Random Political comments...

Bliss said:
I recall that 'slavery was still legal' (in name) up until a few years ago..but didn't know it was Wisconsin. So slavery existed in Wisconsin? Let me catch up .
...
Ok so reading the politifact, 'slavery as punishment' applied to anyone committing a crime.. as in, you serve it doing slave labor. I don't see it specifying 'only slaves committing crimes ...contibue to be slaves as punishment'
It's not even clear that it's slave OWNERSHIP, right? .It states 'slave labor as punishment for conviction of a crime...no?
Click to expand...

It was very complicated, but here is the link to the State Senator who sponsored the bill to change the wording in the Wisconsin Constitution...http://legis.wisconsin.gov/senate/0...s/2016/its-time-for-wisconsin-to-ban-slavery/

"Article I, Section 2 of Wisconsin’s Constitution states, “There shall be neither slavery, nor involuntary servitude in this state, otherwise than for the punishment of crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.”

It doesn’t get any clearer than that. Our constitution leaves the door open for both slavery and mandatory unpaid labor in prisons. It’s bad enough that our constitution allows people to be sentenced to involuntary servitude (labor without pay), but to allow the state to own someone is just immoral!"

This is what I mean when I say time and time again around these parts that the "law" is far from perfect, and has nothing to do with "justice".
 
Loki said:
...I cannot ignore the distinct differences in the gun related fatalities in other countries that have stricter gun control laws/bans.
Click to expand...
...which is exactly why I don’t understand why this should be a complicated discussion. But ok, Americans love their second amendment, I get it. However, the constitution is to serve the people and where it doesn’t work any more in this day and age it can and should be amended.
 
Madeleine said:
...which is exactly why I don’t understand why this should be a complicated discussion. But ok, Americans love their second amendment, I get it. However, the constitution is to serve the people and where it doesn’t work any more in this day and age it can and should be amended.
Click to expand...

Exactly! It doesn't have to be complicated at all. It's common sense, but the anti-gun control folks continue to ignore a huge part of the problem and push another narrative. President Obama called for "common sense gun laws". He even went as far as to state that this isn't about sports persons, hunting and so on. This was obviously the case, but it was gun control which they don't want. So, of course it became... "Obama wants to take away our guns".

Then as this is happening... Some in states with lax gun laws decide to walk around with powerful guns hanging from their shoulders just because they can legally do so.
 
DudeNY12 said:
...
Then as this is happening... Some in states with lax gun laws decide to walk around with powerful guns hanging from their shoulders just because they can legally do so.
Click to expand...
568adfd71f0000a101e9ce59.jpeg


Black-Panther-Guns-270x300.jpg


8616578a1c8998d1.jpg


90

Card carrying

1014blackpanthers07.jpg


The Panthers said they carried guns as a form of self-defense against police brutality
 
Bliss said:
Oh please, You have indeed recently insulted me. Calling me a racist, co-signing that putz flame-ass calling me a nazi whore, blah, blah fucking blah.

Not once did YOU @Loki say shit to them, so miss me with your defense of TDK.

That's why l will alway heart @andreboba and @ColiBreh1 ... A1 men.
Click to expand...
Calling You a racist based on your racist ass posts along with your support of a racist regime is not an insult its a description of your displayed character.
You support Nazis why are you offended when someone calls you a Nazi?
If Boba wants to have blinders on that's his business. Some people won't believe it until the cross is burning on their front lawn.
 
Bliss said:
At least l kept it nice and didn't spell it out.
Click to expand...

:D Lol

Bliss said:
* and not to bring Trump into it, but I think he'd be equally disgusted..and.wish if he heard of this that he call the women and personally invite them to play at his course.
Click to expand...

What about Trump gives you the impression he'd be disgusted by an act of racism? Serious question. Based on what he chooses to tweet about and what gets an apparent pass from him, I'd put my money on him not feeling any genuine type of way about how those ladies were treated. I know you see him from a different perspective but have you really seen sincere disgust from him during any other race issue to honestly believe he'd care at all about this? I really do hate to assume the worst in people but I just don't see even an ounce of humanity in that individual :(
 
RaiderLL said:
:D Lol



What about Trump gives you the impression he'd be disgusted by an act of racism? Serious question. Based on what he chooses to tweet about and what gets an apparent pass from him, I'd put my money on him not feeling any genuine type of way about how those ladies were treated. I know you see him from a different perspective but have you really seen sincere disgust from him during any other race issue to honestly believe he'd care at all about this? I really do hate to assume the worst in people but I just don't see even an ounce of humanity in that individual :(
Click to expand...

Big gi-normous hugs to you!
 
