https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FIhQjfOYKk
-
Recent Posts
Archives
Categories
- Art (88)
- Behavior and Psychology (20)
- Business, Industry and Finance (63)
- Constitution and Law (370)
- Consumer Affairs (4)
- Culture (17)
- Deep State (5)
- Economy (3)
- Education (238)
- Environment (74)
- Fraud Alert (8)
- Global Issues (1)
- Health and Medicine (149)
- History (8)
- Humour (94)
- Military (115)
- Morals and Ethics (149)
- News Media (11)
- Police, Crime, Security (215)
- Politics and Government (144)
- Religion (91)
- Science and Technology (19)
- Veterans' Issues (13)
- World (12)
Recent Comments
- ClayPidgeon on Scam Calls from the American Police Association
- Michael Davis on Life In Chico and Other Places Infected by Bums
- Patricia Lieder on Scam Calls from the American Police Association
- Dawn on Thaddeus Kerns Boy Aviator
- scott sproat on Scam Calls from the American Police Association
Recent NorCal Blogs Posts
Your choice ….
LOL Poor cops they never do anything wrong right?
The question was what’s it worth to you to do this job? YOUR LACK OF EVEN A SCINTILLA OF EMPATHY FOR POLICE TELLS ME YOU ARE A KOOK.
“Worth it” does not apply in my case. I simply could not. I do not have the temperament. I would be lucky to last a week before being locked in the next jail cell. That’s one of the reasons I joined the military. The rules of engagement (then) were much simpler—kill people, break things.
I salute those who hold the thin blue line. For all those who wear a badge on our southern border, I just do not have the words.
Here’s the truth for me. The job that is performed for us every day, 24/7/365, by these men and women is priceless!
It is also unappreciated and that bothers me a lot.
Everybody makes mistakes even those who are well trained. In high stress jobs like this people also experience burn-out and fatigue from time to time, especially since our severely dysfunctional society makes the cops job much more difficult and dangerous. It’s unfortunate but it’s the reality and yet young people step forward to train and do this job year after year. Amazing.
Some in our society have both an unrealistic expectation of perfection in the police force and an attitude that citizens don’t have a standard of perfection to meet. In other words, too many of us have never matured. Cops today get to deal with a large proportion of citizens who have reached the age of maturity but don’t have a clue how to be responsible adults. They often have the strength and the means to inflict great harm but are using the mind of an adolescent. I don’t know how they manage to keep their cool as well as they do but I’ve noticed most that I know are even tempered and dedicated to helping others.
The idea that anyone here thinks a police officer should not be held responsible for infractions of the law, including force or violence when it’s uncalled for, is just stupid. Every individual is subject to our laws. So…nobody is saying “cops never do anything wrong.” We are saying they should be given the benefit of the doubt when the facts have yet to be collected. We are saying that they deserve the same consideration that anyone deserves under our system…innocent until proven guilty. We are saying that because of their service they deserve some level of respect. We are also saying that anyone who makes their job harder and more dangerous through belligerence and defiance should not be held up as a model for others to emulate…or as victims lacking in responsibility as a citizen.
Like I said, to me it’s priceless.
Dewey you are one very sick dude. You’d better pray you don’t EVER need a cop to save your sorry A$$ some day and hope they never learn how you feel about them before you make that 911 call.
This cop went above and beyond the call to protect and serve.
When A Man’s Wheelchair Got Stuck In A Storm, This Cop Did Something Great:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/22/cop-pushes-man-home-wheelchair-rain-_n_5701205.html
Those wheelchairs weight about 200 lbs, with the added weight of an adult they’re not easy to push.
Re: Cop v kid and screaming woman: Police Officers frequently are forced to endure insults, but in most countries they have a law against inciting (provoking) an officer. The video of the kid and that hysterical woman made me want to smack her and she thought she was getting the goods on the officer, ha! Geez what a stupid, loud, ignorant person. A total cop hater for sure, but then you hear her say how she had her child taken away and it all comes into focus. What a piece of work. In the words of Wm. Shakespeare, “The lady doth protest too much, me thinks.” Hamlet, Act 2, Scene 3.
Tina: “The idea that anyone here thinks a police officer should not be held responsible for infractions of the law, including force or violence when it’s uncalled for, is just stupid.”
Tina, the problem is that I have seen you and Jack claim that certain police officers should not be “held responsible for infractions of the law, including force or violence when it’s uncalled for.” The example that leaps to mind is the cop who pepper sprayed a row of sitting OWS protesters at UC Davis. The students were protesting tuition hikes and raises for administrators at the college.
The officer’s action was illegal, as well as a violation of the protesters’ rights to peaceable assembly, not to mention a violation of campus policy on proper use of pepper spray. But you and Jack had no harsh words for the cop, only for the protesters.
http://www.norcalblogs.com/postscripts/2011/11/28/stupid-whiners-at-uc-davi/
It’s very clear that you both are willing to excuse unlawful use of force by police, provided the victims are people you don’t care for.
