!”

“Who’s in whose way?” snapped the South-Going Zax.

“I always go south, making south-going tracks.

So you’re in MY way! And I ask you to move

And let me go south in my south-going groove.”

Then the North-Going Zax puffed his chest up with pride.

“I never,” he said, “take a step to one side.

And I’ll prove to you that I won’t change my ways

If I have to keep standing here fifty-nine days!”

“And I’ll prove to YOU,” yelled the South-Going Zax,

“That I can stand here in the prairie of Prax

for fifty-nine years! For I live by a rule

That I learned as a boy back in South-Going School.

Never budge! That’s my rule.

Never budge in the least!

Not an inch to the west!

Not an inch to the east!

I’ll stay here, not budging!

I can and I will

If it makes you and me

and the whole world stand still!”

Well...Of course the world didn’t stand still. The world grew.

In a couple of years, the new highway came through

And they built it right over those two stubborn Zax

And left them there, standing un-budged in their tracks.

kjayhawks said:

I nominate @jayballer73 to be the judge of this raft between @JayHawkFanToo and @justanotherfan. May the odds forever be in your favor lol

UMMMM - - - NOPE -lol - -not gonna get mixed up in this lol - - heck probably if I said anything they would BOTH turn on me lol - -gonna let those dogs run and hunt leave them alone lol. - - -ROCK CHALK ALL DAY LONG BABY

@HighEliteMajor

Thanks for the break from the summer doldrums!

White privilege is misunderstood in my view. On the one hand Obama proves a black man can be elected to the highest office. That was a great event for many of my older African American friends. But a black woman, a few heartbeats from the presidency in Condeleeza Wright gets stopped in a Texas airport walking with the presidential party a few years back by some dolt who assumed she didn't belong with Bush because of her skin color.

Schools have been desegregated yet they're still obscenely segregated, most often by race, but sometimes by class as well. If you're not sure how this matters, a simple tour of facilities would suffice. Visit the athletic complex in your average suburban HS and then find the athletic complex, if it exists, in the underserved communities. The contrast is striking. I've seen light polls erupt in flames, and a single bulb explode and fall into the stands with spectators. The brightness of stadium lights, soccer pitches with large mudholes vs. playing on turf fields. Inside the hallways, I had 10 principals in 11 years. I'll let you guess which type of school that was. Teacher turnover leads to despair among poor students. Not happening out in the whiter areas generally. This is the issue I care most about.

The protest you mentioned today in Chicago. It's way more about the economic disparity between Chicago's north side and it's south and west side. You have to understand something about the evils of redlining which created segregated neighborhoods. When someone is prevented the ability to own a home in a decent neighborhood several things happen. There's a divide between classes and races. Owning property is a way families develop a legacy for children that someday they can own or benefit from. Simply put, it creates wealth of varying degrees.

Read the book Evicted. This is a great expose on a sometimes necessary but oftentimes evil practice that obviously impacts the underserved in our cities and suburbs.

National anthem? Sorry, but some of the stuff I've read here bothers me. Just because the rich athlete didn't suffer the injustice doesn't mean they shouldn't protest does it? By that logic no rich, successful people can protest, speak out, etc. Totally harmless but effective protest. I thought our country stood for that.

Just Mercy by Brian Stephenson is a startling book about the inequities in capital murder cases in Alabama. Even among criminals there's white privilege.

@wissox your kids are blessed to have you!

8/3/18 The Kansas City Star runs another media hit job on a conservative, attacking Kris Kobach. But this is a much larger issue than Kobach. It's how it is done that is the problem. Let me illustrate the problem. The KC Star runs an editorial claiming that Kobach is "not fit to serve." An EDITORIAL. Editorials are just that. The opinion of the Editorial board. May not like it, but it's clearly opinion and clearly under the editorial section. However, the KC Star also runs a front page story attacking Kobach less than a week ahead of the primary - that corresponds to the publication of the editorial. The alleged "news" is moving in lockstep with the "editorial." That is the problem. The reason the news media is viewed as the "enemy" by conservatives is quite simple - The mainstream news media blatantly favors the democrats and the left, while claiming that they are objectively "reporting" the news. They make their opinion, the news. It is comical that folks attack Fox News. If Fox News leans right, then we must be clear ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC lean left. The overwhelming weight of the media leans very much left. But the left demeans folks that watch Fox as "drones" as we see above, or in other ways. Same way they'd refer to Rush Limbaugh, as if those folks are robots. It's a typical leftist tactic. The news reported on Trump is nearly 90% negative by many reports. Look, I know. The media has always been left leaning. But this gets me to an important point that I started above related to the KC Star -- the media is now couching its "opinion" as news. With the KC Star, one obvious area is immigration. The KC Star will run front page stories on immigrants, their sob stories, run front page photos, follow an immigration hearing of a professor here illegally. All because they favor open borders and open immigration. They refuse to run stories with front page placement, and proper headlines, on the other side of that story. They will place stories on the front page with headlines that are noted as "commentary" -- which is opinion, not news. Importantly, they phrase headlines to influence opinion -- to play up their view, or diminish the position they disagree with. Not to report news objectively. So they choose to run an attack piece on Kobach, who is obvious rigid on the immigration issue. During the court case related to Trump's immigration policy (which he won at the Supreme Court), the KC Star and the rest of the media refused to report on his most powerful arguments (that the statute/law was undeniably clear). They would bury the arguments deep in the story. This is propaganda couched in objectivity. This is why the media is the enemy to conservatives. Look where the "media" and it's member give money for campaigns. I personally favor a media that challenges those in authority. The problem is, when a liberal/leftist is the one in authority, the media shades its reporting, crafts its headlines, diminishes its aggressiveness. The mainstream media is the enemy of conservatives. The media nearly unanimously refuses to report on the violence of the left against conservatives. And at the height of its hypocrisy, the media continues to fawn over women who are "leftists" but attack women on the right. Women in power on the right are not admired by the media as they do on the left. They attack them. It is why the media is the enemy. The media is the enemy because the media controls information. Twitter, Facebook, YouTube,and other media target conservatives, limit opinion, and seize accounts, while permitting the leftist opinions a much wider range of freedom of expression. The only folks that deny the overwhelming bias and purposeful promulgation of propaganda by the mainstream media are folks that are blinded by they viewpoint (intentionally or otherwise).

A couple of observations.

1. @wissox is doing some tremendous work in the education system. Inner city schools are often strapped for resources at every level, from books and lab equipment to sports facilities. It takes a special person to work in that environment, and @wissox is clearly one of those people. Thank you for what you do!

2. The reason I am so passionate about police violence against African Americans is because every time I see one of these situations I know that it could very well be me. Many on this board would argue against that, but several of these incidents that led to the shootings occurred during otherwise routine traffic stops(studies ↗ show that minorities are stopped at a higher rate than whites, and searched at a higher rate than whites, even though those searches turn up contraband less frequently than when whites are searched). I've been stopped by the police more times than I care to count, so I know what it's like to be in that situation, where I know that the officer can shoot me dead, then claim he feared for his life, and no one will ever be held accountable for my murder, like Philando Castille.

Pointing to black on black crime doesn't solve this. When black on black crime occurs, someone can be held accountable for the crime. When police violence occurs, NO ONE is held accountable. The current Department of Justice is getting rid of the department that investigated police departments ↗. There is no interest in holding anyone accountable for these things. That makes it much different than crime, which is being actively investigated and punished.

And that is why I (and many others) speak out against this. If officers were being held accountable, there would be far less outcry. But officers are rarely even charged in these situations. Even when they are dismissed from one police department for potentially inappropriate behavior, they often just get a job at another police department because many law enforcement agencies will accept a resignation, even under bad circumstances, and allow an officer to leave without making a permanent note in the officer's personnel file.

Think of it this way - if a day care worker was mistreating children, you would not want that worker to simply be able to resign from a position at one day care facility and move across town, or to the next county, or across the state line, and immediately get a job at another day care facility. Studies ↗ have shown that the overwhelming majority of complaints regarding officers focus on a handful of officers. Most police officers are not bad. Let me repeat that since some on this board think I am anti-police.

MOST POLICE OFFICERS ARE NOT BAD

In fact, I would do so far as to say the majority are good officers trying to do their jobs the right way. The problem is that many departments refuse to eliminate the worst officers from the force, instead soiling the dignity and reputation of their good officers to protect the bad ones. Why are we, as a society, okay with this?

@HighEliteMajor

Good post on the media. I generally have chafed for 30 years over the biased media. However, media has evolved to where the internet is now mainstream media. You can get whatever news and commentary there that you want. And it goes without saying you can find whatever you want to support your particular view point.

It always cracks me up when you read on FB some shared post that starts out, "The media won't report this" and then it goes on to report on some supposedly damaging story about a politician who breaks the mold on what they're supposed to be doing. I respond to that with "how did you learn about it then if the media didn't report it?"

You said "The KC Star will run front page stories on immigrants, their sob stories" You accuse the media of bias, but there's a lot of bias right in that statement, isn't there? I worked with a lot of immigrants from Central America when I was living in Baton Rouge. These were not sob stories in my view. These were kids escaping the most extreme violence on earth. Read about San Pedro Sula, Honduras someday. Most violent large city on the planet. I'll tell you then about two girls in my classroom who had to get out of there. They were great young ladies, didn't speak any English, but worked hard in class every day. But some people will cheer when or if they get deported. That would be a sob story. I don't know if they were here legally or not. They didn't need to be there, in Honduras.

Trump unfortunately gives the MSM plenty of ammo in their battles against him. His outlandish statements, immoralities, etc sway Americans away from his accomplishments which you started talking about in your original post.

@wissox We can't save everyone. At least not all at once. And that is why I am so against illegal immigration.

