search results matching tag: enforced

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (289)     Sift Talk (37)     Blogs (17)     Comments (1000)   

Three-Minute Video Explaining the Common Core State Standard

newtboy says...

CRT is not real outside of law school. It’s a big racist lie. It’s not taught in grade school.

Edit: Yes, if true, actual CRT, the law school class, was banned in grade school, nothing would change….but you want the intentional misuse and bastardization of the phrase to mean any mention of racial disparity, racist actions, slavery, Jim Crow, racist policies including those adopted by the Republican Party at the same time those racist policies were abandoned by Democrats in the late 60’s early 70’s, any mention of lynching, the KKK, the fact that non whites were not allowed to vote, the fact that non whites were not considered full human beings in the constitution, etc to all be under the name “CRT” and want it all to be removed from schools. You want to rewrite history so it resembles the false image you think you project. It’s absolutely moronic, attempted forced ignorance. The Republican plan for children because ignorance makes it easy to abuse and control the populace.

American history is real….and really racist.
By intentionally mislabeling anything about our racist history as “CRT”, a right wing buzz word they have stripped of any actual meaning to create some fantasy racial boogeyman they can point to to excuse blatant racist policy and actions, you think that allows you to pretend it doesn’t exist, to deny it, and to return to it. Removing any mention of our racist history is racist, stupid, and is a ploy to convince right wing morons that racism isn’t real, never happened, and so doesn’t need any fixing or even teaching. It erases an ENORMOUS part of American history, and all of black American history. You love that.

You bold faced liar. That’s EXACTLY what “anti CRT” is about, renaming the slave trade as “Africans immigrating”, calling slavery “job security”, pretending that Lincoln ended racism completely (but being confused because in your mind slavery is a hoax), ignoring the murderous atrocities during reconstruction, ignoring the blatant often deadly racism that was the norm through the 70’s, and the institutional racism that still exists, never mentioning and pretending attacks against blacks like Tulsa and others, mass murders, arsons, terrorism, all by law enforcement so there’s no legal remedies for the survivors….(The Tulsa race massacre took place on May 31 and June 1, 1921, when mobs of White residents, some of whom had been deputized and given weapons by city officials, attacked Black residents and destroyed homes and businesses of the Greenwood District in Tulsa, Oklahoma, US)…never happened. The anti CRT movement is about erasing that history so they 1)don’t feel guilty or uncomfortable for trying to defend or excuse having a murderously racist history, and 2)so it’s easier to return to that racist society with minimal effort because they won’t know where it leads.

Why? Because the senators that were complicit all switched to the Republican Party after the southern strategy, and those who believed in equality and rights for all switched to the Democratic Party. Another bit of racist history you personally love to deny despite it being the historical, undeniable record of our history. They don’t want to be asked, because they either answer truthfully and are proven to be racists, or lie and lose their racist voter base. Racists are nearly all…99%+-, right wingers. They do not belong to the party trying to eradicate racism. They belong to the party that openly accepts and fosters racism, and pretends, often insists it doesn’t exist when they’re in public….your party. The party of racists, white nationalists, insurrectionists, revisionists, anti American, pro Russian, sexist, anti democracy, anti education ignoramuses.

Quit bringing nothing but dishonest bold faced lies and rewritten history to the table. That means you leave, because dishonest bold faced lies and revisionist history are all you ever spout….because you are a dishonest liar and blatant consistent racist….and a sexist.

LBGTOW (little boys going their own way)….that describes you people well, we wish you would follow through. Go on now…shoo. Go your own way, buy your own country and go there. See for yourself just where unopposed right wing nonsense leads, just leave the US out of it. Ask Musk to forget Twitter and buy Guatemala or an island nation, invite Trump to lead for life, then GO! You have so many issues with other people having rights, so GTFO and create your own white male controlled, white right wing utopia…or move to Russia….but don’t expect to get to come back when it devolves into criminal despotism, economic collapse, and ecological disaster.

bobknight33 said:

If it is a CRT is another red herring than you have nothing to worry about. Let it be banned in schools and in you mind then nothing would be banned.

No one wants to ban the teaching of slavery or Jim Crow.

Why would any Republican want to ban the teaching this side of the Democrat party?

Quit bringing false arguments to the table.

Jordan Klepper Takes On Canadian Truckers | The Daily Show

bcglorf says...