I’m curious: if this had happened at the Bundy ranch, would your argument have been the same? How is it that the UC Davis protesters conducting a sit-in were throwing a “temper tantrum,” but the Bundy protesters–who actually threatened to shoot police!–were noble patriots conducting a legitimate act of civil disobedience?
Peggy, that’s a great story and that officer is one of the great ones. No one is saying that all cops are bad. That doesn’t change the fact that there are systemic issues that need to be addressed.
But conservatives don’t seem to believe in systemic problems, only individual ones, so perhaps I may as well be talking to a wall.
The question was what’s it worth to you to do this job? YOUR LACK OF EVEN A SCINTILLA OF EMPATHY FOR POLICE TELLS ME YOU ARE A KOOK.
Dewey you are one very sick dude. You’d better pray you don’t EVER need a cop to save your sorry A$$ some day and hope they never learn how you feel about them before you make that 911 call.
LOL There are good cops and bad cops…..
You know nothing about me.. Just tired of the conversation that cops can do no wrong and the posts on the Michael brown case which is a bad cop.
My take – do not take a job you are not fit to do. In these one horse towns the police have it easy. The urban police have it hard.
But make no mistake there is now a profit motive. The starving of funding public service by conservative policies have made cities give big quotas to cops.
Reduced fed funding = They need money. Congress also has made a promise to keep profit prisons at a certain level.
We now have cops who think the public are the enemy. We have kids going to jail for weed who get a felony. try getting a job after. Weed really? A felony in some places?
We have a problem…….
We hire young marines who have not decompressed from being in Iraq where everybody is the enemy. Once they fire they do not stop.
SO yes I do not trust the people running the police force. They are not trained. Have quotas and the depts do not have services to take care of their officers.
http://www.womenandpolicing.org/violenceFS.asp
Try knowing someone who was married to a cop and beaten several times to find out it is common.
We need to look at our police depts and fix them.
I could bring up several videos of cops beating people, arresting people for no reason. Even the woman down south being beaten on the freeway!
You are missing the point of what has happened to our police. You are missing the point that it is becoming a profit driven industry.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/03/18/private-prisons-holder-minorities-inmates-column/6580077/
http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/6-shocking-revelations-about-how-private-prisons-make-their-money
Again if you are not fit to be a police officer than do not apply.
Second we must remove profit prisons where we promise a quota whether it is detention or jail.
Also get weed off the schedule 1 narcotics list.
Privatizing means we need to arrest for profit.
A man got arrested when a white cop said hey brother and he said nicely back I am not your brother in front of his kids. There is an attitude in our police forces that is not normal.
So A police officer must earn my respect it is not given because he rides around a one horse town looking for something to do.
I had a very good friend who was a good cop. He is dead because of a bad cop. No trial, no apology.
Wrong Chris, conservatives do believe in systemic problems. The progressive movement that has corrupted our nation and has strived to render our Constitution, created by our Founders, as a draft copy for the type of government they want to transform us in to is definitely a systemic problem.
Also, the systemic problems that exist in Chicago politics/governance has to filter in to the police dept. I would not want to be a cop and I especially would never want to be a cop in Chicago. Chicago is a liberal city run by Democrats and the political birth place for Obama. I’m sure there are good individual cops in Chicago, but they’re trying to function within a corrupt system of their own making. No thanks!
If a wall does exist Chris it’s a wall liberals/progressives built so you all can operate by your own set of rules and by whatever laws you decide to enforce or ignore.
Gov. Jerry Brown deciding the state of Calif. will be a sanctuary state full of sanctuary cities is a violation of our immigration laws. It is criminal that Holder and Obama do NOTHING to force Brown to adhere to our laws. But they just keep on doing what they want behind that protective wall and thumb their noses at us while us little peons get marched off to jail for minor violations. Where’s our equal justice Chris? Why aren’t the elites held to the same standards as the people? Why are cops held to higher standards than the top law enforcement officer in this nation is?
Please explain how you would instruct a cop to uphold the law and do their job when their superiors all the way to DC don’t enforce those same laws. Obama and Holder have been breaking laws for the past six years and their behavior is acceptable for you liberals, while a white cop who kills a black kid a presumed guilty and has to prove he’s innocent.
Jerry Brown’s “Sanctuary State” Of California:
http://townhall.com/video/oreilly-jerry-browns-sanctuary-state-of-california-n1884387
Chris our defense of the officer isn’t any more over the top than your excuses for people who defy and resist an officers direction or your leaps to make the officer wrong right off the bat.
I don’t have a thing against college students. I have defended them regarding high tuition costs so you are flat out wrong on that score.