Illegal immigration is a problem to me, because by letting in anyone, we are undermining a system of those who follow the rules. Of allowing us a vetting process of any sort. And that is what bothers me the most. Good people are not getting the opportunity they deserve because other people are doing the wrong thing.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/06/19/federal-judge-tosses-kansas-voter-id-law-orders-states-top-prosecutor-to-undergo-legal-training.html ↗

@Kcmatt7 Hi Matt, I know we can't save everyone. Can you imagine telling someone in great need that however? I can't.

I never said let everyone in, however, by letting in people in danger in other places is just and humane. This country has plenty of land for growth. There's room for more. If you don't believe me look at China! 1.3 billion people crammed into a country the same size as our 48 contiguous states. We have room for a billion more people!

Another interesting aspect on the immigration issue is how many unfilled jobs there are in some industries now. My Cuz in law has a major landscaping company in Pittsburgh, PA, not Kansas! Long tradition there, highly respected in the community for their work. He's had to dedicate an employee just to hiring because so many people who would fill his positions have been deported. This is true all over the bread basket. Certain manufacturing jobs are going unfilled partially because of anti immigration policies.

If it is simply a matter of not wanting to tolerate the fact that "illegals" broke the law, I wonder how many immigration hardliners cut off their friendships with people they know who falsify their tax reporting? Hey, right wing: if you think someone named Carlos or Juanita is a crook for entering illegally, why are conservatives not leading the charge against major tax cheat Manafort? Why is the president whining his buddy Paul is being treated worse than Al Capone, and pardoning his rich friends for their crimes?

@mayjay you're doing the same thing as someone point to black on black crime when the topic is police brutality.

@wissox you just can't tell everyone yes. Even in great need. Someone has to be strong enough to say no at some point.

Honestly, I'm ok bringing in as many people as we have jobs for and want to work. I just want them paying taxes and at least being accounted for. If it were my decision, I'd be handing out work visa's like they were f-ing candy.

@Kcmatt7 It is not the same at all. I am talking about people who justify deporting someone living a peaceful productive life by pontificating, "They are here illegally. A crime is a crime. Period." But they are not absolutists when it comes to income tax cheating, which is rampant. I knew a guy who had had a pool cleaning business in Hollywood who collected his fees in cash and proudly told me how he saved so much in taxes because he only reported half of it. His drug use was legendary. He always stopped every conversation about immigration by talking about how the "(effing) Mexicans" needed to be kicked out for breaking our laws. In other words, there is a principle involved of law and order, just not one that applies to anyone else except illegals.

The problem with saying the protestors should look to b-on-b crime as a greater harm to blacks than police brutality is that the argument misses the point entirely: the protestors are attempting to bring attention to, and to stop, decades of official sanction of abuse and violence perpetrated by the people whose job it is to prevent and solve crimes, not commit them. A community has felt targeted by agents of the state and ignored when challenging that until recently as the video evidence has become overwhelming. Anyone who thinks all members of a race have to rein in any criminals in their midst before they have the right to protest officials and officers commiting crimes is a fool.

@mayjay Why is one an absolutist issue but not the other?

I could spin the B on B argument the same way you did. Which is what people do when they argue B on B crime in the Police Brutality argument. People who make this argument say, "why is one black death more important than the other? If you believe that violence on black people is an issue than you should focus on B on B crime because it is more rampant. Not Police Brutality."

To which you just responded, they are separate issues. Which I agree on.

But you just made that same argument, basically. Paraphrasing:

"If you believe being an illegal immigrant is a crime that should be punished, this OTHER crime is rampant and you don't say anything about it!!!!" That's what you just said. Which, replaced by B on B crime and Police brutality like mad lib book, it reads exactly the same. It is a comparison to a different issue.

The topic is illegal immigration. Which has nothing to do with current legalized citizens and their lack of paying taxes. Cracking down on that is it's own issue that would have to be handled completely different. So comparing illegal immigration to income tax fraud really isn't connected, at all. Unless of course you are trying to use a completely different topic in an argument in which it really has no business.

One issue starts with whether or not someone should even be in the country in the first place.

The other issue is whether or not someone claims the $599 jackpot they hit at the casino. Or the cash they took under the table. Or however they tweaked their taxes.

The only way that these two issues are related, is when talking about taxes specifically.

Otherwise, they are not the same topic one little bit. By arguing that "if you believe one is a crime than you should feel as passionate about all crime" you are missing the point of the argument that "conservatives" (I hate this because I have been on both sides of issues on this board and feel that I am about as moderate as anyone here). It is that illegal immigrants should have never been here in the first place. Whether they are living a peaceful and productive life or not. Which is that they are taking away that same opportunity for another person who actually followed the rules and would have been equally productive and peaceful. If not more likely to be more productive and peaceful... Did someone fudging their taxes take away another person's opportunity because of it? How did that particular issue directly result in the altering of someone else's life? You see, this is why they are different issues.

If you take an absolutist approach to anything, everyone ends up looking like a hypocrite.

@Crimsonorblue22

Yea I do. It was bad stuff. Marshalltown was hit really hard.

@DoubleDD tell us, so sorry!

@mayjay

Interesting that as a lawyer you presume guilt instead of innocence as our system of laws dictates. Maybe you should get all the facts before you jump to conclusions...don’t believe me, this comes straight from very well known liberal Alan Dershowitz ↗. Apparently these charges were brought up before and none other than Rod Rosenstein exonerated him.](https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/08/judge-napolitano-doubles-down-says-paul-manafort-was-exonerated-8-years-ago-may-call-rosenstein-as-first-witness-video/) ↗

@JayHawkFanToo (1) You might want to read the testimony of his accountant and tax preparer of the past 2 days. How could he be exonerated 8 years ago for falsifying documents to obtain loans in 2016, and filing false returns for 2015? (1-a) Dershowitz is an idiot at times. (2) I am a lawyer. You aren't, as far as I know, although you do make lots of pronouncements about the law. Those facts do not have anything to do with my ability to read trial reports. Please do not tell me how I am supposed to view things since I have no role other than as a citizen. I I were a juror, I would be instructed not to draw conclusions until deliberating, etc etc etc. But I am not. I am under no duty to presume innocence. It is a misconception to think the public is obligated to presume innocence of anyone--it is a legal presumption intended only to determine the burden of proof is on the prosecution to present sufficient evidence to overcome that presumption beyond a reasonable doubt. It applies only to decision-makers. As a spectator (meaning not a participant) I have read testimony that to me looks like clear evidence of guilt. But I am aware this is just the prosecution. So, if that evidence is clearly rebutted, I will change my mind. (3) I assume by keeping an open mind you mean like the president, who has pronounced before trial that PM is being railroaded?

@DoubleDD Sorry to hear about the twisters. We used to drive from KC to Waterloo, Iowa to see my grandparents in the 60s and 70s. Went through Marshalltown, Traer, Tama....all types of towns both northeast and southwest of Des Moines before I-35 was completed. (One stretch of 2-lane highway in northern Missouri was called the deadliest 20 miles of highway in the country.)

Funny family legend involving the late great unintentional comedienne, my Mom: In Marshalltown, we always stopped at this one restaurant both going up on Friday and going back home Sunday night. It was the only thing open. On a Friday night once, my mother ordered a Rueben sandwich that was thoroughly horrible. On Sunday, she ordered it again. Then, when it was also bad, she got something else. We asked why she invited such misery.

Mom: "It was so bad on Friday that I just didn't think it was possible for them to make it that bad again. I was wrong!"

@mayjay

That is a great story made me laugh. I'm ok but man some Iowans got hit hard my friend.

@Kcmatt7 Well good, you're not totally heartless!

@mayjay You know the best thing to come out of Missouri? I-35 and I-70.

@mayjay

As a matter of fact, I have read extensive reports of the accountant and bookkeeper testimony. Interesting that the accountant that makes $400K per year and took direct responsibility for many of the issues was not charged at all and instead granted immunity the same immunity granted to Gates, Manafort’s assistant, who according to the accountant and bookkeeper provided most of the guidance and information directly. The accountant and bookkeeper provided little in the way of proof and a lot of what they testified was about things they though were not right but had no proof one way or another.

The trial has barely started and you have already labeled him a “tax cheat.” As an attorney and a citizen should you not wait until he is convicted? If you were part of the jury pool would rightly be dismissed for cause because you have already made up your mind. With that way of thinking maybe we should not wait for the FBI basketball recruiting investigation to run its course and just go ahead and label KU and Coach Self as cheats since they were cited in the indictment and apparently that implies guilt. Presumption of innocence is one of the most sacred prnciples in the American Criminal Justice System ↗ and jumping to conclusions before all the evidence is in would be understandable coming from a lay person but seems unlikely and most unseeming coming from an attorney.

Does it not bother you that everybody is being offered immunity in order to elicit testimony, real or made up, to incriminate the bigger fish with the hope that someone will eventually turn in Trump? This approach has been strongly and vocally opposed by the ACLU and Trial lawyers in the past, as Dershowitz pointed out, but their silence is deafening now that the target is a conservative. Does it not bother you that while the Special Counsel was tasked to investigate the alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, Manafort is being indicted for alleged crimes that took place long before Trump became a candidate, long before he joined the campaign, unrelated to the campaign and outside the stated scope of his mandate? As an attorney, does it not bother you that while the average sentence for a white collar criminal found guilty is 1.5 years in a federal country club detention center, Manafort is facing a term of 305 years? Apparently not since anyone associated with Trump does not deserve the same treatment as other defendants do. SMH.

@JayHawkFanToo The answer to all your questions is "No, not a bit."

On sentencing, thanks for bringing that up. The difference between what white-collar defendants receive from what they faced is another point of concern about how disparate the treatment of minorities is from the treatment of whites (who make up the overwhelming majority of white-neck, er, white-collar, defendants). They get low sentences compared to what they face, whereas nonviolent minority defendants face mandated minimum sentences. Ever notice that the law and order whiners never seek mandatory minimums for white-collar crimes?

