U.S. Politics

Page 308 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mar 17, 2009
2,295
0
0
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
aphronesis said:
Because they earn less? In some cases probably, definitely not in all. I don't think that comparison even crosses lots of people's minds--or didn't until fairly recently.

Success compared to what? Non-capitalism? But still measured on capitalism's own terms?
I think Mackey's term was "jump in prosperity."

If that's solely a capitalist term than I guess that's how he's measuring it.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
Hugh Januss said:
More from the party that doesn't want government to control their personal freedoms.:rolleyes:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/15/rep-rayne-brown-north-carolina-introduces-bill-criminalizing-nipple-exposure_n_2695720.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

You can't make this sh!t up.:D
Looks like the Representative is taking her cue from the Supervisors up in Frisco.

Looks like Supervisor Weiner cast the deciding vote. You really can't make this **** up:eek::D

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/20/san-francisco-bans-public-nudity_n_2165847.html
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
patricknd said:
i will fight to the death to give women in this nation the right to bare their breasts any where they choose (and not just in a well regulated militia)
While I support this generally... I move that there be a discriminatory panel assembled (which I humbly offer to chair) in order to allow only that which should be seen.

For the greater good, of course.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,773
1
0
aphronesis said:
Because they earn less? In some cases probably, definitely not in all. I don't think that comparison even crosses lots of people's minds--or didn't until fairly recently.

Success compared to what? Non-capitalism? But still measured on capitalism's own terms?
Well I still prefer the capitalist vs. the socialist any given day. Your milage may vary.

Honestly I would go out of my way to shop any day the stores open the doors. For example Holidays like Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Years, Easter Sunday whatever - just open the doors up and give me a chance to put a well made Nija chopper on my Credit Card. No big whuup.

On the other hand I happen to be living in Comi-Canada and they are anti-capitalist up here. Any chance for a Holiday and they shut the doors. I mean what is up that?

Anyhow we missed a doozie of a storm over the weekend. Somehow it hit the folks out in NovaScotia and PEI.

 
Dec 7, 2010
8,773
1
0
Scott SoCal said:
Looks like the Representative is taking her cue from the Supervisors up in Frisco.

Looks like Supervisor Weiner cast the deciding vote. You really can't make this **** up:eek::D

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/20/san-francisco-bans-public-nudity_n_2165847.html
I was really disappointed with the san-francisco ban on public nudity linked story Scott!....I was hoping to catch some good free parn photo's and was stuck with fat old people nude. That was a real bummer for me.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
This ought to give pause. Cali Governor Brown doing what he can to increase violent crime in the Golden State. Just Pathetic.

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Jerry Brown continues to set himself apart from past governors when it comes to giving criminals a second chance, telling the Legislature on Friday that he rejected only a small portion of the hundreds of convicted killers cleared last year for release from prison.

The report follows Brown's disclosure that he pardoned 128 people last year, mostly expunging the records of felons who had served their time.

The governor signed off on parole for 377 convicted killers who have been serving life sentences, according to numbers provided by his staff.
Setting aside the 128 felons that have just had their record expunged (which is a separate issue all on to it's own), but what do we know about violent criminal recidivism?

Yep, within 3 years around 253 of these 377 convicted murderers will be back in the system having committed another violent felony. How nice.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-ff-brown-parole-20130215,0,7673476.story


Why this nation is even discussing gun control with this **** going on is beyond me.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
Don't look now...

The Department of Labor has suspended new enrollment into one of the nation’s largest job-training programs for low-income youths, citing cost overruns that critics have blamed on mismanagement.

The Job Corps enrollment freeze could close the door on as many as 30,000 young adults struggling in a troubled economy and could cost about 10,000 staff jobs, according to the association that represents private operators for the program
The freeze comes as President Obama began to promote his plans for job creation, job training and middle-class growth by taking his State of the Union address on the road last week.

“The timing of this freeze could not be worse,” Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.) said Tuesday. “Though our economy is adding jobs, the number of unemployed remains high. If you add to that the fact that many of the unemployed do not possess the basic skills to fill even the few jobs that are available, what you have is a country standing at a crossroads.”

