POLITICS SCHMALITICS

[CMRivdogs]

Trump's Stasi is at it again

Quote

“Federal authorities told demonstrators Friday that there would be ‘no more prayer’ in front of or inside the Broadview ICE facility, in a move that mystified local leaders and raised legal questions.” https://blockclubchicago.org/2025/11/07/feds-tell-faith-leaders-no-more-prayer-outside-broadview-facility/

 

Edited Saturday at 03:39 PM by CMRivdogs

[Mr.TaterSalad]

Reverend Horace Sheffield is the father of newly elected Detroit Mayor, Mary Sheffield. This is a big endorsement as Rev. Sheffield is one of the predominant pastors in Detroit, with a big congregation. 

 

[Motown Bombers]

That's disappointing. I'm not voting for El-Sayed even if he wins the primary. 

[Tigeraholic1]

1 hour ago, Hongbit said:

Wow, I didn’t think you cared about pedos.  I actually thought that you liked them based on all of the time you’ve spent protecting them.  

Yawn…

[CMRivdogs]

 

[Motown Bombers]

 

[oblong]

7 hours ago, Hongbit said:

Wow, I didn’t think you cared about pedos.  I actually thought that you liked them based on all of the time you’ve spent protecting them.  

Pedophiles are only an issue when the person can be a bigot in pretending to be outraged.  It’s not about the victims. They are mere collateral damage.  But if they can take down “some of those queers” then it’s worth it to them. 

[Tigeraholic1]

[Motown Bombers]

The single most unpopular movement in the past 50 years. 

 

[chasfh]

2 hours ago, Motown Bombers said:

The single most unpopular movement in the past 50 years. 

 

I don't think "defund the police" was ever a serious movement.

First of all, it was never a starve-the-police-of-all-funds-and-then-disband-them movement. The goal was to recognize that a lot of what police do today is really social services, in particular mental health, and that it makes more sense they be handled by people specifically trained for that kind of support, and so, some funding should be shifted from policing into social/mental health services to properly address the problem. Whether the money would still be earmarked for the police and re-expressed into mental health personnel on the force, or shifted away from police departments into mental health departments, was supposed to be immaterial. The point was to stop requiring police to perform services they were not specifically trained for, and to fund the proper performance of these functions by trained professional instead. It's a very reasonable and, I believe, noble approach.

Instead, the RWM and their Russian benefactors seized on the unorganized nature of the movement by highlighting the phrase itself and recasting it as "ban all police and let criminals roam free". That's not anything like a brilliant re-interpretation of the phrase because as fruit, it just hung so low, a high-schooler could have come up with it. But the brilliant part was how they were coached to hang the phrase on the entire Democratic Party, everyone in it, and anyone who ever voted for them. And perhaps because of the unorganized nature of the original idea, Democrats could not effectively fight that off, in no small part because they do not have a left-wing media ecosystem with nearly as much reach to help them out of it.

I think it's still a great idea to shift responsibility and its commensurate funding for social and metal health services away from police and toward trained and educated professionals who specialize in them, but the damage from that phrase was so total, we may never see that happen in any of our lifetimes, even you young guys. Given the MAGA takeover of the nature of governing (i.e., ruling) nationwide, it seems more likely we would see police be tasked with solving mental health crises by simply shooting the people involved dead, than we would be to see a shift in responsibility for mental health issues encountered in the street from cops to trained professionals. Neither one will happen, of course, but given the current climate, one is at slightly more likely than the other.

[CMRivdogs]

More Trump related revenge politics

[pfife]

The gop literally defunded the police.

[chasfh]

15 hours ago, pfife said:

The gop literally defunded the police.

Which they will blame Democrats for.

[ewsieg]

19 hours ago, chasfh said:

I don't think "defund the police" was ever a serious movement.

I think this perfectly summarizes the idea that folks are more patient with their own side.  

Defund the police was a very serious movement by a small group of progressives.  Instead of calling it out, ridiculing it, and defending the police, the mainstream portion of the party tried to keep the momentum but co-opt it into many of the things you went into detail on.  

It wasn't until the pastors and ministers of urban areas started to be heard that they actually want a bigger police presence in their neighborhoods not less, did it finally peter out.  

