US Politics Thread 2021-24

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Cybermat47

So why did Trump say that he was going to be arrested?

For the same reason like the first time. For the same reason he has chosen Waco. To ignite riots.

And from the middle of the dust where the action was wanted to get hot, magically the cavalry would emerge, shoot all Feds and Sheriffs and come to his rescue.

It is good that he is being dragged to court. Unfortunately for the wrong, the minor offenses. So far, he has still been spared having to answer for the important ones.

Its reported due to polls that three of four Republicans support either Trump or de Santis. That makes Biden again the only hope.

What should it tell me about the US if an old man like Biden is its only hope...?

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

The law is in regard to school libraries and allows for the school board, local community and parents to work out. The federal court in California, the governing view of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is found in Ripplinger v. Collins, 868 F.2d 1043 (1989):

“The average person would probably find that most hard-core pornography has little effect on him, and it may well disgust him. Or he may find that it is so overdone as to have anything but a stimulative effect. It is apparent that neither the Supreme Court nor the legislatures intended that tasteful pornography be suppressed while distasteful pornography remains unregulated. Rather, the emphasis must be on the intent or aim of the publication as a whole. If this aim is to produce psychic or physical stimulation, on a less than intellectual plane, and on a short-term basis, then the prurient-interest aspect of the test for obscenity has been met.”

But relax and keep fapping on, nobody is gonna take your porn away from you. You just aren’’t gonna find it in the school library here in the U.S. But like I said earlier, I don’t know of any school library that has ever allowed such things.

But now you never know with those pervs in Europe the way they’re ranting on and mocking the U.S. courts definition of pornography & Utah’s law. It seems they like showing porn to little children, it’s so progressive you know.

I am relaxed so fap on yourself mate.

[Skybird]

https://www-andreas--unterberger-at...._x_tr_pto=wapp


On suing Trump.

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by Skybird

https://www-andreas--unterberger-at...._x_tr_pto=wapp


On suing Trump.

Meh on Trump. What I find most interesting is the level of self-incriminating crap Il Douche posts over a minor civil case that is nothing but self-defeating. Remarkable! He has since removed this post but even that can be construed as trying to destroy evidence.

https://imageshack.com/img923/5206/pwHD3E.png

[Buddahaid]

Oops!

[August]

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

Meh on Trump. What I find most interesting is the level of self-incriminating crap Il Douche posts over a minor civil case that is nothing but self-defeating. Remarkable! He has since removed this post but even that can be construed as trying to destroy evidence.

https://imageshack.com/img923/5206/pwHD3E.png

Is that what you find most interesting?

[Skybird]

What has support for Ukraine to do with the confrontation with China?

https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/...against-china/

[Rockstar]

Democrats vs. Parents

https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/...ts-vs-parents/

By THE EDITORS
March 27, 2023 12:29 PM
TOP STORIES

Last week, Republicans in Congress passed the Parents Bill of Rights, 213–208. Critics will dismiss it as a messaging bill, but the message it sends about Democrats’ priorities is unsettling in the extreme.

Consider: The bill requires schools in receipt of federal funding to publish their curricula and to provide parents with a list of books and materials accessible at the school library. It also contains provisions that require schools to notify parents of any planned elimination of gifted-and-talented programs, to alert parents to any violent activity that took place at school, to provide parents a forum to speak at school-board meetings, and to offer two in-person meetings between parents and teachers in each school year. It requires parental consent for any medical exams or mental-health and substance-use screenings. Crucially, it establishes for parents “the right to know if a school employee or contractor acts to . . . change a minor child’s gender markers, pronouns, or preferred name; or . . . allow a child to change the child’s sex-based accommodations, including locker rooms or bathrooms.”

As you can guess, each one of these provisions relates to the rash of controversies swirling around public schools in the news the past few years, including the introduction of critical race theory and sexually explicit material for young readers and the treacherous subterfuge of school districts’ making major psychological-health decisions for students while deliberately keeping parents in the dark.

There is legitimate debate about whether the federal government ought to assert itself this way upon locally controlled school districts. But that was not the substance of objections from Democrats.

Progressives tended toward hysterical fictions. “Extreme MAGA Republicans don’t want the children of America to learn about the Holocaust,” alleged Hakeem Jeffries, absent any evidence.

Or they outright took the side of the state usurping the proper role of parents. “This Republican bill is asking the government to force the outing of LGBT people before they are ready,” Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said on the House floor. “When we talk about progressive values, I can say what my progressive value is, and that is freedom over fascism.”

Here we must reassert a truth so primordial it predates conservatism as a political philosophy: Parents are the primary educators of their children. Taxes are raised (or fees collected) and schools are established only to assist them in this task, not to take it over. Civilized nations deprive parents of this role or limit it only when there is established criminal neglect.

Democrats, by their universal opposition to this bill in the House, in the Senate, and from the White House, are the ones sending a message. They are the party that wants to treat normal parental oversight and curiosity as a conspiracy against the state, as presumptively seditious, and as dangerous for children. It is the most noxious Marxist conviction that the American Left cannot shake: that normal family life itself ideologically deforms children, and that only the strong checking and supervisory role of the state can save them from the baleful influence of Mommy and Daddy.

Luckily, even most parents who think of themselves as progressives reject the Democrats’ view. Every Republican candidate should loudly and joyfully campaign against this radicalism.

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by Skybird

What has support for Ukraine to do with the confrontation with China?

https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/...against-china/

I hit a pay wall. What’s the article about?