Job Corps, which opened its first center in 1965, was a vanguard of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s war on poverty. The free program gives young adults a chance to earn a high school diploma, receive vocational training or earn certifications in more than 100 specializations.
Democratic lawmakers following the program’s budget issues say they are frustrated by the lack of a response from the Labor Department, which also halted enrollment briefly last summer and in December. Before 2011, the program had never halted enrollment.

“We need to know why it’s happened and why they didn’t consider other alternatives,” said Sen. Robert P. Casey Jr. (D-Pa.). “Maybe it has nothing to do with the program. Maybe it’s a management failure.”
The unemployment rate for young adults ages 16 to 24 was 17.4 percent in January. It was 28 percent for African Americans in that age group, a demographic that made up nearly 51 percent of Job Corps students during the 2011 program year.
But.... but raising the minimum wage to $9/hr should fix that young adult unemployment.

Incompetence with this administration is a top-down problem.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/job-corps-closes-the-door-on-new-recruits/2013/02/16/9ff4e118-712b-11e2-8b8d-e0b59a1b8e2a_print.html
 
Mar 18, 2009
14,634
0
0
frenchfry said:
In this age of recycling, isn't it possible to extract bullets from corpses and reuse them?
Relatives of the deceased tend to get upset when the body is ground into a fine puree to extract the lead. Selfish bastards. They should try thinking about the good of the country.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,663
0
0
BroDeal said:
Relatives of the deceased tend to get upset when the body is ground into a fine puree to extract the lead. Selfish bastards. They should try thinking about the good of the country.
Why not just reuse the bodies for target practice too? Certainly enough to go around - more kids have been killed by guns since Newtown than were killed at Newtown. That's what, maybe 7 weeks or so? ****ing ridiculous. 2nd Amendment!
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
VeloCity said:
Why not just reuse the bodies for target practice too? Certainly enough to go around - more kids have been killed by guns since Newtown than were killed at Newtown. That's what, maybe 7 weeks or so? ****ing ridiculous. 2nd Amendment!
It's just getting started.

You see Brown let 300+ convicted murderers serving life sentences out? Think they won't kill again? Guns, knives, bare hands, whatever. Think you don't need a gun in Cali, think again.

I don't own one, but that is going to change.

Great government we got here.
 
Mar 18, 2009
14,634
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
It's just getting started.

You see Brown let 300+ convicted murderers serving life sentences out? Think they won't kill again? Guns, knives, bare hands, whatever. Think you don't need a gun in Cali, think again.
There was no reason to keep them in prison. They did not kill people. The guns did.
 
Scott SoCal said:
It's just getting started.

You see Brown let 300+ convicted murderers serving life sentences out? Think they won't kill again? Guns, knives, bare hands, whatever. Think you don't need a gun in Cali, think again.

I don't own one, but that is going to change.

Great government we got here.
377 is pretty low. Even if they all kill, say, one person again next year, it will only be a fraction of the likely deaths from automobiles.

What's your worry? Guns not needed; saving money from the prison system.

That's your government working for you.

(By the way, I notice your usual anti-union rants rarely--if ever--touch on the Cal prison union system.)
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
aphronesis said:
377 is pretty low. Even if they all kill, say, one person again next year, it will only be a fraction of the likely deaths from automobiles.

What's your worry? Guns not needed; saving money from the prison system.

That's your government working for you.

(By the way, I notice your usual anti-union rants rarely--if ever--touch on the Cal prison union system.)
The prison guard union is the worst of all the public employee unions. The first thing Brown did when he came to office is give them the store.

377 convicted murderous felons serving lifetime sentences being parolled. Low? Low is the amount of mass killings from assault weapons.

The total fallacy of this issue is going after what won't make any differenc whatsoever... meanwhile we know for a fact the majority of these released felons will be back in the system in three years time. The single violent act they get caught for will be nothing compared to the multiple act that will surely precede.

Those in control know who these people are, they know what they are going to do and they are very willing to let it happen.
 