Adults get the “they weren’t doing anything wrong” excuse from our kids all the time…we know instinctively its a crock! Something more than a peaceful protest was going on. When the students were ordered to move on,right or wrong, they should have done so. They could have made their case against being asked to move on later and they would have avoided an unpleasant experience. They chose to be childish and defiant. They didn’t have to like what they were being asked to do but they should have done it and behaved respectfully toward the officer.
“who actually threatened to shoot police”
Anyone at the Bundy ranch that operated in this manner was asked by Bundy’s son to leave.
I believe what is being called a “systemic problem” has yet to be adequately demonstrated. Right now it is a bunch of talk without a lot of evidence.
On the other hand we have muders in Chicago in a regular basis, burning and looting in cases that become politically useful, and people with big mouths and lots of attitude showing zero respect for the law or the officers. We have jails chock full of criminals that the cops get to deal with every day. There is a systemic problem of incivility and criminality that definitely needs to be addressed. Do that and the other is likely to disappear.
My position is if we are going to hold the police to a high standard then we had better be prepared to hold citizens to a high standard as well. Respect cuts both ways. I’ve had it with incivility and irresponsibility being excused and I’ve really had it with people expecting more from police officers than they do from themselves and their peers.
We are having this conversation because a kid is dead after he first, allegedly, stole some cigars and pushed a storekeeper around and then arrogantly refused to get on the sidewalk when asked by an officer and compounded the event by becoming verbally abusive and violent with the officer. The simple truth is that the kid didn’t have the skills to handle the situation…he had a street thugs attitude and it cost him his life.
Oh boy, this is looking like the Benghazi and IRS scandals.
Breaking: Michael Brown Allegedly Involved in Second Degree Murder Case
http://www.ijreview.com/2014/08/172458-breaking-michael-brown-allegedly-involved-second-degree-murder-case/
Of course, how could I forget: you do believe in systemic problems, as long as you can blame liberals for them.
Tina: “Adults get the “they weren’t doing anything wrong” excuse from our kids all the time…we know instinctively its a crock! Something more than a peaceful protest was going on. When the students were ordered to move on,right or wrong, they should have done so. They could have made their case against being asked to move on later and they would have avoided an unpleasant experience. They chose to be childish and defiant. They didn’t have to like what they were being asked to do but they should have done it and behaved respectfully toward the officer.”
This amounts to nothing less than apologetics for tyranny. By your logic, its’ the fault of the civil rights protesters of the 60s that they had the firehoses turned on them. The members of the lunch counter sit-ins should have just left when asked. Rosa Parks could have addressed her bus seating arrangement later. I’m not comparing the tuition increase protests to the protests against black inequality, but your logic is the same. The UC Davis protest was legitimate and harmless, and the officer had NO RIGHT to force them to move. They were not impeding traffic, they were not causing a fight or even noise.
The students were not doing anything illegal. The officer was. End. Of. Story.
I have already acknowledged that the protesters in the Brown case are jumping to conclusions unfairly so I’m not sure what more you want me to say on that matter. I don’t know if the Brown shooting was a case of excessive force. But when you state that you don’t approve of excessive force by cops, your history proves that you simply aren’t being honest.
Gotta hand to Post Scripts for allowing Head Bloviator Dewey to spout his lunacy. He seems to get further off the rails with each posting.
I would’ve booted him a long time ago.
The progressive movement that has corrupted our nation and has strived to render our Constitution, created by our Founders, as a draft copy for the type of government they want to transform us in to is definitely a systemic problem. –
Peggy that is not true. Also you might take a look at how conservatives are using SCROTUS to legislate which was not their constitutional purpose.
That is what the right says not the left. As an independent I can see the middle.
Just start with the trouble the founders went through to try and stop corporate rule.
Citizens United used a bad SCOTUS ruling to say corporations are people. That was not the intent of the founders.
Start there and tell me who is changing the constitution.
And If you dig deep enough the Tea party officials really want to go back to the magna carta. Proven many times even in VA they tried to make state law off the magna carta as a test case.
Luckily they failed.
This is the 21st century
The constitution is held by All Americans
It is not the Job of SCROTUS to change it
Dewey, what we have that is so harmful IMHO, is so divisive… is this stupid political polarizing we see. You know, like if its liberal its automatically labeled bad by conservatives, if its conservative it’s automatically labeled bad by liberals. That’s a shame. We are all in this together.
Tyranny my a** Chris. Any society that expects to remain civil must have standards of civility.
It may be inconvenient for you, as a fairly new liberal, but the civil disobedience practiced by the thugs in Ferguson and encouraged by radical activists of the left are no different than the (violent) militias you claim to be against.
If the kids that were pepper sprayed were sprayed without cause then they should bring the case to the attention of the college. In the moment, however, the smart thing would have been to comply.
“By your logic, its’ the fault of the civil rights protesters of the 60s that they had the firehoses turned on them.”
Come on Chris you know better than that. I have spoken often of the dignity of the MLK protests!
