I meant for this particular issue, peoples' attitudes about class - and maybe race - are influencing their opinion of whether or not the government ought to be drug testing welfare recipients. I was pointing it out as what I think is an example of dishonest morality-based legislation. I mostly agree with that comic, but not the conclusion.
Because I am lazy and only have this one study handy http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2015/02/26/3624447/tanf-drug-testing-states/ Generally the findings are spend a shit ton of money to find out that people who use benefits aren't actually on drugs.
This is just getting better. Donna Brazile was put in charge of the DNC after DWS resigned. Not so fast Donna. Leaked e-mails implicate her in the whole mess. Marcia Fudge is the new head of the DNC. For now.
Just wow. It's like they're actively trying to alienate Bernie supporters now. A very interesting campaign strategy to be sure. Meet Marcia Fudge: http://wtam.iheart.com/articles/local-news-122520/marcia-fudge-says-bernie-sanders-should-14506141/
I hope none of Bernie's supporters vote for Hillary. She hasn't earned their vote and everything they ever accused the DNC and Clinton campaign of doing has been proven absolutely true. Actively subverting the will of the voters to crown queen Hillary. I hope Bernie decides to go for a scorched earth campaign and says fucked up shit at the convention or sits it out all together.
DWS and Brazile were replaced for possibly attempting to sabotage Bernie's campaign. You would think when they're on their 3rd chair of the day they would choose someone that at least gives the appearance of neutrality.
Is there anything preventing him from running as an independent? Because if he announced that he was running as an independent during his speech, I would DVR that and watch it on repeat for days.
Do you want Trump as President? Because this is how we get Trump as President. I think there are a lot of people (including people suddenly finding their libertarian ideals) who underestimate what that could do. Trump is fucking scary. I mean it's scary enough to know that we have a large portion of the electorate rabidly hoping he becomes President, but it would be helpful if every other reasonable person at this point in time could just say, "Okay, the system is fucked and we absolutely need to change it, but let's not cut off our nose to spite our face and put the person with the highest likelihood of keeping shit together for four years." Hillary is the only reasonable vote in a time like this. People in poverty aren't necessarily noble, but wealth =/=nobility either (well, it does literally, but noble people suck too). How many more friends do you have that talk about tax breaks that they receive? How much wealth from the coffers of the country is lost between gaming the tax system vs. paying out benefits? I think we know the answer there. Besides, everyone benefits from the government. Should we drug test all parents with children enrolled in public schools? Should we drug test everyone before they get a license and drive legally on the roads? Oh, it's about who contributes more though, right? So Bill Gates should have more privileges than you. Fire Department answers his calls first, then you, then me. Same thing with police. You said something a page or two back about people on benefits needing to swallow their pride. Wouldn't it be better on the whole if said people had more pride in themselves? This board just loves to shit on poor people. I don't get it. Most of the shitting on seems to come from people who aren't poor or don't have much experience with those who are. You're (collective second person here) not better than someone because you make more money than they do. And if you don't see how much easier your life is when you're born into a little bit of wealth, and why that means you should be a little bit more compassionate and understanding, then...well then, nothing. That's why there is such an impasse on this issue.
There is a small part of me that wonders if maybe we need a Trump. I'm not talking because he'd be good as President, he'd be abysmal. But I'm wondering if it wouldn't perhaps be the shock the American electorate needs to wake them up and realize just how fucked this system has become. Hillary is clearly the better choice. But after 40 years of the same policy decline - through both Republican and Democratic administrations mind you - something has to change significantly. There are such major structural issues that need to be fixed that just get kicked down the line because it benefits the wealthy that I'm not sure without hitting a shitstorm bottom, the electorate will ever get a backbone and force change. As to the Bernie supporters - I posit the following: you know, 90% of what his platform contains could be proposed by him RIGHT NOW? He's a sitting Senator, he doesn't need to be President to propose this stuff, and in fact, it's easier for him to do now. So let's not lose sight of the fact that Bernie has become a little taken with his cranky old man bit too far. He was an Independent for the vast majority of his career and decided to run as a Democrat because Independents and third party candidates never win. He did it for the infrastructure that the party had - make no bones, he was using them. And that's fine, I like Bernie, but let's hold the side of moral outrage that a party that he never really was a part of was more interested in nominating someone whom has been in the Party for decades. Again, I like Bernie, but let's get real here. Bernie was gaming a system that gamed him better.
What could it do? Seriously, this is the same question I asked the teabillies back when it looked like Obama could be elected. Tell us of the sky is falling phophecy peddled by the left.
Part of me really, REALLY wants to see Trump get elected. If that happens, you'd see Clinton's head finally implode, and it would be a hell of a social experiment to see just how much power the President actually has. But let's say he does manage to go right off the reservation and start madly fucking shit up... what recourse is there?
My wife works at a Title 1 school and it's been an eye opening experience as it relates to poor kids, I would say that 90% of her kids have a parent who is on government assistance, I say parent because very few have two parent households. She has kids that horde food at school because they don't get fed at home, kids who have severe learning problems who can't get meds during the summer because the parent sells them as soon as the script is filled, it isn't the kids fault for having shitty parents. If government assistance programs benefit just a few of the kids and help them get a better life I am all for it. Go volunteer at a Title 1 school for a day and tell me those kids don't deserve some form of help, if you do you'd have to be the coldest hearted bastard on the planet.
Actually having re-read it I'm not so sure now. It doesn't really speak that much to me, though; maybe because I don't have a typical relationship with Feminism as most guys because I was raised by a Feminist and surrounded by Feminists for much of my formative years.
The easiest (and scariest) way to think of this about foreign policy. The man knows nothing. We also know he is thin-skinned (all criticisms are met with sharp rebuke, think of the press corps issues), he is vindictive, at least more openly so than others (talking about funding Super-Pacs to decimate defeated political foes--Kasich, and Cruz), and he will want to appear strong. He has to appear strong to appease his base. To me, this seems like a pretty good set of qualities that could lead to shit that puts American soldiers at risk. Who would he bomb? Who would he invade? We don't have any fucking idea do we. Teddy Roosevelt said, "Speak softly and carry a big stick." Donald Trump will look to yell and swing. Ha, that womea's head doesn't explode. Think about all the shit she has been through. She may wither in defeat, but her head wouldn't "implode."
Fucking rights it would. http://www.westernjournalism.com/hillary-clinton-accused-of-throwing-a-bible-in-fit-of-anger/ She gets very pissy when things don't go her way... and if she loses the Presidency, she's going to fucking lose it in a big way. Just watch her actions when she's in public and in front of a camera. She's far from calm, cool, and collected when shit goes any way other than the way she wants it.
I'm not about to trust anything that guy says. I also don't trust anything Western Journalism has to say about Hillary Clinton. More than a little biased, no? The vitriol for Clinton seems to contradict itself. She is cold and manipulative! Wait, she is impulsive and can't keep it together! The amount of hate she receives is sort of laughable. I'm not a Hillary fanboy by any means, but compared to Trump? C'mon, now. The fact that this is still a race says at all says a lot about America. None of which is good.
The amount of defense she gets from people who turn around and bitch about conservative bias is sort of laughable.