But by not recognizing the obvious, which is even if there are issues with police in this country, having no police is crazier than Brittany Spears, those that entertained the progressives looked ridiculous to the majority of the country.

[Mr.TaterSalad]

Not that I watched McAfee before, but I'll be watching a lot less of ESPN since they want to turn into Fox News. 

 

[romad1]

1 hour ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

Not that I watched McAfee before, but I'll be watching a lot less of ESPN since they want to turn into Fox News. 

 

Disney ABC is apparently heavily invested in annoying the American public. 

[chasfh]

3 hours ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

Not that I watched McAfee before, but I'll be watching a lot less of ESPN since they want to turn into Fox News. 

 

That is pretty horrific and you are right to hold ESPN responsible by refusing to consume their streams. That said, I don't blame Pat McAfee at all, regardless of whether he is pro- or anti-Trump, which I have no idea about either way. The fact is, it's not up to a sports pundit to fact-check politicians live on air. But when the president of the united shaysh wants to be interviewed on your network, you simply don't say no. It's kind of no win as far as that goes, and again, I have no idea where McAfee stands on Trump anyway. But the responsibility falls 100% to ESPN for allowing it to go unchecked on their air.

As for Trump, it's a huge win for MAGA to get this messaging out on previously virgin media territory. He probably converted thousands of guys to red hats with that interview. Huge customer acquisition win.

Edited 20 hours ago by chasfh

[Mr.TaterSalad]

He's the President, not the King. You have no obligation to say yes to him. He's an ordinary citizen who works for the people the same as you and I. We need to stop putting Presidents on pedestals. I don't care if it's a Democrat or Republican, Obama or Trump. Hell, if my guy Bernie Sanders were President I wouldn't want, not expect, a sports TV work to let him rant for 20 minutes about whatever political subject he wants, even if I agreed with him. Presidents need to be treated like people, not kings.

[Motown Bombers]

24 minutes ago, chasfh said:

That is pretty horrific and you are right to hold ESPN responsible by refusing to consume their streams. That said, I don't blame Pat McAfee at all, regardless of whether he is pro- or anti-Trump, which I have no idea about either way. The fact is, it's not up to a sports pundit to fact-check politicians live on air. But when the president of the united shaysh wants to be interviewed on your network, you simply don't say no. It's kind of no win as far as that goes, and again, I have no idea where McAfee stands on Trump anyway. But the responsibility falls 100% to ESPN for allowing it to go unchecked on their air.

As for Trump, it's a huge win for MAGA to get this messaging out on previously virgin media territory. He probably converted thousands of guys to red hats with that interview. Huge customer acquisition win.

McAfee used to have Aaron Rodgers on his show weekly spouting all the MAGA nonsense. I doubt they reached anyone new. 

[oblong]

All you need to know about Mcafee is he helped spread anonymous internet rumors about an ole miss student for which he later reached a settlement.  

[chasfh]

10 minutes ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

He's the President, not the King. You have no obligation to say yes to him. He's an ordinary citizen who works for the people the same as you and I. We need to stop putting Presidents on pedestals. I don't care if it's a Democrat or Republican, Obama or Trump. Hell, if my guy Bernie Sanders were President I wouldn't want, not expect, a sports TV work to let him rant for 20 minutes about whatever political subject he wants, even if I agreed with him. Presidents need to be treated like people, not kings.

I'm not even talking about putting the guy on a pedestal. I'm talking about the top tier of worldwide fame.

If Taylor Swift wants to come onto your show for an interview, you don't say no.

If Tom Hanks wants to come onto your show for an interview, you don't say no.

If Ronaldo wants to come onto your show for an interview, you don't say no.

If Barack Obama wants to come onto your show for an interview, you don't say no.

I could name dozens more, but you get the point.

These are all among the most famous people in the world right now. They are better than ratings gold—they are ratings platinum. If you can manage to book them as guests on your show, you get to tout that, the eyeballs roll in, the ratings go up, you get to charge more for commercials—it's just too good for the business, and only a fool passes that up.

The President of the United States is, de facto, in the same category. But even without the trappings of the office, Trump himself is in that same category.

So if Trump says he wants to come onto your show, there is no way you are saying no. That would be derelict of your responsibility to the business at the very least.