@newtboy,

A company cancelling a multi-billion dollar project means multi-billion dollars not spent on the work of the project, that many jobs out of the economy. Exactly the same as a car manufacturer shutting down for a week, by your logic nothing was lost, the company just stopped spending money for a couple days...

I only support the groups right to protest, and not to illegally block roads or borders. I stand by my wish is for their prompt arrest when illegal blocking roads, borders or places of business.

That said, I believe it also wrong of me to fail to point out that our federal government has continually refused to act as I would wish in promptly shutting down illegal blockades. This is the very first instance were they've shown any interest in a prompt police enforced end, and they've in fact jump much further to invoking a declaration of national emergency so they can also target protesters bank accounts directly and without court orders.

An analogy would be someone that supports arresting people for possession of marijuana. The government then proceeds to only selectively enforce that law, say only acting to make arrests when people are a particular creed or color. It's perfectly consistent to believe the government arrests are wrong and unfair, and to NOT support them, while at the same time still believing the idea of the rule applied fairly being a good idea.

One side is about what I think the line for protest should be:
-I believe the right to protest should be independent of creed or belief, and should only be restricted when actions taken are illegal.(Ideally illegal being defined as impeding on freedoms of others)

By that, the convoy blockade of border or streets should have led to immediate arrests.

In the eye of fairness though, the last two years have already seen at a minimum 3 major protests, that included illegal blockades of work sites and railways and those were ALL allowed to run for weeks and in 2 cases months. The government of the day even tripped over themselves to message their support for the overall causes of the protestors.

In that light, it's wrong to simply ignore the fact that the first protest that is likely to vote conservative is the ONLY one where the government immediately condemns everything about them and feels compelled to intervene urgently.

Churches were literally burning last summer, and our PM's public statements spent most of their time sympathizing with the anger before pleading that burning churches isn't helpful. Where'd all that compassion for folks that you disagree with go when it meant a small number of downtown Ottawa business shutdown and horns honking go. Now our PM invokes terrorizing of the populace.

Trudeau's actions have been distressingly similar to Trump's as the division in our country grows, he's using his words to reach out to the extreme end of his side of the aisle, while tossing gasoline and vitriol onto his opposition. It's making things worse in the worst possible way when we need leaders uniting instead of stoking further division.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

JiggaJonson says...

https://www.inquirer.com/columnists/attytood/january-6-stewart-rhodes-sedition-oath-keepers-20220215.html

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21203387-rhodes-memo-for-detention-reconsideration

ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh they would NEVER overthrow the government...unless trump told them to via the insurrection act. WELL

WELL WELL WELL that's very comforting, i guess you were right after all, nothing to worry about here. Just a buncha guys sittin around with thousands of rounds of ammo, assault rifles, spare parts, and body armor ready to overthrow the gov if ordered. Sittin around havin some breadsticks.

I saw ur comment about you care about everyone blah blah, just not in a public-policy-enforcable kind of way right? Well this concerns all of us. These people were ready to create a dictatorship.

Texas Cop Vapes Confiscated Weed on Cruiser Camera

newtboy says...

21 cases of tampering with evidence in 6 months, theft, armed robbery, felony possession of controlled substances, felony driving under the influence of a controlled substance, lying on an official report, abuse of power, and intoxication on duty by a police officer and he got two years probation? After his force tried to hide what happened, delay, mitigate, minimize, etc.

In Texas, he should be getting life in prison for the marijuana alone and every penny he or his family has should go to repaying the hundreds of people he illegally arrested, including his pension….his department on the hook for the rest.

*promote exposing exactly who the absolute best in law enforcement really are. A rock star, dedicated, decorated super cop….their golden boy….more of a criminal than everyone he ever arrested combined. Typical.

Where are the good apples. I’ve never seen one. Just a few bad apples, and a few more, couple more, one more bushels, a few trucks full, and 17 train loads, and 4 super size cargo ships full…not a good one to be found in the bunch.

STUDY: $500 Per Month Life Changing For The Homeless

newtboy says...

Did they offer that in the program, or was it only random individuals….or are you extrapolating, assuming the program became universal? I thought this plan was just for the indigent.

$500 each for 4 works out to more than my wife brought home for 40 hours a week after 15 years at her last job…..barely livable for 4 anywhere in California, a nice income in some states. Not a huge amount to provide for 6 months. How much does temporary housing, services, extra law enforcement, etc cost over that time for 4 people? I assume they’re close.