Scott SoCal said:
Those in control know who these people are, they know what they are going to do and they are very willing to let it happen.
Yes and no. I think there's more fallacy in the overall operations of those in control than you allow. On the one hand. And on the other a certain unconscious cynicism that can write it off.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,663
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
It's just getting started.

You see Brown let 300+ convicted murderers serving life sentences out? Think they won't kill again? Guns, knives, bare hands, whatever. Think you don't need a gun in Cali, think again.
It's amusing watching you guys trying to convince yourselves that the homicide rate won't change. It's pretty simple, dude: we have a high homicide rate because we have a gun problem.

I don't own one, but that is going to change.
Just remember to sit with your back to the wall facing the door at all times when eating at a restaurant so when Jerry Brown's Gang of Thugs comes for you, you'll be ready. You might want to ask BroDeal to join you the first couple of times to show you the ropes.

Great government we got here.
Definitely one of the better ones. Just not for you.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,663
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
377 convicted murderous felons serving lifetime sentences being parolled. Low? Low is the amount of mass killings from assault weapons.
Decided to check that, and not surprisingly, the truth is nowhere near as bad as you make it out - or want it - to be.

The governor signed off on parole for 377 convicted killers who have been serving life sentences, according to numbers provided by his staff. That's 81% of those the parole board endorsed for release.

In his report to the Legislature, the governor said he blocked the release of 91 inmates because he believed they still posed a public safety threat. He sent two other cases back to the Board of Parole Hearings for review.

Administration officials said that while previous governors rejected parole for a far larger number of convicted killers, scores of those inmates were ultimately released after successfully appealing the rejections in court.

Brown spokesman Evan Westrup said the courts ordered the release of 106 of the 144 inmates who sued the state in 2011, challenging the rejection of their parole by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
So in other words, all Brown was really doing was upholding the recommendations of the state parole board. Oh the horror.

I love this part btw:

In his first tenure in office, from 1975 to 1983, [Brown] granted clemency to 403 criminals. The 21 executive pardons he delivered in 2011 surpassed the 16 pardons and 10 commuted sentences of Arnold Schwarzenegger's seven years in office. Gray Davis granted none. Ronald Reagan delivered 575 pardons.
Bloody Reagan, setting all of those murderers go free.

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/feb/15/local/la-me-ff-brown-parole-20130215
http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Brown-blocks-parole-far-less-often-4283836.php

oh and btw Scott: recidivism rates are also nowhere near what you think - or want - them to be.

A Stanford Law School study in 2011 looked at 860 convicted murderers paroled in California since 1995 and found that only five had been sentenced for new felonies, none for crimes carrying a life term.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Brown-blocks-parole-far-less-often-4283836.php#ixzz2LSVUqM3R
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,663
0
0
How the right-wing echo chamber works.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2013_02/wildfire043100.php

Speaking of contemporary standards of conservative behavior and McCarthyite tactics, remember when the people trying to destroy Chuck Hagel were shouting about “reports” that the Nebraskan had once spoken to a group called “Friends of Hamas?” In the process of reporting that the group didn’t appear to exist, Dave Weigel noted how rapidly the claim spread after it was published by Breitbart.com’s Ben Shapiro:

"It caught fire on the right in no time. “That is quite the accusation,” wrote Moe Lane at RedState. “All they have to do to debunk it is to have Hagel reveal his foreign donors.” In the National Review, Andrew Stiles reported that “rumors abound on Capitol Hill that a full disclosure of Hagel’s professional ties would reveal financial relationships with a number of ‘unsavory’ groups, including one purportedly called ‘Friends of Hamas.’” Arutz Sheva and Algemeiner, conservative pro-Israel news organizations, ran versions of the story based 100 percent on links to the Shapiro original."

As Salon’s Alex Pareene commented, that’s all it took:

"n case you were wondering, if you want to viciously smear someone, all you have to do is send a stupid lie to a Breitbart guy and he will publish it and then everyone in the conservative movement will repeat it."