Of course, the rich miscreants who commit financial crimes get pardons from their connected pals. (In both parties--Clinton's pardon of Marc Rich was deplorable.) If you think Manafort, even convicted of everything, will serve any time greater than 6 months before your hero pardons him, you are dreaming.

Finally, the use of immunity for small fish to testify against big fish is the only way to get evidence. The biggest objections are to giving deals to jailhouse snitches who have no connection to their cellmates and have been shown to be willing to say almost anything about their new companions who strangely spontaneously confess to all types of crap after getting locked up. A second objection is when they give better deals to big fish and then fry the no-longer-needed little fish to increase conviction rates.

I have never heard a convincing argument against giving immunity to an accessory to give needed evidence to convict a major actor in a criminal enterprise.

I suppose you think it is the accountants who committed crimes benefiting Manafort. And Gates must have fooled him into saving millions in taxes. Poor Paul, such an ingenue in the ways of international finance and business partnerships. My tears are streaming down my cheeks.

@HighEliteMajor to quote Stephen Colbert, "reality has a well-known liberal bias".

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Liberal_bias ↗

8/5/18 - So we saw the story in the KC Star and on various news outlets a days ago. 15 people were shot in Kansas City over 3 days. This is nothing new. Look at every major inner city. Many in areas with the strictest gun laws in the country. Killing fields. To find these killing fields, simply look to the major cities on the last presidential election map, and then look for the deep blue middle. President Trump promised federal involvement in Chicago if it didn't improve. I'm still waiting. This is more than a political stunt. These are people's LIVES. Real and tangible. A little boy paralyzed at a gas station waiting with his father. A little girl shot through a window in her home. A young woman randomly shot while driving. THESE LIVES MATTER AND WE GLOSS OVER THEM EVERY DAY BECAUSE WE ARE USED TO INNER CITY VIOLENCE. It is the product of a depraved and morally bankrupt culture.

The KC story is interesting. I'm waiting for the KC pro sports athletes to join the effort to vilify, target, blame, and eradicate those that murder and maim. I'm waiting for athletes around the country, who have influence, to villify, target, blame, and eradicate those that murder and main. I'm waiting for athletes around the country to speak up and villify, target, blame and eradicate a cultural tolerance and enabling of this horrific behavior. Oh, wait, that would require many to blame what they have so readily embraced and glorified, right? They are cowards.

Or, we can laud the athletes for their contributions to schools, and clubs, and charities. All very worthy of praise. But all while missing the point. If the athletes believe their voice and actions mean something, why not target those that kill, rob, maim, and destroy on a nightly basis? We know why. That would require many to target what they have readily embraced and glorified. They are COWARDS.

http://www.kctv5.com/story/38808975/kc-residents-tired-of-violence-after-15-people-are-shot-in-3-days ↗

@HighEliteMajor Are you a coward for not crusading against all the problems within the groups that you identify with or are identified as being a part of? Do you really think these athletes think police crime is the end all and be all of problems with black people facing violence in this country? I do not. I feel like we are talking about the perspectives of people that we don't know, as spoon fed to us by spin media encouraging us to dismiss them and see them in 2 dimensions.

Also, do you think it is logical to demand that these athletes tell other black people what to do simply because they are both black? As @justanotherfan pointed out, this comes down to personal safety, not crusading for group ideals as defined by racial collectives.

8/6/18 Will be interesting to hear the misguided anti-gun folks spin this. The same folks that want to disarm citizens on the fairy dust and hope that the thugs and criminals will do the same (or not caring one way or the other). "Left" and "Logic" can never be confused as partners. Now "Left" and "Feelings", that another thing. And "Dangerous" is always an appropriate moniker.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/08/06/florida-armed-bystander-stops-gunman-at-crowded-back-to-school-event-at-park-police-say.html ↗

http://www.kxxv.com/story/38807302/1-arrested-after-attempted-carjacking-attacking-woman-and-officer-in-littlefield ↗

Edit - "Stupid" changed to "misguided."

@HighEliteMajor I actually agree about the gun control, being a independent. I think we need to take steps to prevent school shootings and what not but disarming millions of law abiding citizen won't help. They ain't gonna go to south Chicago or South Boston, east St. Louis and Compton to get the guns from there because it would turn into a war zone. Here is a great video on the matter.

@HighEliteMajor Not a good way to start another debate by saying "The stupid anti gun folks". I sincerely like your basketball postings. IMHO you're one of the best here. You're level headed when people disagree on basketball. Why can't you be the same here?

UK, which has severe gun control averages around 100 gun homicides a year. One horrible mass shooting a long time ago in Scotland I believe. Gun control does work.

@wissox They have also seen crimes using vehicles, knifes and blunt force objects sky rocket. A friend of mine was in the air force over there for a few years. You have to have a permit to own a dang baseball bat. I agree we need to do something and aint afraid to say I dont have all the answers but taking away freedom and rights aint it. "those who give away freedom for security, deserve nether" - Thomas Jefferson.

I own guns, but have no problem with attempts to develop requirements for safety training and limitations on magazine size and ammo stockpiling. Registration may be a pipe dream if 3D guns proliferate (no serial numbers). I recognize there are well-meaning people who want to get rid of all guns, just as there are well-meaning 2nd Amendment defenders.

There are also people on both sides who are nuttier than a fruitcake. Anyone who takes an unyielding position at either extreme end is guaranteeing that the battle will become more and more bitter, and will eventually result in a solution being crammed down people's throats rather than a reasonable compromise. The NRA is succeeding so far in knocking out any reasonable attempt to solve criminals' and violently ill people's virtually unfettered access to guns. The ultimate result, I fear, will be an overwhelming populist movement to amend or repeal the 2nd A.

@kjayhawks I like your response, but I would say that those weapons aren't going to wound and injure 10-15 people at a time which has happened just in the last weekend twice here in Chicago.

@wissox

Youi have to be very careful with the number you quote for the UK since they basically cook the books and the homicides are not reported in a straightforward basis like the FBI does here. Here is an article you can read ↗ that explains the process.

Also, while homicide by firearms is low, the homicide by knife and other objects is high to the point hat the mayor of London has proposed banning knives. ↗

A friend of mine from Australia, not a conservative at all but a well educated individual who owns a software firm and also publishes a blog about holistic medicine and wholesome foods and is a big opponents of big corporation and pharma, just wrote recently that the gun control and gun confiscation experiment down under had very bad unintended consequences. The number of home invasions and othre crimes has increased exponentially and criminals now break into homes and commit crimes with impunity because they know home owners no longer own guns and obviously criminals do. Something to think about.

Did you notice that just about all the recent mass shootings in this country were on areas designed as "gun free"? Something else to think about.

I read that if you take the 5 cities in the country with the highest rates out of the statistics (St. Louis, Chicago Detroit, New Orleans and Baltimore...if I recall correctly) the homicide rate for the country as a whole drops dramatically to levels comparable to other similar developed countries. Something more to think about.

I believe in rational gun control that requires training and permits to own guns and a comprehensive and up to data registry of those who lose the privilege such as but not limited to, anyone convicted of a felony, but it is easier said than done since the implementation of such as system would be nearly impossible. Arbitrarily confiscation guns, like many politicians are proposing, is not the answer; responsible ownership through education is.

It's just the American mentality.

While the rest of the World is working for peace, we are preparing for war.

Homicide rates, suicide rates, etc. None of it matters to anyone who is pro gun. No statistic could change their mind.

God himself could show up on their doorstep, and they'd shoot him for trespassing.

@JayHawkFanToo I'll have to read those links later (going to Sox-Yankees tonight!) But I've heard the 5 cities thing before. Interesting that 3 of our 4 largest cities, NY, LA and Houston aren't on that list. Not sure about Houston, but NY has stricter gun laws than Chicago, and on the conservative side of things those cities have pretty aggressive policing which is just the opposite in Chicago. Read about the ACLU's role in Chicago's high homicide rate if you have time.

@HighEliteMajor you really need to get off the Fox News. To me, posting links from Fox is like bragging about a cocaine addiction.

approxinfinity said:

@HighEliteMajor you really need to get off the Fox News. To me, posting links from Fox is like bragging about a cocaine addiction.

Would a MSN ↗ link do? In all fairness, it is hard to post a link to CNN when it will not even report it.

!0_1533610648262_08845D0B-FC74-4780-9E13-6AE755E99E15.jpeg ↗

The same search on Google yields lots of result from many other publications including the MSN link above.

@JayHawkFanToo this is some sort of voodoo witchcraft. You've managed to find a Fox News story posted on MSN.

How about this...

https://www.clickorlando.com/news/1-person-hospitalized-in-titusville-shooting-police-say ↗

...coverage that doesn't start with a young attractive blonde woman, then transition to a huge subtitle "GOOD GUY WITH A GUN STOPS PARK SHOOTING"

It is disturbing that you guys willingly subject yourself to this brainwashing.

I don’t care for CNN or Fox News lol they both stink. CNN has posted several stories that appeared to be nothing short of fiction and Fox News thinks Trump is Jesus return.

@approxinfinity probably has a good friend that works at fox

Here's an article on the fallacy of the "Good Guy With a Gun" rhetoric being pushed by the NRA:

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/evd4we/the-good-guy-with-a-gun-theory-debunked ↗

@approxinfinity

That was the very first link that came up on Google. I personally do not and have not watched Fox News or any of the networks for a while now. On the other hand, you must watch it quite a bit because you seem to know all about it.

@JayHawkFanToo I know more about the content of the links you post than you do? We're getting somewhere! :joy: Im glad you're not reading Fox.

Tell me man, are any of these conservative sites worth a look in your opinion?