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

I hit a pay wall. What’s the article about?

I am still able to scroll through the article.

[Rockstar]

Don’t know what to tell ya, I hit a pay wall for that article. Says I’m out of free articles. Crazy thing is, I can’t remember ever visiting the NR website before.

[August]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

I hit a pay wall. What’s the article about?

Me too.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Don’t know what to tell ya, I hit a pay wall for that article. Says I’m out of free articles. Crazy thing is, I can’t remember ever visiting the NR website before.

...
You literally linked to a NR article in the previous post.

[Rockstar]

Here’s the article. I had to use a VPN and pretend I was from the Netherlands.

Supporting Ukraine Helps the U.S. against China

By DALIBOR ROHAC
March 27, 2023 6:30 AM
Advocating that we abandon Ukraine is not a sign of ‘realism.’ It betrays a lack of seriousness about America’s strategic rivalry with China.

One wonders what Senator Josh Hawley and a growing chorus of Ukraine-skeptical Republicans think of the trip of Japanese prime minister Fumio Kishida to Kyiv and Warsaw last week as Xi and Putin conducted their lovefest in the Kremlin.

In a recent speech, the senator dismissed as “magical thinking” by Washington’s foreign-policy “uniparty” the idea that security in Eastern Europe and in the Indo-Pacific were connected. Cut Ukraine loose, he proposes, and focus on the real challenge to the United States: China.

The flaw in the argument is not just that the Russian threat to Eastern Europe would not go away if the United States decided simply to look elsewhere. If the United States abandoned Ukraine, Germany and France would not “put their minds to it” and “shoulder a greater burden of defending themselves and supporting Ukraine,” as Elbridge Colby of the Marathon Initiative and Kevin Roberts of the Heritage Foundation write hopefully. Instead, U.S. withdrawal would be an excuse for doing less — paving the way to some version of China’s “peace plan,” empowering both Moscow and Beijing.

More important, abandoning Ukraine would kill any chance of bringing Europeans on board with our efforts to confront and contain China over the course of this century. The EU is the world’s third-largest economy and wields, albeit clumsily, enormous regulatory and standard-setting powers. Where Europeans stand is critical to the effectiveness of our own responses to Huawei, TikTok, or Chinese technological theft. The United States may try to sanction China until the cows come home, but unless Europeans turn away, too, Beijing will continue to have access to a massive advanced market offering a cornucopia of cutting-edge technologies.

As it happens, the Baltics and the Czech Republic, the EU member states that are the most concerned about Russian expansionism, are the ones pushing the European conversation on China in a U.S.-friendly direction.

From March 25–30, for example, the speaker of the Czech Republic’s lower house, Markéta Pekarová Adamová, is leading a delegation of 150 Czech lawmakers, business leaders, academics, and artists on a visit to Taiwan. Truly unprecedented in its scale, her visit follows a trip made in 2020 by Miloš Vystrčil, the speaker of the Czech senate. There he famously declared, in a Kennedy-esque fashion, that he was Taiwanese.

Pekarová-Adamová is bound to meet with the same reaction from Beijing as did Vystrčil, who was warned by the Chinese foreign minister that he would “pay a heavy price for his short-sighted behavior and political opportunism.”

These are not simply manifestations of solidarity between two small democratic nations living in tight geopolitical spots. There is another, implied audience for these trips: policy-makers in Washington.

Just like Lithuanians, who decided to put up with a host of Chinese sanctions — including a ban on all imports from Lithuania — for allowing Taiwan’s representative office, an embassy in all but name, to open in Vilnius, the Czechs are signaling to the United States that they are not indifferent to Taiwan’s future and China’s security challenge in the Indo-Pacific.

Senator Hawley has a point when he says that “if our resources are tied up in Ukraine, those are resources we can’t use to deter a Taiwan invasion.” Yet the serious, adult response to the underlying problem is to ensure that more resources are directed at expanding our defense industrial base and restoring it to its Cold War–era size — not to alienate those governments in Europe that are stepping up both to help Ukraine (in per GDP terms, Lithuania’s and the Czech Republic’s assistance far exceeds that of the United States) and to confront China.

It may be tempting to dismiss the Balts, the Czechs, and a handful of Scandinavians as insignificant players. But building a European anti-Beijing coalition has to start somewhere. Leaving Ukraine to its own devices would be guaranteed to destroy our deep, painstakingly built relationship with Poland, which is currently sitting on the fence on China-related questions.

Just like our withdrawal from Afghanistan, it would be a signal of America’s lack of seriousness and would put a massive target on the back of any European leader wanting to join forces with the United States to confront China. Advocating that we abandon Ukraine is not a sign of “realism.” Quite the contrary — it betrays a lack of seriousness about America’s strategic rivalry with China.

[Rockstar]

I don’t know about “the growing chorus”. For and against can be found on both sides of the isle and everywhere in between.

Though I disagree with the good Senator’s assessment of our support for Ukraine.. I can see why some may be questioning it. Namely because our current President has not even once stated what our goals are or what we are trying to achieve by throwing money and arms at Ukraine. What the hell is this administrations objective here? ‘With you until the end’, ‘Whatever it takes’ ‘we stand strong with Ukraine’ isn’t much of plan. Who’s prepared to take decisive action and say yes we are booting Russia out of Crimea and restoring Ukraine to its 1991 borders and securing our hegemony in the region. Biden needs to stop pussy footing’in around with empty slogans and drop the hammer.