Yes, universal income is costly, but most on the right won’t consider giving the destitute money if they don’t get a handout too, that likely multiplies the amount by over 10 times. With a means test, it would be billions, maybe under $100 billion. We spent nearly $6 trillion on bad Covid response in 2020, including trillions to corporate welfare handouts with no strings attached and they still fired millions of workers. I think if that’s ok we can afford to invest in making people productive again instead of drains on society (of course, not everyone will benefit, but 75% success must be a win overall). If not, socialize any corporation that took a bailout, we bought em, we should own them.

…Or taking on more debt like every government project, but the increase in gdp from turning costs into profits likely pays for the program without a dime in new taxes, just a reduction in costs of handling the homeless and new taxes from their incomes….especially if you have a means test and not universal income.

Yes, they convoluted by calling it universal income but focusing on homeless. It should be UMI. Universal Minimum Income….under employed get less than unemployed up to a certain minimum livable combined income, fully employed (with living wages) get nothing….IMO. Sadly, a large portion of people can’t see what’s in that plan for them (no homeless, less crime dumbshits) so won’t consider it unless they also get $500 even though that’s not even a noticeable amount to them….one more ivory backscratcher.

bcglorf said:

I'm gonna have to be that guy. $500 a month for a family of four is $2k, which is a very good chunk of money to drop in your lap.

That works out the same as it they were on a single income, working 40 hour weeks at $10/hr, so almost equivalent to a full time job. No doubt that's gonna be a big deal and noticeable financial improvement to the recipient(s).

As always with UBI schemes, the devil is in how you pay for it. If it's truly universal, paying $500/month to ~330 million Americans would cost $1.98 Trillion dollars, meanwhile the current entire US gov budget for 2022 is estimated at $1.2 Trillion.

So, to implement $500/month universally in America would require not only increasing overall tax revenues by almost 50% it would also require the cancellation of 100% of every single other expenditure. That not includes military spending going to zero, but even cancelling the jobs of everyone that collects taxes and would presumably have been responsible for distributing the $500 checks.

If the 'fix' is to just tax the pants off anyone earning more than the $500/month, or limiting who we give it to, then it ceases to be a UBI scheme, and is instead just a mundane modification of the existing social security scheme by shuffling more money back and forth between different folks.

Vote While It Counts

newtboy says...

Comment downvote for blatant lies

1) it specifically does not outlaw them, it explicitly allows them….it regulates and enforces them, so yes, in states with ID laws, it has mandatory ID to vote (but expands what ID is allowed beyond a drivers license.). Fail

2) It does not allow unattended drop boxes. where? Quote it. It requires more drop boxes than one for 3.5 million people, it does not (that I can find anywhere) allow unattended drop boxes any more than current laws which require them to be under surveillance and attended. It does not allow “vote gathering” liar, prove me wrong with quotes from the bill (you can’t)….side note, in California, the Republican Party itself set up multiple unauthorized drop boxes, unattended and without surveillance cameras even after being charged for breaking state laws, gathered those votes (discarding any that they didn’t want to submit, like any from people named Enrique and DeShawn, and possibly filling out any left unsealed…..Republicans are also the ones caught with campaigns directly harvesting ballots from nursing homes and admitting they filled out any race not filled out, voting for the Republican candidates even on Democrat’s ballots, so you know, those are Republican MOs, not Democratic, you can’t point to one actual example of Democrats doing that, maybe you can find some false OAN reports claiming that, but absolutely no evidence. Double Fail

3) dumb ass, it requires investigation by the state “ Additionally, the bill sets forth provisions related to election security, including by requiring states to conduct post-election audits for federal elections”. It also requires states to purchase voting machines with a paper receipt and record, so no more attempts like cyber ninjas to reprogram the machines to give the results they want with no physical record to prove their fraud. Super fail

4) where does it limit a states ability to challenge and audit itself? Quotes from the bill or admit you’re lying. It limits the states ability to gerrymander, to deny polling places for targeted populations, and to create biased and blatantly racist policies designed to obstruct certain populations from voting. It limits states ability to limit early voting. It actually REQUIRES states to audit every federal election you delusional fucking moron. Double dipsolitious fail

5) the scariest part for you (that you didn’t mention intentionally) is making Election Day a national holiday, because if poor working people get a paid day off to vote, guaranteed more will vote, and that’s disastrous for the right that freely admits it can only win elections if they get to choose the voters, the method of voting, and the outcome (I’m looking at Trump), and will never win any election ever again if all legal voters vote.