But it gets worse: turns out New York Daily News reporter Dan Friedman has come forward to say he invented the “Friends of Hamas” bit in a conversation with a Republican Hill staffer as an example of a theoretical Hagel association so obviously fictitious that it never occurred to him anyone would take it seriously. Next thing he knew, it was everywhere, spreading like wild fire.


http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/friends-hamas-rumor-started-article-1.1268284?localLinksEnabled=false&google_editors_picks=true
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
VeloCity said:
Decided to check that, and not surprisingly, the truth is nowhere near as bad as you make it out - or want it - to be.

So in other words, all Brown was really doing was upholding the recommendations of the state parole board. Oh the horror.

I love this part btw:

Bloody Reagan, setting all of those murderers go free.

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/feb/15/local/la-me-ff-brown-parole-20130215
http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Brown-blocks-parole-far-less-often-4283836.php

oh and btw Scott: recidivism rates are also nowhere near what you think - or want - them to be.
Uh huh.

The governor signed off on parole for 377 convicted killers who have been serving life sentences, according to numbers provided by his staff. That's 81% of those the parole board endorsed for release.

Brown approved a similar portion of parole grants the year before, in contrast to earlier governors, who rejected almost all release recommendations for murderers.
Musta missed that part.

Here's something salient that completely negates you propaganda regarding Reagan;

A voter-approved 1988 California law, one of a handful of its kind in the nation, allows the governor to overrule the parole board when it approves the release of prisoners, mostly convicted murderers, sentenced to life with the possibility of parole.

Davis, who declared early in his term that "if you take someone else's life, forget it," vetoed 98 percent of the murderers' paroles he considered. Schwarzenegger rejected about 70 percent.

In 2011, according to his office, Brown reviewed 412 of the board's decisions to grant parole and upheld 338, or 82 percent. In 2012 he reviewed 470 such decisions and upheld 377, or 80 percent.
Meaning, before 1998, Gov Reagan could not overrule the idiots on the parole board.

I love this part btw:
I'll bet you do. So long as your family or friends aren't victimized, it's all as it should be.

F'ing pathetic.

Your Stanford study flies in the face of national statistics. How shocking. But feel free to continue to be as wrong as you'd like.



In a 15 State study, over two-thirds of released prisoners were rearrested within three years
But somehow, California bucks that trend significantly.:rolleyes:

I'm gonna go ahead and go with the DOJ study on this one.

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/reentry/recidivism.cfm
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,663
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Uh huh.



Musta missed that part.

Here's something salient that completely negates you propaganda regarding Reagan;



Meaning, before 1998, Gov Reagan could not overrule the idiots on the parole board.
Good point. Still, it just reinforces the initial point: all Brown is doing is following the recommendations of the parole board, but you seem to be saying that you want a governor to be able to unilaterally decide who stays in prison and who doesn't. For someone who says they distrust government and the nanny state, you sure are eager to have an overlord.

I'll bet you do. So long as your family or friends aren't victimized, it's all as it should be.

F'ing pathetic.

Your Stanford study flies in the face of national statistics. How shocking. But feel free to continue to be as wrong as you'd like.





But somehow, California bucks that trend significantly.:rolleyes:

I'm gonna go ahead and go with the DOJ study on this one.

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/reentry/recidivism.cfm
National recidivism rates for homicide is about 1.5%. As for the Stanford study, well, sure, it may be a multiyear study conducted by scientists according to a very strict protocol, but hey, it flies in the face of what you want to believe so it must be rejected outright.
 
Nov 8, 2012
12,104
0
0
VeloCity said:
Good point. Still, it just reinforces the initial point: all Brown is doing is following the recommendations of the parole board, but you seem to be saying that you want a governor to be able to unilaterally decide who stays in prison and who doesn't. For someone who says they distrust government and the nanny state, you sure are eager to have an overlord.

National recidivism rates for homicide is about 1.5%. As for the Stanford study, well, sure, it may be a multiyear study conducted by scientists according to a very strict protocol, but hey, it flies in the face of what you want to believe so it must be rejected outright.
all Brown is doing is following the recommendations of the parole board
Which is in stark contrast to previous Gov', D and R.

but you seem to be saying that you want a governor to be able to unilaterally decide who stays in prison and who doesn't.
You...you mean I want the government to actually perform their PRIMARY role? Guilty, man. I'm guilty.