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/nov/22/conservative-websites-media-bubble ↗

8/7/18 - Links below. ANTIFA thugs doing what ANTIFA thugs do. Black Lives Matter thugs interrupt a police officers wedding. And the leftist politicians endorse harassment as a preferred method of protest (and remember, when this stuff is done, the left is silent). The left has normalized harassment, in place of good old fashioned debate. You'll find the leftist thugs spitting, destroying property, and engaging in other vile conduct. It began during the campaign when it was the left that targeted and assaulted Trump supporters. Physical attacks. Vandalism. A group to be proud of there on the left. And as we know, the leftists believe that the rights under the Constitution only apply to them -- their m.o. is to shut down free speech, to attempt to intimidate, to pressure social media to silence the right. Those rational voices on the left are being drowned out. They don't speak up. They don't condemn. They are being pulled farther and farther down the rat hole. So when the left determines that anything goes, well, you can imagine the media coverage of Trump supporters confronted Cory Booker, or Kamala Harris, or Elizabeth (Pocahantas) Warren, or Maxine Waters at restaurants or at their homes. The last link is the best link.

The reality is that a return to civility is sorely needed. Good old fashioned debate and freedom of speech. Both talking and listening. Doesn't meant it will be pleasant or lacking in harsh words. But try mentioning it to leftist crew. They'll scream, spit, tell you to f-off, and try to shout you down.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/08/07/berkeley-police-slammed-for-antifa-related-mugshot-tweets-after-violent-rally.html ↗

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6035539/Black-Lives-Matter-protesters-crash-wedding-cop-fatally-shot-unarmed-Stephon-Clark.html ↗

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/25/politics/maxine-waters-trump-officials/index.html ↗

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jun/22/protesters-descend-kirstjen-nielsens-home-no-justi/ ↗

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/20/politics/kirstjen-nielsen-mexican-restaurant-protest/index.html ↗

http://thefederalist.com/2016/11/22/meet-intolerant-vulgarians-dirtbag-left/ ↗

@HighEliteMajor Trump has energized the radical left that's for sure. Their behavior is as disgusting to me as Trumps over the top rhetoric.

At this point, my only hope is that both parties continue to drift further and further away from the middle.

That will finally leave room for an independent to run for humanitarian reason's only. Not for greed or power. But simply to serve their fellow countrymen.

8/8/18 - A man who lived the fight. A man who has perspective. Jim Brown.

"I'm going to give you the real deal: I'm an American,” Brown said in an interview with ThePostGame. “I don't desecrate my flag and my national anthem. I'm not gonna do anything against the flag and national anthem. I'm going to work within those situations. But this is my country, and I'll work out the problems, but I'll do it in an intelligent manner."

Look at the attacks on Dak Prescott from the cowardly left after his statement. Standard issue for the leftists. No way that he can actually think for himself. Name calling, insults, the norm for the left.

Don't ever, for a moment, believe that the kneelers love and respect this country. The kneelers look at this country with disgust (as does much of the left). And it is why they are the enemy. Anyone that looks at this country with disgust is my enemy. Because without this country, I have nothing. Folks love this country. Folks would die for this country. Folks would kill for this country. Folks would defend this country to their last breath. And the kneelers can't comprehend why they are viewed with such contempt. Protest, complain, march on Washington. Have at it. But when you turn to insulting our country, don't expect those that love this country to simply turn the other cheek.

http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2018/08/08/hall-famer-jim-brown-says-hed-never-kneel-during-anthem-will-always-respect-flag.html ↗

While Brown said he preferred if players would stand for the national anthem, he also respected the players’ right to do what they want — even if it is to kneel.

“Well, if you take the bottom line, what are we talking about? We’re talking about freedom to express one’s self, and if you don’t break any rules then you have that particular right,” he said.

Ehh my white brother was murdered by his white ex-wife and the white police officers did nothing about it. It’s not just a race thing. The police are genuinely bad at their job and like most people many are lazy which give the rest of them a bad name as well.

Illegal immigration is a major issue here. I’ll bet 10-15% of the local population is undocumented. The problem is many of these productive people have been denied citizenship for over a decade inspite of every legal attempt to become just that legal citizens. One of my farmers just was granted citizenship after 12 years of applying and having no record and paying taxes religiously. It’s a broken process that many just give up on.

@dylans Only going to get worse too.

People don't realize how inept new police officers are going to be from here on out.

Why be a cop anymore? It used to be a good way for good people to serve their fellow man. Now, It is a shitty way for average people to make a very mediocre living. They get crapped on from all sides. It requires more school (note this is not training), it pays less, the retirement is worse, and people hate you. The quality of people applying for the job has only gotten worse.

@Kcmatt7 I’m afraid so and if it’s this bad for white people it’s only worse for others

I keep checking this thread occasionally to see if HEM in dropped the N word yet. Nope. Uses "kneelers" instead.

DanR said:

I keep checking this thread occasionally to see if HEM in dropped the N word yet. Nope. Uses "kneelers" instead.

Idk that I’d go that far, I wouldn’t say I agree with all that HEM has posted but a difference of opinion doesn’t make someone racist. I don’t get the why the left is that way. “You see it our way or you’re a racist, bigot nazi!”. Especially from the group that wants to take away free speech and the right to bare arms, which is exactly what the nazi did. Imagine businesses working that way, if you use Jim’s plumbing you’re a racist nazi! , only use Jeff’s plumbing.

@kjayhawks @DanR never says bad or negative things about people.

@Crimsonorblue22 riiight lol

@kjayhawks I was being serious.

@Crimsonorblue22 yes because insinuating that someone is racist is nice, wow.

@kjayhawks I think @DanR stands up for people.

@Crimsonorblue22 I don’t think insulting people or accusations of racism is standing up for anyone especially when he hasn’t post anything remotely racist. I’m fine if folks disagree but that’s a little out there I think. I’m a little worried your gonna start calling me racial slurs for disagreeing with you, after all that makes you a racist.

@kjayhawks the reason I stood up for him is because we are not racist. I will not say another word, you are not understanding me at all. I am the most easy going person there is. I will shut up.

@HighEliteMajor You said "Don’t ever, for a moment, believe that the kneelers love and respect this country. The kneelers look at this country with disgust (as does much of the left). And it is why they are the enemy. Anyone that looks at this country with disgust is my enemy. Because without this country, I have nothing. Folks love this country. Folks would die for this country. Folks would kill for this country. Folks would defend this country to their last breath. And the kneelers can’t comprehend why they are viewed with such contempt. Protest, complain, march on Washington. Have at it. But when you turn to insulting our country, don’t expect those that love this country to simply turn the other cheek."

Isn't kneeling just another form of protest? Didn't people die for our country for the right to protest? Even if it's protest that offends people? I think our flag, our anthem, certainly our constitution gives people the right to protest in sometimes reprehensible ways.

@Crimsonorblue22 I honestly don’t think you even know what your point is. HEM is posting stuff that Danr doesn’t agree with (which is perfectly fine) so Danr is waiting for HEM to post some racial slurs, insinuating that he is racist. HEM hasn’t posted anything racist or used racial slurs on here, that would make a person believe he is in fact racist. Danr believes he is racist because they don’t see the kneeling situation the same. Ik Danr is a Democrat(I’m not a republican, don’t call me one please) he has even said it I believe. I personally and several other people that I know are to, are tired of hearing how anyone that ever disagrees with a Democrat is “ racist”. That IMO is part of the reason Trump won, that’s been the only argument Democrats have had for the last 3 elections, you cant vote for the other guy he’s racist. Hell even Ben Carson was called racist because he was a republican. I’m willing to bet right now regardless of who the republican nominee is for the next election I guarantee you they will be called racist repeatedly from the left regardless of race, gender or religion. I believe that to not be a nice or logical thing to do. I enjoy talking with you @Crimsonorblue22 and @DanR but I’m standing up for people that are being insulted and called racist daily in this country for no other reason than disagreeing with a Democrat.

These labels for people like "kneelers", whether you believe them to be racist or are not, are a vehicle to dismiss and hate your neighbor more easily.

I find this line of thinking in your last post divisive, deeply disturbing, and I believe it leads down a dark path where people act impulsively without rational thought.

Why are you trying so hard to dismiss the humanity of people you disagree with, @HighEliteMajor ?

@approxinfinity I 100% agree with what Jim Brown said in the article, it’s their right to do the protest, I just wouldn’t do it that way. Maybe HEM did go to far with some of what he wrote in your opinion and that’s fine but your vehicle comment is no different than what people are saying and doing to Dak, they want people to hate him for not kneeling. That’s the issue with politics and parties, one side can do it but the other side can’t. I do my best to respect others opinions even it’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard. I’ll be the first to admit I do fail at it from time to time.

When Saul converted to Christianity from Judaism, and changed his name to Paul, he had very different ways of addressing Gentile congregations and Jewish congregations. When he preached to Jewish congregations, he pointed out issues he had with the Jewish faith. When he preached to Gentile congregations, he spoke ill of Jews, calling them "uncircumcised mongrels" and other foul names.

This was not a good look for Paul.

We shouldn't speak of those we disagree with by labeling them names, repeating those names over and over in a derogatory manner, and talking about them as subhuman. It's evil. It's just evil.

We should speak of the things we disagree about, and let rationality rule the day.

Maybe this thread should be closed, I’ve already said more on politics and crap I usually don’t waste my time with. I still love everyone on this thread regardless of their opinions that I agree or disagree with, I just gonna move on and stick to sports my friends.

@kjayhawks There's a big difference here between what people other than us do, and what we do.

As far as I'm concerned, what antifa, or a few dozen protestors somewhere are doing is nothing compared to what we do, right here, right now. We can control ourselves. We can act with dignity and compassion. Let the outliers be outliers, not fodder for our own hate.

Let the murder-death-kill channels shill their dirty swill. It doesn't matter nearly as much as what we do, each and every one of us.

8/9/18 - So now we are treated to the spectacle of a publically funded organization again attacking anything conservative. Planned Parenthood, with its public funding supporting its fraudulent organization, will buy advertising to attack Trumps nominee, Brett Kavenaugh. I cannot imagine a more sick pursuit than to make your life's work the slaughter of innocent human life based on convenience. Ah, the joy it must bring the soul. Perhaps the sickest organization in this country. Public funding of this twisted assembly of jovial murderers is the true abortion.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/400949-planned-parenthood-launches-six-figure-supreme-court-ad-campaign ↗

@kjayhawks this thread is a glaring example of what is wrong right now in our country. If you do not agree with the "left" you are automatically labeled a racist. Its pathetic and laughable.

@HighEliteMajor Agree 100%

@kjayhawks

Racist - a person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another.

Nothing in there about having to use epithets.

If a person shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, they are, by definition, a racist.

If a person believes a particular race is superior to another, they are, by definition, a racist.

The real trouble is, many people spend more time worrying about being called a racist than looking inward to see if their words and actions showed discrimination. Whether their words or action expressed prejudice. Whether their words or actions conveyed disrespect or disdain. That's the problem. Maybe they don't even intend to express racist attitudes, but their words and actions suggest this superiority, or an inferiority of another race. Maybe they don't intend to express such a bias, but they engage in behavior that is discriminatory. That's still, by definition racist, but they will only have the opportunity to change that (if they want to) if someone points out that particular words, actions and behaviors indicate prejudice or discrimination.

I don't really care if I encounter someone who doesn't use epithets or slurs. If that person doesn't show me a normal measure of human respect simply because of the color of my skin, that person is a dictionary definition racist, and I don't have to hear them say the N word to prove it.

So don't look for epithets and slurs to see if someone is a racist. Look for words and actions that imply superiority of one race or another, or inferiority of one race or another. And then look for opportunities to encourage better behavior. That will make us all better for it.

@justanotherfan I agree a 100% buddy. I just dont think HEM is a racist and I personally don't agree with calling someone that who has different views than you, that's my point. Not that if you don't use racial slurs you can't be racist. It's a common thing these days from Democrats either you agree with them or you're a racist. There is very little to no middle ground. I didn't like Obama's healthcare or Foreign policy, I am considered a racist for doing so. I honestly think Obama and I would get along fine talking about basketball and whatnot, I'd be happy to meet him. I have no ill will towards him, i just didn't agree with some of his political agenda. I personally am an Independent, Patriot that stands for justice and Equality. This will be my last post on thread, someone else can have the last word if they want no biggie, good day to everyone.

8/9/18 Err on the side of free speech. I see that Adam Jones and the conspiracy theorists at Infowars have been banned by Facebook, YouTube, and other such media. Twitter, though, has resisted the ban. Really all of these companies have evidenced the typical liberal bias. Widely prevalent. Initially, of course, these are private companies. They can handle matters as they choose. But what is the best way for these companies to handle speech and content? Very simple. Be an American. When it comes to political speech, opinions, these companies should permit a very wide berth. Free speech makes you uncomfortable. And we can dislike it .. or hate it. Much like my opinion with the kneelers. I hate it. I don't respect the opinion. I don't respect those that engage in the conduct. But our country has many opinions. My only issue with wanting it stopped is the "when" -- because the employer has the right to dictate the work place. A simple an unassailable point. If the NFL and players agree to permit the kneeling, then I have choice to make based on the employer's assent. I may not like it, but if someone doesn't want to stand for the anthem as a spectator, or elsewhere, that's free speech. On social media, the thought police governing expression of opinions is now a significant threat to our dialogue as a nation. We should all fully resist the urge to support social media banning thought and expressions. We can draw the lines at matters that equate to crimes. But if Antifa wants to decry the white man, or InfoWars wants to speculate on 9/11 theories, let it be. If the speech is criminal, such as threats or communications in support of terrorism, for example, then that should be line. The same line that is present when you open your mouth. How can anyone in America, knowing the first amendment, support anything less? Here's how. They are the true fascists. It's easy to see. Easy to diagnose. Where do you stand?

@HighEliteMajor so you think that Alex Jones saying "Hillary Clinton is a frickin intergalactic alien" is a healthy talking point?

Terrorists like to recruit followers with falsehoods and assertions that are impossible to keep/prove (1000 virgins for the martyrs). They prey on minds that are receptive for something intriguing and exciting and primed for reinforcement of beliefs, the seeds of which were planted when they were young and susceptible.

I am not sure what Adam Jones' motivation is/was, but his tactics seem eerily similar.

Obviously the owners of the platforms felt he crossed a line.

I think the interesting question is, where is that line that leads to a ban? When Al-Qaeda crossed it, there wasn't as much uproar. But I would like to think that it's in everyone's best interest to know what that line is (for Facebook, Google, Apple, Twitter, etc.) and how it's defined, so that it is consistently enforced.

It would lead to a healthier discussion about whether the line is too lenient or too strict and in what ways... I'm sure the arguments would be just a passionate, but that's a more healthy debate rather than arguing about act made in apparent solidarity but without revealing the rationale or logic. For instance, did they all use the same criteria? Did they all decide to ban because of the same concern or violation, or did they each do it for a different reason?

Guess I’m a racist. I can’t stand stupid people.

@bskeet It certainly would be healthier to have that debate. I think thats where our mainstream news corps have utterly failed us. That would be an interesting, non-partisan and viable talking point to engage the viewing audience with. Instead, we get divisive entrenched garbage that keeps us locked in a partisan war.

We are a nation steered by ratings. Our tyranny of the majority listens to celebrities.

@HighEliteMajor I've been saying for years the left has fascist tendencies as they curtail speech on campuses. When Condoleeza Rice is banned from giving a commencement address at Rutgers, what else is it than fascism? The somewhat silly bakery debate has fascist tendencies. If a businessperson wants to exercise his religious beliefs that way, why should he be forced to go against what he believes? I could go on and on.

I think there is this thought that somehow American laws and rights transcend our borders and is the law of all nations. The thought being is a non citizen has the same rights as an American and Americans would be treated as non citizens??? Thereby creating this mass hysteria that anybody that is off kilter most be silenced and their platform taking away. Hence Adam Jones is compared to terrorist, even though he has never preached violence. . Which in theory would be the right and just thing to do. However as we are seeing in America's two party system. Their is a big push by the DNC and liberals to shut up opposing views, without even having a debate. So it raises a big question and extreme problems. What if someone is silenced merely because they have a differing view? That doesn't fit Liberal and DNC agenda. Will they be silenced too?

There was a NBA basketball player that stated he believed the world was flat. Yet his platform wasn't taking away. He wasn't kicked off Facebook, Google, Apple, and so on. Even though he was clearly using the media platform and his status in the NBA to preach his beliefs. So why the different punishment. Because one is preaching a political view and the other isn't. So if one toes that DNC line they can say and belief whatever they want. Cross that DNC line and you will be silenced. Not sure that is freedom of speech?

It's been my experience that when a person/group resorts to name calling. Any chance of comprise or a healthy debate is lost, and is replaced with harsh feelings. Just a thought.

@DoubleDD The difference btwn flatearthers and Alex Jones is that Alex Jones deliberately used these platforms to incite hatred and violence (unless you got some seriously aggro alt-alt-flatearthers in mind)

Over the years, I have frequently heard from the right that we should allow businesses to do whats best for business, even when large numbers of people oppose the companies' actions. Think gun companies, Walmart, etc.

It is interesting that in this case the right does not want to allow companies like Facebook and Twitter to do what they want to do, even though they believe that their actions are best for their businesses.

Facebook has been under all sorts of fire for their impact in mob mentalities being cultivated in other countries. We Americans exceptionalists are not so exceptional that we don't have our own mob tendencies.

Yes, the social media platforms have created a mess, but if you believe in laissez faire economics, we should let them sort this problem out as they see fit, doesn't the private sector know best?

If we don't think media platforms like Twitter and Facebook should be restricting hate speech, maybe we should take a glance at the gigantic elephant-fox in the room filtering their content a whole lot more.

@approxinfinity Those are valid points, but I have a bigger problem when it's the government at any level, or even grassroots organizations, forcing people to conform to a certain viewpoint. It reeks of fascism in my mind. It's telling someone 'you can't think that way' and then punishing them for it.

@wissox Do you have a big problem with the Trump administration being in bed with Fox News? Do you think it makes sense for Bill Shine, former co-president of Fox News and longtime friend of Sean Hannity to now join the Trump staff?

I can guarantee you that an agenda for what Fox viewers are allowed to think is being shaped by those people. Fox is the source that the President encourages people to accept as "real news" while all other sources are "fake news".

"Pointing to black on black crime doesn’t solve this. When black on black crime occurs, someone can be held accountable for the crime."

Not really. No one wants to snitch in black on black crime, so no one's held accountable.

@approxinfinity

I see your point, but I think we are comparing apples to oranges here. Not sure how we can make a connection with a box store to a mega social media outlet. As one sells products and the other a platform to express and share. Also not sure Conservatives as a whole really care about the fate of Alex Jones. Just not really seeing a big outbreak on the issue.

It is a tough topic to debate from any point of view. As there has to be some kind of oversight on these social media sights. I think we all would agree?

Sadly I have no answers to solve the issue. The problem as I see it, isn't Capitalism. I'm on aboard with you, on letting companies rise and fall as they may. As long as freedom is maintained the market will create what is needed. Look at Fox News it was created to fill a void of non Conservative view points. Now it's the Number 1 News channel in the country, even besting the world wide giant CNN. Free market is a good thing. People will in the end decide for themselves if they are allowed freedom, and Companies will rise and fall because of those choices.

This isn't the problem. It's the Government and a certain political party pushing to suppress that very freedom, and trying to seize control of the platform, thereby dictating the what can be expressed and what can't. Scary indeed.

@DoubleDD The government didn't make these platforms remove Alex Jones. I also misspoke in earlier post where I implied Twitter removed him. They didn't while others did. And this proves that this is a decision very much being left up to private industry for better or worse.

What you said about Fox, that they filled a need for conservative news, I think we should discuss. Again, for better or worse, private industry was allowed to sell a product without interference. That product is being marketed as news, but our generation is old enough to remember when the expectation was that news was supposed to be an unbiased portrayal of events. I.e. there should be no "liberal" news or "conservative" news.