RaiderLL said:
...What about Trump gives you the impression he'd be disgusted by an act of racism? Serious question. Based on what he chooses to tweet about and what gets an apparent pass from him, I'd put my money on him not feeling any genuine type of way about how those ladies were treated. I know you see him from a different perspective but have you really seen sincere disgust from him during any other race issue to honestly believe he'd care at all about this? I really do hate to assume the worst in people but I just don't see even an ounce of humanity in that individual :(
Click to expand...
Golf is close to his heart, for sure. He also does seem to have a soft spot for BW, and these dignified ladies would be no exception.
Remember also, "..when Trump established Mar-a-Lago as a club in 1995, he welcomed Jewish members, African-Americans, and gay couples, all of whom had been prohibited from joining other Palm Beach clubs.."

I truly think in this horrible golfing example, he would not like the treatment these ladies recieved.
 
Madeleine said:
...which is exactly why I don’t understand why this should be a complicated discussion. But ok, Americans love their second amendment, I get it. However, the constitution is to serve the people and where it doesn’t work any more in this day and age it can and should be amended.
Click to expand...
Work for whom? It works just fine for me. I don't want it amended.

But if another American does, that's perfectly fine to formally attempt to ammend it. Next step is to familiarize themselves with the process and respectfully FOLLOW it.

What is most disgraceful is the slick methods employed by libs to circumvent the process with unilateral attempts to abolish it completely. Sorry, NOT GONNA HAPPEN with their cheating way.
 
Bliss said:
Golf is close to his heart, for sure. He also does seem to have a soft spot for BW, and these dignified ladies would be no exception.
Remember also, "..when Trump established Mar-a-Lago as a club in 1995, he welcomed Jewish members, African-Americans, and gay couples, all of whom had been prohibited from joining other Palm Beach clubs.."

I truly think in this horrible golfing example, he would not like the treatment these ladies recieved.
Click to expand...

I think accepting those demographics back then was purely a financial decision, not an push for equality or inclusion from him. As a business man, I think he probably saw an opportunity for financial gain by opening doors to those who may be shunned elsewhere, but I don't believe that business decision is any kind of indicator of his genuine feelings towards those groups of people.

I think if he had a sincere interest in fixing some of the damage (racial division) he's perceived to have caused (or at least fanned the flames of) in this country, or maybe wanting to "right" his reputation of being a racist, he'd react publicly, against these injustices. He tends to stick his foot deeper into his mouth every time he attempts to engage in these conversations though because it truly feels like his default go-to is defending the white/money/power side of the debate.

I'm rambling. I hear your point, I just can't give the benefit of the doubt like you can. I feel like everything he does is for self-serving purposes only. I could be 100% wrong, maybe.
 
RaiderLL said:
I think accepting those demographics back then was purely a financial decision, not an push for equality or inclusion from him. As a business man, I think he probably saw an opportunity for financial gain by opening doors to those who may be shunned elsewhere, but I don't believe that business decision is any kind of indicator of his genuine feelings towards those groups of people.

I think if he had a sincere interest in fixing some of the damage (racial division) he's perceived to have caused (or at least fanned the flames of) in this country, or maybe wanting to "right" his reputation of being a racist, he'd react publicly, against these injustices. He tends to stick his foot deeper into his mouth every time he attempts to engage in these conversations though because it truly feels like his default go-to is defending the white/money/power side of the debate.

I'm rambling. I hear your point, I just can't give the benefit of the doubt like you can. I feel like everything he does is for self-serving purposes only. I could be 100% wrong, maybe.
Click to expand...
I can appreciate your opinion.
Business decision or not, he did take a risk at alienating existing members, yeah? A true racist doesn't want you in their circles.

I think the truth lies more in that he saw it as a win-win. Give those ostracized who love to golf an opportunity to join, and make a lot of money in the process. Can't fault him for that.

At the end of the day, if you were a well-off jew/Black/gay person and wanted to join a golf club, you finally could ...at Mar-a-lago.
 
Bliss said:
Work for whom? It works just fine for me. I don't want it amended.

But if another American does, that's perfectly fine to formally attempt to ammend it. Next step is to familiarize themselves with the process and respectfully FOLLOW it.

What is most disgraceful is the slick methods employed by libs to circumvent the process with unilateral attempts to abolish it completely. Sorry, NOT GONNA HAPPEN with their cheating way.
Click to expand...
If innocent people are being shot all the time it’s objectively not working for the society as a whole even if you think it works for you as an individual.
 
The Dark King said:
Or blindness. I stopped calling privilege because most of these dummies can't see how it all eventually hurts them too
Click to expand...
For the forseeable futute white men are going to have militias with AK47's and AR15's just in case they feel like attacking us like they have before with black wall st ect.....

Even if those guns get "banned" they won't take those guns that are already out there waiting to be used on us, if they so choose. Full auto isn't even illegal, just requires class 3 license. What does that tell you?
 
Beasty said:
White men are doing the shooting. Its a lot that they do that don't work for society as a whole. Its called privilege......lol
Click to expand...
If there weren’t so many guns out there they wouldn’t have the opportunity to do that level of damage. Anyway, I had already spelled out my opinion on this in the other thread and you were all jumping at my throat so guess that wouldn’t change now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom