Indeed, but we should remind ourselves these decisions were made in a theater of war. That does not exist as a backdrop for Trump's decisions on infringing on personal freedoms and freedom of movement.
The Decline of the DNC III
- Thread starter crimsonaudio
- Start date
Well
1) FDR knew better because he lived through the First World War and knew how effective Wilson’s tyranny was on the USA. And knew that the Japanese Americans were no more of a threat to USA as the German Americans in WWI and the Russian Americans during the first red scare.
2) If he was complaining about Hitler’s master race theory and his treatment of the Jews then is the only line exterminating a group of people. Because most of the Japanese who were taken out of the houses never got their land or property back after internment ended.
I get everyone thinks everything Trump does is something unique and insanely over the line. And perhaps to a degree it is. But Trump sending the military to quell a riot in LA is not even in the same zip code of insanity as Japanese internment. I mean have people forgot that HW did the exact SAME thing as Trump is doing now with the Rodney King riots?
Personally I think this a battle between two self important people (Trump and Newsom). Newsom knew darn well he should have called the NG in when they started to actually rioting, but chose not to. Trump is far too giddy to show that he is strong by using the military for putting down stuff. Now they are arguing of who’s toy is the California NG.
Today, we heard from Felecia, a single mom of four who works up to three jobs at a time to make ends meet. She counts on SNAP to help put food on the table.
This is who Republicans in Congress are trying to take food away from.
Listen to her story.
Someone needs to tell Amy that this isn't helping her argument. This woman is clearly putting away 4-5K calories per day which is far more than I eat in a day. Seriously, do better and maybe a little more sympathy can be generated.
Also, is this the first time in world history when poor people actually outweigh the rich? I'm pretty sure it is. (And before anyone tries to go there, I am NOT making fun of this woman for being overweight. I'm just saying she isn't helping your argument.)
This is who Republicans in Congress are trying to take food away from.
Listen to her story.
Someone needs to tell Amy that this isn't helping her argument. This woman is clearly putting away 4-5K calories per day which is far more than I eat in a day. Seriously, do better and maybe a little more sympathy can be generated.
Also, is this the first time in world history when poor people actually outweigh the rich? I'm pretty sure it is. (And before anyone tries to go there, I am NOT making fun of this woman for being overweight. I'm just saying she isn't helping your argument.)
Lol what? Single mom of 4 working 3 jobs isn't sympathetic enough because she's overweight? IMO that's truly an insane way of thinking.
She isn't working 3 jobs anymore and 2 of those kids are over 18 (if I recall correctly.)
It sounds like she has 1 over 18 and one who is 17 and correct she isn't currently working 3 jobs but still apparently doesn't have enough money after bills for food.
Regardless I don't think her weight should play a role in whether she is sympathetic or not.
Maybe she has thyroid problem or is diabetic. See the Magats would insinuate the same thing you raise. But Im not saying you are a Magat...
No political stuff in my mind on this just the medical. If she has diabetes the most likely cause is her own life choices. They are hers to make, but let's not kid ourselves that the vast vast vast majority of obese people with all the medical complications that come from that are in that shape because of their choices. It's a free country if you want to kill yourself eating Krispy Kreme and watching the View go ahead. We are all going to die of something. I would just like to live what life I have with the best quality I can and that means driving past McDonalds, KFC, and Taco Bell to eat some actual real food.
I agree but you can afford to drive by those locations. I am trying to feed 3 growing boys and even on our household income it is a strain on the wallet. And me understanding what cost end up eating their leftovers.
If you working 2-3 jobs or trying to make 3 practices in an evening and then doing homework. Healthy eating falls way down the priority list.
It would have been a bad look if this woman was overweight and not working. But she is still working and Republicans do/did want work requirements for public benefits. Now they want to yank the rug out from under these people altogether.
If you working 2-3 jobs or trying to make 3 practices in an evening and then doing homework. Healthy eating falls way down the priority list.
It would have been a bad look if this woman was overweight and not working. But she is still working and Republicans do/did want work requirements for public benefits. Now they want to yank the rug out from under these people altogether.
I can assure you I'm not. I had a custom-made T-shirt that said, "I'm not prejudiced; I hate you all." While this is a bit of an exaggeration because I don't hate anyone, but it does give a decent approximation of how I feel about political parties and politicians.
I understand you are not. But its that kind of projection onto others that has gotten in the shape we are in.
Fair enough, but if you to garner any sympathy from the right, there is a formula for doing so. Showing them a woman who eats more than they do is not the way. Remember, my criticism wasn't the woman, it was the decision to use her. If things are really as bad as I'm expected to believe, most people need to see it to believe it. I mean, that's fair, right?