A desire to seek out "liberal news" or "conservative news" should be an acknowledgement that in fact you are no longer seeking out "news" but rather you are seeking out an opinion. Not only is it tenuous to call an opinion "news" it is also tenuous to call it "conservative" when it is so clearly in bed with a political party and that party's president. Should we assume that no matter what the party does every action is conservative? No! The news was once called the fourth branch of government. An impartial watchdog. It should remain free from political influence.

Fox News is neither conservative nor news.

@approxinfinity I used to watch Fox a lot. Although I'm still conservative in many ways, I grew tired of their act. I'm afraid they haven't provided an alternative to 'liberal' news outlets. And they're getting worse as Laura Ingraham proved yesterday.

@approxinfinity

Well to be fair what choice does one have? Sure it would be nice to watch a perceived news outlet and get both sides of the story. However this is no longer the case. I myself bounce around.

Almost all news is biased in way or another. So goes the argument. The concept of a pure journalist is dead. Almost all have an agenda and a political view to push. And all have a boss that signs the checks.

I'm not sure where I heard or read it. Yet the saying goes, "he who controls the media, controls the minds of the masses". This is all too true in today's climate. The days of good honest debate and comprise are dead. Look no further than the Russian Collison, and Trump? You have CNBC's top news star pushing the narrative that Trump is a Soviet spy. And you expect a Conservative or a regular joe to watch that and say yea that's good fair and balanced reporting? Especially when you have no true evidence to back such claims.

I don't think so. I said to you once before that the DNC and Liberals created Trump? Well the DNC and liberals created Fox news. If one can't understand/see the control the DNC and Liberals have over the Media platforms, then they will never understand why Fox is the #1 news media platform in America, and Conservatives talk shows dominant Am Dial/radio.

Some people just refuse to be brain washed.

8/11/18 - PGA Championship. Watching and I can't get enough Tiger Woods. When Woods hit the scene, it was amazing. But I then went into phase where all I could do was root against Tiger. Kind of that "everyone hates the Yankees" thing. His overwhelming success bred a desire to see him fail. Now, though, it's completely the opposite. All I want to do is see him win this tournament -- win another major. When Woods returned, he couldn't play in the WGC tourney this spring. Hadn't done enough to qualify. How ridiculous. Woods should have a lifetime pass to any tourney he wants to play in. I'm sure the tour players feel the same. He is the GREATEST golfer in the last 30 years. He's Nicklaus. He's Palmer. He made the tour what it is today. He's the most dominant player in any sport in recent memory. And I sure hope the guy can find a way to win another major. Can't wait to see him in they Ryder Cup.

@HighEliteMajor I'm glad he's competitive again. He's been through hell and back in his personal life. Being groomed since childhood to be a sports legend doesn't yield normal people. Woods seems to have learned what it is to be a man on his own terms, the hard way.

8/12/18 - Big surprise. A coordinated effort among newspapers to attack the president. Truth is, that's all it's been since he started winning primaries. He fought back. He took the fight directly to people through Twitter. And the national media when bananas. They could not take their credibility being challenged. "Fake news" is the entire package -- failing to report successes, minimizing positive news, running "commentary" as it is news, holding yourself out as an objective source while attacking based on political beliefs. It's the same song and dance. Now, newspapers are coordinating editorials to combat the attack on free press. REALITY CHECK - ITS AN ATTACK ON THE PROPAGANDA WING OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY. The press was Obama's lap dog. Where was the watchdog press then? The mainstream media is a joke, and President Trump has called them on it. Now they whine like spoiled brats they are.

https://money.cnn.com/2018/08/11/media/boston-globe-free-press-editorial/index.html ↗

@HighEliteMajor Thanks for not saying he's the GOAT and starting another GOAT debate like we had a few months ago in basketball.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/man-who-killed-florida-father-markeis-mcglockton-charged-manslaughter-n900181 ↗

About time they brought charges. Just hope that this man gets convicted. Some days it feels like we are closer to the Wild West than we are to a modern society.

8/15/18 The perfect example of "fiction" from the KC Star. The Star has been on the open borders, pro "bring any immigrant to the country regardless of background, values, and security" bandwagon for quite some time. No bigger evidence is the laughable front page coverage of some anonymous Lawrence chemist. Today, the Star again provides front page reporting on this non-story. Read the story. The Star claims that the proper deportation proceedings led to a "grass roots revolt." Again, a joke. There was no revolt. A small number of folks holding signs isn't a revolt. Online petitions aren't a "revolt." Just purposeful and dishonest hyperbole. The Star, by it's prior front page coverage, created the purported importance of the news. Try this -- follow the law. Enforce the law. Send the illegals back to where they came from. Every one of them has a sob story. Most have families. But that's not the standard that should be utilized. Let's focus on getting folks here legally, and with high scrutiny. That's the stark difference between left and right. Remember, the KC Star and the left want everyone to be here. They operate on feelings, and the law, and logic are secondary. See the last three links. The left doesn't care about that story. EXTREMIST MUSLIMS ARE A SCOURGE ON THIS EARTH AND SHOULD NOT BE PERMITTED IN THIS COUNTRY UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE. The problem is, when they come, how do you ferret out the freaks? Donald Trump, Jr. made the best comment during the campaign. if you were given a bowl of Skittles and you knew two or three were poisonous, would you eat one? Remember, entry to this country is a privilege and not a right. We can scrutinize who we allow in with great detail. And I'm always interested to hear the silence -- the crickets -- from the "other Muslims" when it comes to the extremists. Do they speak out? Do they condemn? Do they create groups that combat the extremists (those that murder, rape, and destroy) and challenge their approach? Sound familiar?

And the fact is, the story that is contained in the final links are far more newsworthy that some chemist in Lawrence who failed to ensure that he was legal -- the most important thing in his life, perhaps. But not important enough to take care of, apparently. This is the KC Star manufacturing the importance of news, to fit their political narrative.

https://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article216660415.html ↗

https://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article200121229.html ↗

https://fox43.com/2018/08/14/sheriff-woman-arrested-at-extremist-muslim-new-mexico-compound-moved-to-federal-custody/ ↗

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/08/08/man-arrested-at-extremist-muslim-new-mexico-compound-was-training-kids-to-commit-school-shootings-documents.html ↗

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/08/14/woman-arrested-at-extremist-muslim-new-mexico-compound-moved-to-federal-custody-sheriff-says.html ↗

You should learn the stories before calling them sob stories.

@HighEliteMajor when was the last time you vocally protested crimes by white supremacists? Yes, this does sound familiar. You want ethnic groups to be responsible for the actions of other members of the same ethnic group, it seems. That's how I read you.

Unfortunately the KC Star has turned into a joke. When I read the newspaper I like to read pieces that are not bias and report the actual news. However, the Star does not do that anymore.

@wissox doesn't everyone have a "sob story" nobody's life is perfect. It's called life.

@Woodrow I've said it here before in this thread even I think. Before calling them sob stories, learn about the refugees coming to our country from Central America. A bus ride back to Honduras or El Salvador would be a death sentence for some of my students I taught for the last 6 years. Escaping MS13 is one of those stories I heard. 2 wonderful 16 year old girls got here from San Pedro Sula, Honduras, the worlds most dangerous city. Do you really favor sending them back there? Todays conservatives do I guess when they say "send them all back" without even thinking about what that means. It also means vast number of unfilled jobs because the refugees Americans malign, do a lot of jobs that bring strawberries to your table, or milk to your wheaties, or wheaties to your milk for that matter. Your manicured lawns and office parks will be less so as more and more immigrants are being sent home.

Gosh, the moral compass of the country is broken. American society seems to be so much more jaded, suspicious, judgmental, polarized, self-serving and reactionary.

Hope this trend has peaked and we regress to the mean soon.

If we lock down the borders and send all the illegals home? Who will pick the strawberries, mow the lawns, clean the houses of our wealthy? I mean they do the jobs Americans don't want to do.

LMAO

I wonder why Americans don't want to work those jobs? UM could it be because they don't pay enough? The problem with letting anybody and everybody with a sob story come in (which by the way is everybody). You flood the market with unskilled and uneducated labor. Driving down the cost for unskilled and uneducated labor. As Illegals will work for dirt cheap. Even the Black communities are suffering from undocumented and illegal immigration. As they are being undercut by the plethora of cheap labor that our current immigration approach seems to be.

Please stop with the you don't care dribble? Everybody cares.

Everything is cause and effect. Sadly I'm finding out Libs/DNC never think about the effects just the cause.

Yet next week the topic will be hourly wages aren't nearly high enough under the Trump economy. He should be impeached?

It isn't as simple as "those damn illegals are stealing our jobs!" Without the cheap labor, produce probably gets made elsewhere instead of here. Which is a lot of money lost. Add in that if the price of the service/product increases, people won't spend as much elsewhere.

Of course, it could result in people spending more money in the U.S. but that seems unlikely. The main problem is that the increase in the cost of the service/product is more than the tariff to have the product made somewhere else. If the service cost increases, the service will probably no longer exist.

This is not as simple as "Americans would take over those jobs." Because it is simply not true. I work for a company that does manual labor in many different trades. And the problem isn't pay. It isn't demand from the consumers. The problem is that we can't hire enough people. Most people don't want to work in the heat and do a manual labor job when they can sit in the A/C and get paid enough money to not work outside. And I can't blame them. I weed-eated for a company for an entire summer. Thousands of hours kicking sand and rocks back up into my face. And that was the job that made me sure I was going to graduate college and get an office job lol.

The main reason though, that American's wouldn't take those jobs and that it makes no sense to kick out all illegals, is the fact that their cost of living would increase significantly and basically mean they were getting paid the same shitty salary we are paying Mexicans right now, only they are busting their ass twice as hard to live an equally shitty life.