Things changed AFTER that with Bill Ayers and his bombs, the SDS, the Black Panthers, and later with the riots, looting and burning of the Watts riots. The contrast is indisputable and dramatic.
So yes, I think I have a significant point to make about the systemic problem of violent civil disobedience, and the attitudes that go along with it, as being a problem that needs to be addressed if we are to hang on to civility and justice in this nation.
” By your logic, its’ the fault of the civil rights protesters of the 60s that they had the firehoses turned on them…your history proves that you simply aren’t being honest.”
Excuse me but I cannot do anything about you not understanding what I have said. I do my best to clarify. It is possible to defend protesters who do so civilly and the idea that when the police tell us to do something we should do it at the same time.
The above accusation shows you have a propensity toward deciding what I mean rather than getting what I say.
Peggy that is an interesting new bit of information in the Brown case. When we have something more conclusive we will no doubt be posting about it. For now I’m content to keep it in comments and give it a rest for a bit but who know what the morrow will bring?
Oh and Peggy. It would be an interesting exercise to stand the principles and ideal in the Constitution up, side by side, with progressive principles and ideals…care to give it a shot?
Tina, before accepting your challenge to compare the Constitution to the principles of progressives I thought I check on the internet to see what information was out there. Below is what came up on the top of the list when I typed in “progressive principles.” The result was shocking.
—-
Principles Of Progressive Politics:
“The Revolution won’t happen with guns, rather it will happen incrementally, year by year, generation by generation. We will gradually infiltrate their educational institutions and their political offices, transforming them slowly into Marxist entities as we move towards universal egalitarianism.” MAX HORKHEIMER, Marxist Theoretician”
Saturday, July 11, 2009
PRINCIPLE OF PROGRESSIVE POLITICS — For Peace And Justice To Be Realized, White People Must Be Reduced To A Minority
Susan Sontag once wrote, “the white race is the cancer of humanity”. I must confess that I agree. It may sound harsh, but when one objectively analyzes the myriad of crimes committed by whites against people-of-color, Ms. Sontag’s statement is obvious. For the past 2,000 years, white crimes against people-of-color include: slavery, imperialism & conquest, colonization, theft of resources, racism & discrimination, theft of dignity, robbing of language and culture… the list is endless. Wherever white people settle (ie. invade) they oppress, enslave, and abuse the indigenous non-white population.
WESTERN CIVILIZATION IS CULTURALLY “WIRED” FOR CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY
Some progressives have stated that white people are genetically (ie. biologically) “wired” for racism and oppression. I tend to think the problem is culturally rooted. Specifically, the problem with white people is the following: whites are the embodiment of Western civilization and Western civilization is inherently based on greed, selfishness, oppression, racism, anti-Semitism, and murder. The history of the Western world is a never-ending sequence of horrific crimes against humanity.
WHITES MUST BE REDUCED TO A MINORITY
White people have had 2,000 years to change their ways and, yet, THEY HAVE NOT. Whites seem unable to practice justice and fairness. Therefore the only solution is to reduce whites to a minority wherever they are presently a majority (USA, Canada, Europe, Australia, New Zealand, etc). The sooner whites are reduced to a minority, the sooner the world can be remade into a unified global society based on justice & dignity… a world free of war and conflict. In such a world, the natural instincts inherent in people-of-color (eg. sharing, justice, peace, fairness, etc) will then finally be free to flourish. Lastly, the fewer white people in the world, the less chance they’ll have to re-emerge and restart their oppressive & racist ways. Sadly, this is the only solution, and, however this solution is realized is justified (large scale non-white immigration, birth control, abortion, etc).
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
PRINCIPLE OF PROGRESSIVE POLITICS — Minority crime is caused by white oppression
The next time you read about an African American or Hispanic who committed a crime, don’t blame the African American or Hispanic, instead blame the majority white population. Whites have historically oppressed people-of-color; this has been occurring for hundreds of years. Oppressed people have limited opportunity for education, employment, promotion, advancement, etc. Such oppression unfortunately manifests itself in the form of violent crime. Ultimately, whites are responsible for such crime.
GANGS & GRAFFITI
Nobody likes street gangs or graffiti. Unfortunately, most street gangs are either Hispanic or African American. However, the reality is that gangs result when whites oppress people-of-color. When a gang member commits a violent crime, the gang member should NEVER be on trial. Instead, the majority white population should be on trial for oppressing minorities… the gang member is the victim and the white population at large is the victimizer.
As a person-of-color myself, it’s disheartening to admit that the majority of graffiti in urban America is done by minorities (most studies on graffiti & vandalism show this). However, the next time you drive down the highway and see graffiti, don’t blame minority youth for spraying such graffiti. His action is the cumulative effect of white institutionalized oppression. Essentially, it is white oppression which is “spraying” the graffiti, not the young person-of-color. Minorities spray graffiti as a subconscious expression of their oppression. The anger you feel when seeing the ugliness of such graffiti should be directed at white people.
