Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 

I try to follow this advice every day but I'm never quite sure I get it right. Remember how funky The Meters were back in the day? Sure you do. Those spare arrangements buoyed by crazily funky second line drumming? Well, here's a little secret. I got some more for ya. If this drumming does not set off the funk sensors in your head, I suspect your idea of a fashion statement is a douche-y red baseball hat bearing an ironic saying paired with a red tie. The Daily Dose is "Soul Machine":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqyPAH4zqcY

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 

One of us actually worked in criminal defense. State and fed, rich white collar clients and minority lower level crimes. Have you ever heard me say the criminal justice system wasn't racist? It's as fair as your wallet is deep. If you're rich, whether you're black or white, you'll get a deal. But if you're black, you need to be a good bit more affluent than if you're white. If you're poor, you're fucked no matter your race, but you're fucked a whole lot more if you're black.

So then, you might ask, why did I say "probably" most felons barred from voting are black? Because I didn't feel like looking it up, no matter how much I know that stat. I'm uncomfortable saying most felons are black for reasons I don't understand, but perhaps stem from self-loathing at a system in which I work. Or maybe I'm just stupidly avoiding being impolitic in an assumption.

Maybe I'd uncomfortable being comfortable casually stating a certain portion of society is wrongly and unfairly jailed like crazy.

No it's not. I never said you find racism and back it up later. I accused you of seeing things through a prism of race primarily. This shades the debate into a discussion of race where I think class matters just as much. If you think the GOP is aiming at blacks because of their race, you've got it half right. The other non-or-less-bigoted and much more effective element of the GOP is aiming to disenfranchise blacks for the simple reason that they vote Democratic. That part of the GOP is engaged in all out war on the poor. Blacks are just collateral damage.

If we make discussions of voting rights exclusively or predominantly about racism, the nastiest cabals withing the GOP win. They want that fight. The debate has to be about class and inequality first and foremost.

Think about this... It isn't because anyone in the GOP strategy apparatus gives a damn about the color of anyone's skin. They'd love to grab the black vote. But as long as blacks are perceived to be stalwart Democratic voters, the GOP will seek ways to keep them from voting.

I didn't mean to come off as one. But I'm seriously tired of hearing racism and sexism offered as the first explanation of so much since the election of this guy. Most of these things are so much more complicated than that.

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 

It's like McCarran Ferguson on a monster dose of steroids. The States have total control. And in the Commonwealths (VA, PA... some other shitholes), the counties really have control.

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 

You cannot talk about criminal justice without considering race. It is primary. On purpose.

It doesn't, and if you think it does, you really need to study your history. Hey, there's a documentary about it you could check out.

Which isn't to say that poor white people can't get fucked by the system too, but that's a side effect of a system designed to incarcerate black people.

They're trying to keep black people from voting. It does not absolve them that they are doing it to get elected and advance their agenda.

This is bullshit. They win if we ignore the fact that they are trying to prevent black people from voting, because they will successfully keep black people from voting.

They'd love to as long as they don't have to do anything about the oppression of black people to win it, and as long as it wouldn't cost them their base among white rural voters.

Both of those things are impossible.

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 

Your ability to slide left, right, back, and forth away from the point is astounding.

While I appreciate what you wrote above, none of it really addresses the point. Your comfort levels are irrelevant. There are actual historical reasons why voter suppression is designed the way it is designed. Your inclination to argue that the suppression of the black vote is really just about them voting Democrat is either willfully uninformed or purposefully lazy. You cloak your arguments in this general theme of complete detachment you love so much, but the simple fact is, detached or not you cannot have a discussion about voter suppression without recognizing how we got here, whether it's:

• the latest suppression tools, requiring voter ID and cutting access to early voting
• the Supreme Court's ridiculous decision to destroy the VRA (which required historically racist states to preclear changes in voting laws), which resulted in laws being passed immediately in TX, MS, NC, FL, VA, SD, IA, and IN
• the removal of the right to vote from the current and formerly incarcerated and the facts behind that (which are that this country incarcerates blacks and Hispanics at extremely disproportionate levels)
• the historical and plentiful efforts to keep blacks from voting since winning suffrage (grandfather clauses that said former slaves couldn't vote, poll taxes, literacy tests, etc.)

Oversimplifying the issue by saying, "Republicans suppress black votes because they tend to be overwhelmingly Democrat," is exactly why they are so successful at enacting these laws. Everyone on this board knows it's not that simple. There are many reasons why all of these localities suppress the black vote and they range from pure racism (blacks are inferior and shouldn't get to vote) to classism (blacks who are poor will vote for things in my county that benefit them when I would prefer municipal, county, state, and federal money go to shit for me) to pure politics (blacks vote Democrat and I'm a Republican). Your intentional focus on just one of those things intentionally overlooks the history of voter suppression and ignores the fact that voting is how anyone in this country is able to have a voice, be represented, and be granted societal resources.