You keep saying inciting hate and violence. Well for 8 years I got called a racist because I didn't vote for and didn't agree with everything the previous president wanted to do. Where was everybody then? Nobody seemed to have a problem calling, and grouping people into a so called racist group just because they disagreed. Where was the justice warriors? No not a peep from Libs and the DNC. You know those fair minded people that just want to sit down and compromise?

Then people wonder why the love for Trump? Really?

@DoubleDD

Not voting for a president on policy grounds does not make you a racist. The trouble with President Obama was that a lot of people claimed to disagree on policy grounds, but then trotted out silly arguments like:

1. He's a Muslim (untrue, but even if true, there's nothing in US law to prohibit a Muslim president)

2. He was not born in the US (also untrue).

Simply put, lots of people (not pointing at you, just outlining the arguments) said their quibble with Obama was policy, but argued things that were simply veiled racism like anti-Muslim rhetoric and birtherism. Both attempt to suggest that Barack Obama was not "American" enough to be president.

It was hard to take some prominent politicians seriously when they said their issue with Obama was policy related, all the while seeing them "like" or even personally circulate jokes comparing President Obama and his family to gorillas, etc. Those are not policy arguments. Those are arguments rooted in racism. Again, not saying you did any of these things, just that lots of people did do these things while also arguing that their issues with Obama were policy driven.

Now, I will say that too many people painted with too broad a brush regarding racism against President Obama. There were some reasonable criticisms of the President. He was not perfect. I had my own criticisms of him, even though I supported him throughout his presidency.

Part of that, however, was that too often the chorus against him was led by individuals with racial undertones to their arguments, making it very difficult for individuals with true policy issues to make themselves heard.

That's what makes racism so ugly. We can't even have a reasonable policy discussion because those peddling their hate suck up all the airspace around the issue, preventing reasonable people from actually talking about the issue.

@Kcmatt7

You make a great point. In 2012, Georgia ↗ had to have prisoners in the state's penitentiary system pick fruit due to a worker shortage.

The thing about harvesting crops is that, when doing so by hand, because you are paid by volume, as the article says, you have to 1) work very hard and 2) be very good at it to make a decent wage.

Many workers in the US don't want to do that because the time and effort it takes to become skilled enough in the job to make a decent wage is very taxing.

There's another ↗ round ↗ of articles ↗ out over the last year ↗ detailing ↗ the same ↗ problem ↗.

Part of the issue with this is perception. Many people, once they see a minority class doing certain work, devalue that work, making it less desirable as a career.

@justanotherfan The better policy decision would be additionally funding a program for registering current Illegal Immigrants and offering them all Work Visa's that are good for as long as they pay taxes and don't commit a felony.

Additionally, you severely punish anyone who houses or hires illegals that don't register in an attempt to save money on taxes. This could be done using a whistleblower/bounty law where ratting out a company that is hiring illegals would be given half of the money resulting from the fines. The fines of course would have to be so big that it wouldn't be even close to worth hiring an unregistered illegal.

I have no issues with a cheap workforce. But they do need to pay taxes because they do use things provided by our government and the taxpayers. It's that simple. About 1.7% of the U.S. population is Illegal Immigrants (12.5M estimated). And people pretend like the shitty jobs they fill is what is hurting the country. That is inherently false. What is hurting the country more than having a great supply of cheap labor is that we aren't collecting billions of dollars in taxes. (By my estimate, roughly $37.5B should be collected by the 12.5M illegal immigrants who live here). I do know that some of them pay taxes, hoping for immunity some day. But, I would say that is not the case for most. Even if half were, we are talking about a very large amount of money. This also doesn't include employers who should be paying an additional $19B into Social Security and Medicaid for their portion of Employer's taxes. Which, again, is a large number even if cut in half.

We simply need to capitalize on the low wage workforce, not attack it because we keep forgetting history and how immigrants coming in to do low wage jobs is literally how the country was built from day 1. And has been how this country has thrived. How many more times do we need to learn this lesson? Italians, Irish and Asians have all done this same exact thing. The U.S. is still standing.

What is funny to me, it is always those who are scared of someone being better than them that fight this the most. Most Irish around the Civil War Era were FOR slavery simply because they didn't want the competition for low wage jobs in the North. This, to me, is what most middle-class American's are scared of today. Competition. Conservatives today crack me up because they are the biggest Champions of "Competition and Capitalism and a Free Market", but fear all of those things the moment you bring up a Minority population coming in and "stealing all the good jobs that could go to Americans."

@justanotherfan

Yea I was never big on the whole Birth certificate issue as some where. Yet just as in the case of Trump not showing his tax returns. Obama could've brought that issue to a close quite quickly just by showing his birth certificate so much sooner than he did. Once Obama revealed his birth certificate the issue was dead. A lesson Trump it seems hasn't learned yet.

Sometimes people create unnecessary turmoil. Even if the unfounded claims are indeed based in craziness.

As for the claim of the this mythical movement not to elect Obama as president because he was black? I do believe is unfounded. Sure there were people that didn't vote for Obama because he was black. Just like there were people that voted for him because he was black. Just as there are persons of color that won't vote for a person that is white, women that don't vote men, and vice versa. There will always be these types of persons on the fringes, but hardly main stream. Let alone big enough to sway an election. After all Obama was elected president, and twice at that.

I think? Just an opinion? You had a few isolated incidents of racist persons getting way too much attention by certain media outlets. Thereby creating this hysteria that the KKK is back large and in charge, and that all right leaning white people are racist. When in fact it was just a few misguided individuals, that have some serious social issues. Yet you still see and hear some of this after math on a lot of talking points and media outlets. The theme being now, if a person voted for Trump they are some how racist? Seems a bit unfair.

Just me again, but I think that maybe we as a society are jumping the gun with some of the claims that are being thrown around in this hostile political environment we find ourselves today. To be labeled a racist is quite serious. Case in point? People are losing jobs and being barred from social gatherings all because they voted for Trump..... Doesn't seem like a fair and free society to me? Again I concur they are isolated situations carried out by misguided persons. Yet there seems not to be much pup on this issue from the media. Which only leaves some Americans to believe that the media is indeed bias.

The real question we should be asking? Why did middle America and the Rust Belt abandon the DNC party this last election? That's the question the DNC should be asking it's self. And claiming it was racism, isn't a legit and just answer.

@DoubleDD Obama released 11 years of tax returns as a presidential candidate. You're comparing horseshoes and hand grenades.

approxinfinity said:

@DoubleDD Obama released 11 years of tax returns as a presidential candidate. You're comparing horseshoes and hand grenades.

Actually I think if you go back read what I was saying it was quite comparable. Both withheld a private document that so many wanted to see.

Obama relented finally and revealed his birth certificate. The issue went away. Where as Trump still hasn't and the issue still persists.

@Kcmatt7

Its a valid point you make. Yet I would counter if we didn't make it so easy for persons to stay home smoke dope and play video games all day with all our social programs. They'd have to get a job. Hence no more man power shortage.

@approxinfinity

Also, it should be noted that while presidential candidates traditionally release their taxes, it is not traditionally expected that they release their birth certificate.

The notion that Obama should have released his birth certificate simply because someone with racial motivations decided to question it is in itself a form of racism - that as a minority, Obama should have to answer any question with proof, no matter how absurd or ridiculous, in order to prove his legitimacy.

People often overlook this as a subtle form of racism - that minorities must provide proof any time any non-minority questions them or what they are doing, or satisfy the questions of every non-minority before they are legitimized - somewhat like police requiring ID when they stop minorities doing every day activities, but that's another issue for another day.

I have heard, throughout the years, that Obama should have released his birth certificate, his college grades, his law license and his admissions letters to college simply because someone questioned it, and "he could clear it up by releasing the documents."

President Obama rightly recognized this as a form of racism, that if he provided proof for every challenge, the flood of challenges would never cease.

@DoubleDD sources? Stats that can be checked? Where is your basis for that statement coming from?

@DoubleDD see what @justanotherfan said... thats exactly the point here.

@approxinfinity

I think you have me mistaken. I don't really care about a politician releasing his birth certificate or tax returns. There is no law that says they must. Plus I'm pretty sure the FBI and IRS do a fine job of vetting persons running the for office.

I'm also not comparing the two. I'm just pointing a person can save themselves a lot of trouble by just showing the people what they want to know.

Kcmatt7 said:

@DoubleDD sources? Stats that can be checked? Where is your basis for that statement coming from?

This isn't what you're looking for but I though it was a decent read.

People dropping from the rolls ↗

@DoubleDD The IRS cares about whether you are paying your taxes. I don't think they care about much else, and yes, I think we can assume that Donald Trump pays his taxes. The purpose of providing your tax returns as a candidate pertains more to the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution which states:

“No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.”

And it has been standard behavior for presidential candidates to provide their tax returns.

When was the last time you heard of a President's citizenship being questioned? Yes, I do think by the time a candidate is running for office his citizenship has been pretty well vetted.

When has the last time you heard of Impeachment when the president hasn't done anything?

The Emolument Clause maybe be the standard but it's not the law. There is no law that says a person has to show their tax returns to serve in the government.