WHAT ABOUT MURDER?
In the case in which a person-of-color commits murder, there should be some, albeit, limited punishment (perhaps a couple years of prison time). But again, such a crime, as heinous as it is, is ultimately the result of white oppression. Rehabilitation, job training, and housing should be provided to the person-of-color upon his/her release from prison.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
PRINCIPLE OF PROGRESSIVE POLITICS — The teaching & promotion of alternate sexual lifestyles
The social “norm” of heterosexuality is oppressive to alternate lifestyles. Who is to say heterosexuality is “normal” and alternate sexual lifestyles are “not normal”? Only a bigot would make such a claim. Nobody should cast judgement on another person simply because he/she practices something different. Humans are complex creatures and our diverse sexuality is one reflection of this. All sexualities are equal and, even though some sexual lifestyles may be practiced by a minority of the population, this certainly shouldn’t make them less acceptable.
Unfortunately, our bigoted heterosexual society marginalizes, mocks, and oppresses alternate sexualities. During the past 40 years, a campaign of tolerance has helped this situation somewhat. However, tremendous oppression still exists towards those practicing alternate sexual lifestyles. The only way to end such discrimination is to normalize alternate sexual lifestyles by vigorously promoting them. By drastically increasing the numbers of gays, lesbians, bisexual, and transgender people in society, we essentially normalize alternate sexualities.
Ideally, in say 40 years (roughly two generations), we hope to realize a society in which at least 50% of all people are gay or lesbian. In slowly building up to this 40 year mark, we incrementally will (year by year) make alternate sexual lifestyles become more and more normal. Such sexualities will eventually, by definition, not be “alternative” but rather normal (due to the large percentage of the population practicing them).
TEACHING ALTERNATE SEXUAL LIFESTYLES
Older generations are a lost cause since they are typically set in their beliefs. This is why it’s imperative to focus our efforts on teaching the newest generation (children) about alternate sexual lifestyles. It is critical that we teach children about all sexualities at as young an age as possible. Why? Because the younger a child is, the easier they are to reach. Waiting until a child is 8 or 9 (for example) is too late since their mind has already been polluted with bigoted ideas which are pervasive throughout society. A child should grow up being equally curious about boys and girls. Youth should be free to choose same sex relationships without any pre-conceived notions about what is “normal”. When these goals are realized, discrimination against gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people will end.
Monday, January 12, 2009
PRINCIPLE OF PROGRESSIVE POLITICS — Only whites are racist; people-of-color cannot be racist since they are oppressed.
White people, ie. European derived people, make up only 9% of the world’s population yet control about 70% of the world’s wealth. How can this be??? The answer is that for the past 500 or so years, whites have oppressed people-of-color by enslaving them and/or colonizing their land & stealing their resources. Through brutal and militaristic methods, white people have marginalized the rest of the world. This campaign of white terror has resulted in generation spanning white priviledge which has enabled whites to enjoy benefits at the expense of non-whites. Typically, even when a person-of-color has managed to persevere and break through white oppression to some degree, he/she is beaten back down via white institutionalized racism and discrimination. We see this pattern repeated as non-whites are constantly denied promotions, educational opportunities, and professional placement. Yes… it’s true that a handful of non-whites have reached a fairly high professional position. But whites only allow this anomaly as a propaganda tactic to make it seem as though they (ie. whites) are fair. A person-of-color who does reach a high position is simply the “token minority” to be used and paraded around in “demonstrating” so-called “tolerance”.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of whites are incapable of being taught justice. And frankly, whites are clearly wired for racism and oppression – nothing has changed with them for hundreds of years. Every place on Earth white people settle, they oppress the indiginous peoples – there are no exceptions! Hence in order for the world to realize true justice and equality, whites must be reduced to a minority in Europe and all other Western nations where whites are presently the majority.
Sunday, December 21, 2008
PRINCIPLE OF PROGRESSIVE POLITICS — The Elimination Of All Religions (Religion = Organized Oppression)
What is religion? Religion is an illusion, a silly superstitious fantasy created to comfort the insecurities of humans. Religion is the ultimate form of oppression & control over a person’s life. Religion prevents people from realizing the strength that lies within themselves. By believing in false gods, people naturally suppress their inner strength. Most important, religion creates false moral boundaries regarding sexuality, honor, free will, and free expression. Religion plants fake ideas and false ideals in people’s heads regarding what is acceptable behavior. You are your own god! Never be subservient to some “religion” which, sadly, too many people have been indoctrinated with. NEVER be obedient to some “higher god”… decide for yourself what feels right and hence it will be right. When you see a church, you should view it as an institution of oppression.
Religion also undermines the authority of a collectivist-based society… a collective society made up of secular humanists (ie. people which hold the core belief that morality is whatever suits each individual). There should NEVER, I repeat NEVER, be limits & absolutes on the definition of “right” and “wrong” behavior.