You run into the same problem with Medicaid, too. People are far less likely to be okay with their tax dollars paying for the health care of someone who is 200 pounds overweight, diabetic and loaded with heart disease. Especially when a working person such as us are working our asses off and getting substandard insurance coverage from companies or government agencies who are nickel-and-diming us. Every one of my clients is on Medicaid and I get a bird's-eye view of how they live. Most are responsible citizens who are genuinely struggling and for them, I am 100% on board with providing care. But that two or three who have spent their entire lives refusing to be productive contributors to society really do get under my skin precisely because Medicaid pays for medications that my BC/BS simply will not.
No. It is not fair to say you need to see a starving person to have sympathy for those who are food insecure.
It's both callous and idiotic to expect the poor in a wealthy country to look a specific way and to fail to be sympathetic because of their weight.
Suit yourself. Have fun watching SNAP evaporate while half the country fails to give a crap because they have a false idea of what they were paying for. It won't affect me one way or the other.
You asked if it was fair, it is not fair.
People who are poor or food insecure in the US(and other wealthy countries) tend to have higher rates of obesity. Much of that is tied to the fact that they are poor or food insecure. The goal should be to educate people not to trot out emaciated people for some kind of sympathy show or something.
The lack of empathy the average person seems to have is incredibly disturbing to me.
Politics is all about optics; this is why every bit of it is performative. Truth is, no one in D.C. gives a damn about these people or anyone else. Image is everything. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just pointing out the truth. You can get upset about the truth all you want; I do it on a daily basis. Nevertheless, if you're going to sell something to the American people, you have to actually SELL it. This is just how the system works.
Look, I get it. We would all love to live in a society where everyone cares, everyone gets along and no one is in need. If I found a genie's lamp and only had one wish, that would be it. But there are no such things as genies and there is no such thing as a society that cares about much beyond its own self-interests. I do my part, but I don't make a show of it. And I'm certainly not looking to exploit people over politics. But for those who are, put on your tie and your biggest smile and sell it to me. Who knows, maybe it will even work if you're good enough.
The fact that anyone in the US, or the world for that matter, would suffer from malnutrition due to not being able to afford to eat is unsettling to say the least. That being said, this lady obviously is not suffering from malnutrition. The basic laws of nature state that if you consume more calories than your body requires then you will gain weight, glandular problem or not.
If the left is going to trot someone out to show that Trump's attack on the SNAP program is immoral then why in the world would they use a cast member from My 600-lb Life. The SNAP program should be for poor people that cannot afford food so that they and their family don't go hungry. It's not for making sure there is enough Totino's and Coca Cola in everyone's house.
Trust me, any Libertarian could’ve told you that.
That study is about half right. It once was all right but no longer, not with Trump.
I didn't need a study to tell me the intolerance of a number of self-proclaimed liberals or Democrats. Simply look at the fact - and it is a fact - they spent years saying, "The GOP needs to be more tolerant on abortion" and yet it was the REPUBLICAN PARTY that allowed pro-choice speakers at their Convention, but it was the Left that wouldn't allow one (most notably Bob Casey Sr. in 1992) to speak on ANY subject if he didn't toe the line on that one subject. My God, even Jeff Greenfield who worked for RFK acknowledged that while the GOP was every bit as strident on their public stated position, the GOP would actually allow a pro-choice governor (like Christie Todd Whitman or Tom Ridge) to speak at the Convention. This has been obvious to anyone with an open mind for at least 40 years now.
That being said - the idea that the TRUMP portion of what used to be a political party is TOLERANT is laughably absurd. They tolerate zero deviation from kissing the backside of the Master Manipulator. I've watched self-professed conservatives of my entire life turn into bowls of jelly to defend this shameless huckster and to try to run out of the party anyone who points out he himself IS A DEMOCRAT!!! Let's see: he loves big deficits, he doesn't understand business, he appointed Democrats to head HHS and DNI, his donations were all to Democrats except for the liberal Republican Giuliani until 2011, and he's come down for gun control. If that ain't a Democrat - at least prior to 2016 - I don't know what is. And he has every bit the intolerance of the Che Guevarra wing of the party in 1972.
I once knew some tolerant liberals AND some tolerant conservatives. I probably have more friends (acquaintances? I don't have much in the way of friends, I'm a loner) who are towards the left than the right, and we get along fine because of (wait for it) our tolerance of opposing viewpoints. It's like there are people who DO understand "life would be pretty damn boring if we all agreed."
Amazon Prime Day Deals for TideFans!
Hangtime University of Alabama - Alabama Crimson Tide Bama Nation - University of Alabama Route Sign
Get this and many more items during Amazon Prime Day Deals (July 8-11)!
Get a Prime Free Trial!