@DoubleDD

Article I charged that Clinton lied to the grand jury concerning:
- the nature and details of his relationship with Lewinsky
- prior false statements he made in the Jones deposition
- prior false statements he allowed his lawyer to make characterizing Lewinsky's affidavit
- his attempts to tamper with witnesses

Article III charged Clinton with attempting to obstruct justice in the Jones case by:[22]
- encouraging Lewinsky to file a false affidavit
- encouraging Lewinsky to give false testimony if and when she was called to testify
- concealing gifts he had given to Lewinsky that had been subpoenaed
- attempting to secure a job for Lewinsky to influence her testimony
- permitting his lawyer to make false statements characterizing Lewinsky's affidavit
- attempting to tamper with the possible testimony of his secretary Betty Curie
- making false and misleading statements to potential grand jury witnesses

(other articles were dropped)

approxinfinity said:

@DoubleDD

Article I charged that Clinton lied to the grand jury concerning:
- the nature and details of his relationship with Lewinsky
- prior false statements he made in the Jones deposition
- prior false statements he allowed his lawyer to make characterizing Lewinsky's affidavit
- his attempts to tamper with witnesses

Article III charged Clinton with attempting to obstruct justice in the Jones case by:[22]
- encouraging Lewinsky to file a false affidavit
- encouraging Lewinsky to give false testimony if and when she was called to testify
- concealing gifts he had given to Lewinsky that had been subpoenaed
- attempting to secure a job for Lewinsky to influence her testimony
- permitting his lawyer to make false statements characterizing Lewinsky's affidavit
- attempting to tamper with the possible testimony of his secretary Betty Curie
- making false and misleading statements to potential grand jury witnesses

(other articles were dropped)

Come on he lied about having sexual relationships with an intern in the White House. Even if he didn't lie he still had a sexual relationship with an intern in the White House.

And for the record I liked Old Bill. Still do. Even though some stories have come out that he has been a bit too aggressive with the opposite sex.

@DoubleDD He was impeached for lying to a grand jury and obstruction of justice. Had he not done those things, he wouldn't have been impeached.

Do you think obstruction of justice should be an impeachable offense? And, why do you think Trump's lawyers are trying to avoid having him testify?

@justanotherfan Of course, Trump promised to provide his tax returns, so that was a lie. It also took our current President a few years before he acknowledged that Obama's birth certificate was genuine--and then only after repeated pressure during the campaign. A few years during which he continued to claim that he had "people in Hawaii" who had investigated and had discovered amazing evidence about Obama's BCert that Trump promised he would reveal.

The man can't help lying, even when he has no reason to!

@DoubleDD The prohibition against emoluments indeed is the law. The Constitution is the highest law in the land. It is not, perhaps, separately spelled out in federal statutes. But do not say it is not the law!

@mayjay

Well you are a judge even though retired. I'll take your word for it.

@approxinfinity

I think your reaching a bit. Why should Trump talk to Mueller? Mueller has no reason or right to demand such a meeting. Trump hasn't done anything wrong. Mueller is just trying to find some wrong doing. Which I understand what your saying.

Yet it's common knowledge when a person is picked up by police not to say anything until a lawyer is present. Why is that? That is street cred, and basic survival in this world of litigation.

Look I get you loath Trump. Yet he would be stupid to engage in such a conversation. Especially when there is no reason for such a conversation.

Basic street knowledge.

@DoubleDD My point is that Trump firing people due to the Russia investigation, as well as his tweets demanding the investigation to cease, etc could be construed as obstruction of justice, and as @mayjay mentioned, Trump is a habitual liar, and if he were to take the stand, he'd almost certainly get himself a perjury charge as well.

So, your original question was "when was a President impeached for nothing?" and my point was, Trump's actions are not much different than Clinton's. So if you think Trump has done nothing, then Clinton is the comp you seek.

You do know how to tell when a Politician is lying? When their lips are moving. Lmao.

@approxinfinity to go to bed don't bother yourself with me. I'm just stirring the pot.

@DoubleDD Actually, Mueller could just subpoena Trump and make him testify at the grand jury where he would not have the right to an attorney. But Mueller is trying to get a meeting instead in order to avoid a confrontation and possible constitutional crisis.

Trump would have to appear and testify (or plead the 5th, but he could not then make any statements at all--can you imagine?), but only if the lapdog rightwing judges and justices follow the legal precedent sought by the rabid attackers of Bill Clinton. Now that their Darling Donald is in the crosshairs, I have no doubt they will decide Clinton should not have had to appear.

@DoubleDD those fluctuations happen all of the time. When the country had almost no Welfare, the country damn near collapsed...

I'm not saying that I want a ton of people dependent on Welfare. There are a lot of things we waste tax payer money on. But, we are not replacing 12.5M low wage workers with Americans. The effect would largely be something we don't want to see happen.

It has been a long-time consensus from economists that an unemployment rate from 2.5% to 4% is a great place for an economy to be. Higher than 4% and wages get stagnant. Lower than 2.5% and inflation could take off into a theorized uncontrollable cycle of wage increases followed by price increases. So, at 3.9% in the U.S. right now, we are right where we want to be. It makes for an economy that is predictable and reliable. It is one of the main reasons why Wall Street continues to climb to all-time highs.

So, getting rid of 12M low income workers and replacing them with 12M middle-income workers and dropping the unemployment rate down near that dangerous 2.5% is something I would not be very interested in. It would disrupt 695M Americans (and millions world-wide quite frankly) far more than it would benefit the 6M who are currently unemployed (if you could theoretically swap out people who are unemployed with illegal immigrants).

Our economy is in a good place right now. The growth of the Market helps hundreds of millions of people. Part of that successful economy is having a truly low-wage workforce in our own backyards.

@mayjay

Plain ol' lying during a political campaign is not against the law, if it were, all politicians would be in jail... joining all cheating spouses, car salesmen, preachers, school kids and most members of society who at one time or another lie...some more than others, of course. Lying becomes a crime when it raises to the level of perjury, fraud or obstruction of justice and likely other circumstances such as when it causes hardship to someone else.

@Kcmatt7

in my Economics class I was taught that economists consider 4% as being full employment or no unemployment since that 4% includes people in between jobs, people taking sabbatical leave or going back to school or just time off, people retiring early, discouraged workers not actively seeking work and so on. Of course I have seen different number as low as 2% but 3% to 4% appears to be the more commonly cited figures.

@mayjay

Um no you're wrong on that one. If he tried without any real evidence? OBG. He would ruin everything he's ever done.

He has no evidence and has no leg to stand on. He can't subpoena the president with evidence why he is issuing the subpoena. He's screwed if he tries to do it. You know it and so do I. Muller has nothing he's just trying to find something.

@Kcmatt7

Don't worry I love crap out of you. You're a fair poster. No problems.

DoubleDD said:

@mayjay

Um no you're wrong on that one. If he tried without any real evidence? OBG. He would ruin everything he's ever done.

He has no evidence and has no leg to stand on. He can't subpoena the president with evidence why he is issuing the subpoena. He's screwed if he tries to do it. You know it and so do I. Muller has nothing he's just trying to find something.

He is charged by law to investigate. Questioning witnesses is part of that. So, yes, he can subpoena the president.

@mayjay

Yes, he can subpoena the president provided he can show relevance to the case; he cannot just go on a fishing expedition and expect a judge to sign off on it particularly if the subject is not just a witness but also a target and the fourth and fifth amendment would likely kick in and the subpoena quashed. This article ↗ has some good information with citations to actual court decisions.

@JayHawkFanToo If that were a bar exam question, I am afraid you would not have passed. There is nothing in the article that supports your argument. The rights of a party to subpoena a witness has to do with trial. As your article's commenters pointed out, a grand jury is different. And, incidentally, Mueller has previously said Trump is not the target, so that is out.

@mayjay

"Rather than a warrant to arrest or search the property of a suspect, a subpoena is an order to a witness to produce documents or provide testimony. Subpoenas are available in civil as well as criminal proceedings, and can be obtained by any party. Normally a party who requires the disclosure of documents under subpoena before trial must show that (1) the documents are evidentiary and relevant, (2) they cannot otherwise be procured with due diligence, (3) they are needed for trial preparation, and (4) the application is made in good faith and is not a 'fishing expedition': United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974), pp 699–700."

As I recall, Nixon was at the time the sitting president...

and...

"I originally stated that a subpoena is directed at a witness rather than a suspect. As pointed out in the comments below, a suspect can be a witness as well. But at common law, a subpoena could not be issued to a defendant in a criminal case because of the privilege against self-incrimination: R v Purnell (1748) 1 Wils 239, p 243. In Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616 (1886), pp 634–635, the Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment protection from unreasonable searches and seizures and Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination reflected this part of the common law."

Now, if you believe Trump is not the ultimate target, then I have some waterfront property in Florida you might be interested...you cant't possibly be that naive.

@JayHawkFanToo Being a target is a technical term. The Nixon case was talking about a "party". This shows you are not the lawyer you aspire to be. The grand jury ain't a party. And Nixon was forced to comply, incidentally.

@mayjay

Because in the Nixon case there was plenty of evidence of collusion. So far Muller has not shown any evidence of collusion with Russia and the only case he has brought up so far, supposedly his strongest, is about tax evasion that happened much before Trump was even a candidate and has nothing to do with Trump or collusion with Russia or even his original charter.

Looks like Mueller should be investigating Hillary ↗ instead.

By the way, I am not a lawyer and never wanted to be one. I followed the same advise that Téa Leoni's father gave her when she thought she wanted to be an archeologist...don't do what you are good at, do what you are passionate about and become good at it.

@JayHawkFanToo Incidentally, Nixon involved a subpoena for documents and tapes sought for use in a pending criminal proceeding against 7 indicted defendants. Nixon was a third-party, and was trying to quash on a claim of executive privilege (essentially, the need for confidentiality of presidential conversations and communications).

Was there any doubt in Nixon in 1974 who the ultimate target might have been? Nixon resigned 3 weeks after the decision after his support in Congress dissolved when the produced tapes proved he actively sought to illegally impede the Watergate investigation.

In addition, the Court in Nixon expressly approved a prior Court precedent applicable here:

Only recently the Court restated the ancient proposition of law, albeit in the context of a grand jury inquiry rather than a trial,

"that `the public . . . has a right to every man's evidence,' except for those persons protected by a constitutional, common-law, or statutory privilege, United States v. Bryan, 339 U.S. [323, 331 (1950)]; Blackmer v. United States, 284 U.S. 421, 438 (1932) . . . ." Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665, 688 (1972).

That reference seems to indicate the principle applies more in a grand jury subpoena!

@JayHawkFanToo Tea Leoni should have been a pro golfer.