In particular, Christianity is the most offensive of the major religions. Why? Because it has historically been the backbone of the Western world. And, clearly, Western thought & culture is the cancer wrought upon all of global humanity for the past 2,000 years.
PRINCIPLE OF PROGRESSIVE POLITICS — Elimination Of The “Nuclear Family”
What is the “nuclear family” or so-called “traditional” family? In short, it’s a social unit used as an instrument of oppression on the succeeding generation. Outmoded and often racist ideas are passed from one generation to the next via the so-called “traditional family”. When children are born into a “traditional” family, they are immediately indoctrinated by their parents with: oppressive, hierarchical, patriarchal/authoritative/fascist and viciously racist ideas … this spans generations. Think of the “traditional” family as a generational chain of oppression.
Progressive people of the world (such as myself) work tirelessly to instill ideas of justice, equality, and egalitarianism in youth. However, we progressives are constantly fighting against unjust and often racist ideas which have polluted the minds of children… these ideas coming from, of course, the children’s parents (who were themselves polluted with the same ideas FROM THEIR PARENTS). This cycle of oppression MUST be elimated… henceforth, the “nuclear family” must be eliminated. Only without the “nuclear family” can children be taught the virtuous values of equality & justice via the schools and other instruments of managed socialization.
PRINCIPLE OF PROGRESSIVE POLITICS — Elimination of all borders and dissolution of the nation-state concept
What are borders? Why do we have them? The short answer is that borders are meant to divide people. Borders are meant to oppress people. Borders are an invention of the elite to divide and conquer/control/oppress the masses of humanity. The very concept of a “nation” is oppressive and degrading. We are citizens of the Earth, nothing more and nothing less. We must work to eliminate these oppressive, racist borders which carve the world into 195 so-called “countries”. People must be free to live anywhere they choose with absolutely no restrictions whatsoever. For example, anyone in the world who chooses to live in the “United States”, as they call it, should be able to. In fact, the “USA” now has a moral obligation to the world’s people, especially when considering how oppressive the racist white power structure of the “USA” has been for the past 200+ years. Destroy the nation-state, erase these oppressive and racist borders – we must build a world in which all of humanity is united for the collective good of humanity.
http://principles-of-progressive-politics.blogspot.com/
Sorry Tina, but after reading just some of this I am so upset and physically ill at the crap and poison in this blog I won’t be able to compare this to our Constitution. Other than to say this is vile and a completely opposite vision to what our Founder created for us.
(Peggy this is impressive enough it’s going to the front page!)
If progressives are able to fulfill their agenda America will be destroyed and the transformation Obama said he would do will be accomplished.
I am reading, “America: Imagine the World Without Her,” by Dinesh D’Souza and recommend it for individuals of both parties.
Peggy when we talk about radicals in the Democrat party this is what we are talking about. The radicals that shaped the views and beliefs of our President and his staff and “czars” think like this. Those in leadership don’t always fly the full colors because they know older people that have not been taught by progressives in education would have the same reaction as you. Lets hope most Americans and young people at least have enough common sense to see the danger in this kind of thinking.
Oh yeah…good job!
Tina, I know Van Jones who was once one of Obama’s Czars was/is a communist and radicals like Valarie Jarret and John Brennan are amongst his most radicals who he gets his advice from, but seeing so many of the major issues we are dealing with today on the progressive’s list was like a two by four across the head. Wake up call, light on bright. It’s all right there.
Just look at the Michael Brown killing, marriage, tradition family, sexualizing children through sex ed., the border elimination. Their all right there and this was written back in 2008-2009.
This is the playbook and Team Obama has been following it to the T.
The only chance young people have is to realize they are being played and used by master manipulators. They’ll have to decide if they want to make their own decisions or live the life according to the government.
As the saying goes, “Freedom isn’t free.” It does come with responsibilities. Children can’t handle responsibilities while adults can.
Side note:
I saw “The Giver” today and really enjoyed it. If anyone is a CS Lewis fan and liked the Chronicles of Narnia they’ll probably like it too. Lots of symbolism where you walk out after still trying to figure things out. I’m going to see it again cuz it was just that good.
Sorry for all of the run on sentences. I’m tired, going to bed. ZZZZZZZZZZ
Tina: “Tyranny my a** Chris. Any society that expects to remain civil must have standards of civility.”
Of course. Can you please explain to me how silently sitting on the pavement at one’s own campus could possibly violate any reasonable “standard of civility?”
“It may be inconvenient for you, as a fairly new liberal, but the civil disobedience practiced by the thugs in Ferguson and encouraged by radical activists of the left are no different than the (violent) militias you claim to be against.”
What?
OF COURSE civil disobedience is different from a violent militia! If your standards of civility don’t allow for that difference, then your standards are terrible.
The rioting and looting in Ferguson is, of course, not civil disobedience.
But I was not talking about Ferguson. I was talking about what happened at UC Davis. You said you and Jack have never suggested that police officers should not be held responsible for excessive force. That is not true. You have suggested many times that the officer who pepper sprayed the sitting, nonviolent protesters at UC Davis should not be held responsible for his actions, and that the only people responsible for his act of violence were the nonviolent protesters.
“If the kids that were pepper sprayed were sprayed without cause then they should bring the case to the attention of the college. In the moment, however, the smart thing would have been to comply.”
What would the smart thing have been for the officer to do?
“Come on Chris you know better than that. I have spoken often of the dignity of the MLK protests!”
And yet when leftists today use the same tactics, you condemn them.
“Things changed AFTER that with Bill Ayers and his bombs, the SDS, the Black Panthers, and later with the riots, looting and burning of the Watts riots. The contrast is indisputable and dramatic.”
Yes, but again, we aren’t talking about any of that. We are talking about a nonviolent protest. The fact that you are trying to equate the two is ridiculous.
“So yes, I think I have a significant point to make about the systemic problem of violent civil disobedience,”
There is no such thing as “violent civil disobedience.” That is an oxymoron.
It is also an oxymoron to say that disobedience can be systemic. Systemic problems by their very definition take root within systems of authority, not in opposition to authority.
“Excuse me but I cannot do anything about you not understanding what I have said.”
Sure you can. You can write more clearly, and double check to see if what you’re saying bears any connection to what you’re responding to. You didn’t do that in your last comment, which is why you ended up talking about violent protests as a way to…defend pepper spraying a non-violent protest? Your point is completely unclear.
“It is possible to defend protesters who do so civilly and the idea that when the police tell us to do something we should do it at the same time.”
Sure that’s possible, but it’s not even close to what you’ve said about the UC Davis protesters. At no point did you defend their civil protest. Your argument was not that their protest was just, but they should have listened to the cop. Go back to the article I linked to earlier; you had nothing but condemnation for the protesters.
“The above accusation shows you have a propensity toward deciding what I mean rather than getting what I say.”
You could consider the possibility that what you’re saying doesn’t make any sense.
Chris the thugs in Ferguson burned up a store.
The civil disobedient thugs that Ayers hung with in the Weather Underground thought bombs were the answer.
Armed robbery, extortion and murder was a solution for the SLA
Days of rioting, including setting fires and trashing property went on following the Rodney King verdict.
YES! Civil disobedience has been extremely violent and worse than any threats posed by armed militia groups thus far.
“The rioting and looting in Ferguson is, of course, not civil disobedience.”
Of course it is! At the heart of the word is disrespect for the law and the normal conventions of society!
“You have suggested many times that the officer who pepper sprayed the sitting, nonviolent protesters at UC Davis should not be held responsible for his actions, and that the only people responsible for his act of violence were the nonviolent protesters.”
What I have said is the officer had the authority to move them along and they invited the spraying when they refused to comply. My point is the protesters were in control of a different outcome and chose otherwise.
I don’t know whether the officer overstepped his authority but I do no there were no criminal charges brought. Your version of events is quite different from this one in comments at Police Patrol:
In a situation like that the protesters are interfering with a police officer in carrying out his duties. Refusal to move invited a bad experience that I do think they deserved.
“And yet when leftists today use the same tactics, you condemn them.”
I do not condemn protests. I insist that if people refuse to obey an order from a police officer, and especially if it interferes with his sworn duty and obligation, then whatever happens next is a result of the non-compliance…the responsibility of the person who refused to comply. The cop is responsible too for carrying out his duty. If he makes a mistake he will face the consequences.
“We are talking about a nonviolent protest.”
NO! You are talking about that.
This post is about the very difficult job of a police officer. It is about many types of incidents that they must deal with when confronted by civilians who refuse to comply with our laws and their orders.
I took your advice and revisited our conversation with the link you provided. My initial comment began:
Gee…I was really tough on the kids and bitterly defended the cops right from the get-go…do you realize how hysterical you get at times? If the conversation escalated from there its at least in art because you will not gt that our choices have consequences and you do not appreciate the difficult position of the officer.
I went on to say the following and then concluded:
What I’m saying makes perfect sense to the adults in the room.
Tina, civil disobedience is most commonly defined as nonviolent disobedience. I am not sure why you are rejecting this commonly accepted definition, unless your goal is to smear nonviolent protesters by unfairly associating and conflating them with the violent ones.
“I don’t know whether the officer overstepped his authority”
I’ve shown you before that he did. The UC guidelines on proper use of pepper spray clearly state that it is only to be used “to gain control of an unarmed attacker, or to overcome resistance likely to result in injury to either a suspect, a victim, or the officer…
…When the situation requires Pepper Spray to be used, it is to be sprayed in a one second burst. It is not meant to be used repeatedly on an individual, or for long periods of time.”
Section V, B, paragraph 1 of the California State University System, Executive Order No. 756
Lt. Pike clearly violated both of these rules.
And Kamran Loghman, who had helped the FBI develop the use of pepper spray as a weapons-grade material, said “I have never seen such an inappropriate and improper use of chemical agents.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/23/us/pepper-sprays-fallout-from-crowd-control-to-mocking-images.html?_r=0
The argument that the protesters were blocking the officers from driving away is patently ridiculous. You can clearly see in many of the videos that the officers were not blocked from leaving prior to the pepper spray incident.
You also continue to ignore the point. You said this:
“The idea that anyone here thinks a police officer should not be held responsible for infractions of the law, including force or violence when it’s uncalled for, is just stupid.”
Yet you still refuse to acknowledge that the UC Davis incident was an example of excessive force. Given this, do you understand why the sentence I originally quoted seems like nothing more than lip service? You do not call out excessive force by police when it happens–in fact, you excuse and defend it, and place the vast majority of responsibility on the victims of police violence. So it’s not “stupid” for people to think that you and Jack don’t really believe police officers should be held accountable for excessive force. It’s the only logical conclusion from your comments about Davis.
Me: “who actually threatened to shoot police”
Tina: “Anyone at the Bundy ranch that operated in this manner was asked by Bundy’s son to leave.”
You are wrong about this. Bundy himself, as well as his wife, clearly threatened to shoot federal agents, while their son smiled on:
“Carol Bundy said her husband is not a violent man, just a person who will protect what he owns. For that matter, so is she.
“I’ve got a shotgun,” she said. “It’s loaded and I know how to use it. We’re ready to do what we have to do, but we’d rather win this in the court of public opinion.”
Grabbing another fistful of bacon, Arden said he wants to be part of any coming battle. His mother smiled.”
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2013/sep/23/lone-rancher-prepared-fight-feds-land/
After these comments were made, Bundy continued to enjoy passionate support from many in the conservative media and blogosphere, including yourself.
So once again it would seem that your opposition to the UC Davis protesters and your support of the police in that instance is not based on any real guiding principles. You seem to think that conservative protesters who threaten to shoot police are admirable, but liberal protesters sitting down as part of a peaceful protest somehow represent the utmost disregard for police authority, not to mention the continued hippie death spiral that has slowly been consuming our once great nation for the past sixty years.
Please explain how I’m wrong.
Chris: ” civil disobedience is most commonly defined as nonviolent disobedience. I am not sure why you are rejecting this commonly accepted definition”
Whats more worthy of note, a definition you learned in college or the history on the ground over the last sixty years. There has been a lot less civil protest than disobedience and incivility. I care because I do not want to live in a nation…a FREE NATION WITH RIGHTS FOR GOD’S SAKE…in which citizens behave like animals…especially for trumped up political causes designed to undermine those freedoms and rights! (Not talking about the kids in Sac)
I want you to pause and take a deep breath. Do you have any idea how fortunate we all are to live in a free republic with an established rule of law and, when idiots aren’t doing stupid things in government, an atmosphere and economy in which even the poor are well fed and housed and anyone with a smidgeon of ambition can do very well? I posted information yesterday about successful blacks in America…are they invisible? Do you not know that America is a land where anyone can make it with a little effort? Do you have any idea what a colossal waste of time the grievance industry is? If the people who spent all their energy thinking about inequality would spend just half of it improving their skills they’d soon find they have nothing to bitch about! If they turned away from the activists who use them and put their energies and money to work in their family and community they could make things better for themselves and others.
This entire conversation is NUTS!
I got it Chris. The officer was wrong and he was also fired. So what the hell is the beef, really?
The fact remains that the students invited trouble when they refused to get out of the officers path. The fact remains that generally speaking citizens should comply with the directions given by police officers whom we hire to do this job.
“You also continue to ignore the point…”
I don’t have any interest in pursuing old material we have covered before. And you are wrong, Chris, you are being ridiculous and unfair. I was willing to say the officer should be held to account if his actions were wrong…I just refused to say the kids were completely without cause in the matter and you don’t like that. Tough beans, kiddo!
Your need to go over and over this, especially when none of us was there, is more than I’m willing to do.
My point is very simple and I’ve explained it over and over again. You aren’t wrong, Chris, you just have a very immature point of view in my humble opinion.
Thousands and thousands of good cops put their lives on the line every day to rid our streets of criminals, thugs, and drunks. They step into the gap and assist people in disputes and help people in trouble. When an unfortunate incident happens I think they deserve the benefit of the doubt at least until the facts are known. I don;t think that’s too much to ask. I have also noted that those who overstep their authority are and should be held accountable. I honestly don’t know what your problem is other than you seem to need to think of me as totally unreasonable. As the remarks I made at the start of the conversation you linked to suggest, I began in a very reasonable manner. The conversation devolved in my opinion because you just won’t stop till you’ve hammered someone into the ground over an issue. To hell with that!
Tina: “The officer was wrong”
Thanks!