You should be. That's the point. We should all feel uncomfortable about that and a society that would disenfranchise people based on the color of their skin. I want you to feel that discomfort whenever you get the urge to remove the historical context of why things are the way they are in favor of reducing efforts like voter suppression to: Republicans just trying to beat Democrats in the political game.

See above. Especially the part where you say, "If you're poor, you're fucked no matter your race, but you're fucked a whole lot more if you're black."

This is absolute bullshit. Pure and unadulterated.

The preclearance requirement of the VRA required states which historically suppressed the black vote to submit any change to their voting laws for approval. When the Supreme Court destroyed it, those states (and others) immediately enacted laws that overwhelmingly affect black voters. I am not making the discussion about racism. It is about racism. Even if I gave you the benefit of the doubt and agreed that the impetus behind voter suppression laws was purely political, the effect is that such laws overwhelmingly target black voters. That's institutional racism.

And here is where I think you and so many others get caught up. It doesn't fucking matter whether a law, regulation, court decision, departmental practice, trend, whatever was not designed to be racist in a dark room by a bunch of white people thinking about how they can screw black people. What matters is that it does.

And this is the most naïve thing you've said yet.

Think about what you just said. Black voters are not perceived to be stalwart Democratic voters. They are because of the actions Republican politicians who attempt to curtail rights for blacks at every fucking turn. They are because Republicans at best turn a blind eye to and at worst are the proponents of police brutality, disparate treatment, discrimination in education, housing, finance, and the justice system, etc. Sure, Republicans would love to grab the black vote. But they cannot because their appeal to their base is that they will to continue to screw blacks as much as they can. Talking about voter suppression--one such tool they use to implement that screwing--like it is being implemented without regard to the color of the skin of the people being purposefully suppressed is the very definition of insanity.

If that's what you're hearing, you are not listening.

If you vote for David Duke because he said he would magically get your job back and you ignore everything else, you may not be racist, but you sure as hell are okay with racism. And the fact that so many people are okay with putting a racist, misogynist, xenophobic, piece of shit at the helm of this country says a lot about the people who put him there.

TM

For Hank
 

For the People are Fucking Stupid file (which I imagine may no longer have any room):

75% of this country wants to keep the ACA. And here's where the stupidity comes in (and it's the perfect example of how everyone in this country thinks and votes--i.e., Gimme something for nothing):

"The poll also finds that while the public is split on the law overall, the individual components are largely popular, except for the law’s mandate that everyone get insurance or pay a fine. Provisions like giving financial assistance to help people afford coverage and preventing insurers from denying coverage for preexisting health conditions both have 80 percent support.

The mandate has just 35 percent support, though many health experts say it is necessary to make the rest of the law work and make sure healthy people enroll as well."

http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare...acare-repealed

TM

Re: For Hank
 

If one party is dedicated to telling people that you can have your cake and eat it too, it helps make people stupid.

Re: For Hank
 

We are on quite a run of agreement.

TM

Re: For Hank
 

One party?

Re: For Hank
 

Which party passed legislation with an individual mandate, and which party attacked it as a unthinkable infringement on liberty?

Re: For Hank
 

Which party promises jobs will come back, if only we vote them in? As to the mandate, how is that working out?

Re: For Hank
 

The Republicans again! To be fair, they are willing to endorse mainstream Keynesian economics to create jobs, as long as they get to be in charge.

eta: See if you can spot the trend here:

http://images.dailykos.com/images/93...png?1404779256

As a matter of public policy, the ACA has been fairly successful, and the mandate is, of course, critical to making the insurance markets work, because otherwise you have massive free-riding and cream-skimming.

As a political matter, not so much, as we were previously agreeing.

Re: For Hank
 

Actually, the major problem with the mandate right now is that it doesn't hurt enough. Which is one of the contributing reasons that the rates went up this enrollment period and some insurers left some markets. A lot of healthy people opted to take the minor hit than get health insurance.

Frankly, if I were to mess with it, I'd get rid of the "stay on your parents' insurance until 25" to get a hold of those young healthy lives for the ACA risk pools. Probably would see a drop in rates in a lot of markets if the penalties were incentive enough for the 20-24 year old set to buy insurance.

Re: For Hank
 

Okay, this may be a dumb question, but if they're on their parent's insurance, aren't they in the risk pool?

I suppose the answer is that family premiums are less than the sum of a set of individual premiums.

Re: For Hank
 

They're the risk pool of whoever their parents' insurer is not the risk pool of the ACA plans. My employer provides a self funded group health plan for about 100,000 employees and maybe another 25,000 retirees.