For someone who says they distrust government and the nanny state, you sure are eager to have an overlord.
Since we, as a society, generally don't want vigilante justice, we, as a society, must trust the judicial system.

Lifetime sentenced murderers set free is a problem for me no matter who does it. You care about people murdered except when you don't. Nice.

National recidivism rates for homicide is about 1.5%. As for the Stanford study, well, sure, it may be a multiyear study conducted by scientists according to a very strict protocol, but hey, it flies in the face of what you want to believe so it must be rejected outright
Common sense much? Didn't think so.

California DOC report looks at recidivism rates

The California recidivism rate, which has long been among the highest in the country, clocks in at 67.5 percent

The study tracked about 108,000 inmates released from state prisons between 2005 and 2006 over the course of three years. Overall, the state recidivism rate, which has long been among the highest in the country, clocks in at 67.5 percent, which is not a significant change from previous statewide tallies.
“The recidivism rates in general, while not surprising, are disheartening, and attest to the complete failure of our prison system in achieving deterrence, rehabilitation, or both,” UC Hastings law professor Hadar Aviram writes in an email. “It is telling that the statistics haven’t changed significantly over time, despite increased punitive measures. Clearly, what we are doing under the title ‘corrections and rehabilitation’ does not correct or rehabilitate.”
According to the study, the overall recidivism rate has dipped by 1.6 percent since 2005. “We’re pleased that the overall rates are down, but there is more work to be done to get the rates down even further,” says Terry Thornton, a CDCR spokesperson. “The more we can bring down recidivism, the fewer victims there will be, and that’s the bottom line.”
“The distribution of offenses is interesting,” notes UC Hasting’s Aviram, who also runs the blog California Correctional Crisis. “Twenty percent of released inmates were in [prison] for serious/violent crimes, and this percentage holds for recidivism, so it would appear that people do not ‘graduate’ to more serious crime… Also, there doesn’t seem to be a connection between seriousness of crime and recidivism.”
http://www.correctionsone.com/re-entry-and-recidivism/articles/2865158-California-DOC-report-looks-at-recidivism-rates/

But, according to 'scientists using strict protocol', the CA DOC doesn't know what it's talking about.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,663
0
0
Whoops.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/02/20/the-powerpoint-that-proves-it-s-not-obama-s-sequester-after-all.html

The latest semantic spin is to call the looming $1.2 trillion in cuts, which could throw the whole economy back into recession, “Obama’s Sequester.” House Speaker John Boehner indulged this approach half a dozen times in a floor speech before he went on break, establishing its place in the talking-points firmament.

There are a couple problems with this tactic, as my colleague Michael Tomasky pointed out Tuesday. Congress passed sequestration before the president signed it, and the whole self-defeating exercise was carried out in response to Tea Party Republicans’ insistence that we play chicken with the debt ceiling, which ultimately cost America its AAA credit rating.

But here’s the thing. I happened to come across an old email that throws cold water on House Republicans’ attempts to call this “Obama’s Sequester.”

It’s a PowerPoint presentation that Boehner’s office developed with the Republican Policy Committee and sent out to the Capitol Hill GOP on July 31, 2011. Intended to explain the outline of the proposed debt deal, the presentation is titled: “Two Step Approach to Hold President Obama Accountable.”

It’s essentially an internal sales document from the old dealmaker Boehner to his unruly and often unreasonable Tea Party cohort. But it’s clear as day in the presentation that “sequestration” was considered a cudgel to guarantee a reduction in federal spending—the conservatives’ necessary condition for not having America default on its obligations.

The presentation lays out the deal in clear terms, describing the spending backstop as “automatic across-the-board cuts (‘sequestration’). Same mechanism used in 1997 Balanced Budget Agreement.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
MarieDGarzai Non-Cycling Discussions 2
Similar threads
The Politics of Sport

ASK THE COMMUNITY