Such a sad, deluded little liar you’ve become, bob. You must really dislike yourself to do that to yourself. You’re worth an honest argument and position, bob. You let Trump twist you into this dishonest, “say anything”, hyper partisan angry little man…..you deserve better, and we all deserve better from you.

Always against the side of freedom, inclusion, equal opportunity, truth, honesty, fairness, civil rights, and civility.

bobknight33 said:

It does not have mandatory ID to vote.

It allows un attended voting boxes.

It allow vote gathering.

None of this is secure.


Limits states ability to challenge.

Let's talk about questions and the Potter case....

newtboy says...

Unfortunately, I think his summation is correct.
Law enforcement will take the wrong lesson and continue to act criminally, claiming she was convicted because of 1) her truthful statement (taking the lesson they should never accept any responsibility verbally) or 2) politics (absolving her of any wrongdoing so taking no lesson at all).
Until this is the norm every time an officer shoots someone, meaning they must prove in court it was justified (and not just to their boss/friend), criminal police won’t reform.

snake eating itself

cloudballoon says...

True enough. But with Manchin & Sinema, the Dems aren't doing much better to have laurels to rest on either. It just projects a whole lot of incompetence & re-enforce the frustrations and distrust Americans (and many allies) have and an easy target for ruling autocrats to laugh at. Surey that's not what people voted Biden AND control (albeit bare-bone) of all 3 branches of gov't to the Dems for...

newtboy said:

It was imitating the Republican Party.

News Fails to Ask WHY Police Seized $100K From Traveler

bobknight33 says...

from Asset Forfeiture
Policy Manual 2021


I. Guidelines for Planning for Seizure and Restraint
A. Background
The Department of Justice (Department) Asset Forfeiture Program (Program) encompasses the
seizure and forfeiture of assets that represent the proceeds of, or were used to facilitate, federal
crimes. The Program has four primary goals:
(1) Punish and deter criminal activity by depriving criminals of property used in or acquired
through illegal activities.
(2) Promote and enhance cooperation among federal, state, local, tribal, and foreign law
enforcement agencies.
(3) Recover assets that may be used to compensate victims when authorized under federal law.
(4) Ensure that the Program is administered professionally, lawfully, and in a manner consistent
with sound public policy

II. Payment of Attorneys’ Fees in Criminal Forfeiture Cases
A. Defendant’s attorneys’ fees
The defendant in a criminal forfeiture action may file for an award of attorneys’ fees only under
the Hyde Amendment.4 A motion for fees and costs filed in a civil forfeiture case under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2465(b) cannot include fees and costs incurred in even a directly related criminal proceeding.5
To prevail on a Hyde Amendment claim, the defendant must prove that: (1) the defendant was the
prevailing party in the underlying action; (2) the government’s position was vexatious, frivolous, or in
bad faith; and (3) there are no special circumstances that would make the award unjust.6
This burden
is heavier than the one the government must meet under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA

Congress requires new tech to detect and stop drunk drivers

dedstick jokingly says...

I agree, but lets take this to it's inevitable use: car senses illegality, locks doors, parks car and dials 911 to make sure you get the help you need from your local law enforcement friends. All in the name of group safety of course.

RITTENHOUSE, Law, Verdict

newtboy says...

Clearly fails to meet the criteria for a citizens arrest….they had no personal knowledge he had committed a crime (and indeed he had not). They did not stop him immediately during the commission of a crime or immediately afterwards. The crime they suspected him of committing was not a felony, so they could not follow him or arrest him after the fact, the law requires immediate apprehension. The force used in a citizens arrest must be proportional to the crime, it wasn’t.

Because it wasn’t a legitimate citizens arrest, by stopping him and aiming guns at him they became the initial aggressors, and the instigator of violence cannot claim self defense when his victim defends themselves….by law.

But they’re white, at least one was in law enforcement, the victim is black, and it’s Georgia. Don’t get your hopes up even such a blatantly obvious cut and dry murder case will end with a fair outcome.

Ironically, the defense just asked again for a mistrial because black men are driving around the protests carrying rifles, and they say that’s an intimidation tactic meant to terrify the jury (while admitting the jury is unaware of them)…but when their clients did that and went on to use those guns, that was a civic duty, a community service they were performing. Um….

surfingyt said:

watching the comments reminds me of this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IR9XsOCP43Y

Inside Arbery Case With Spotlight On Self Defense 'Claim' | Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar

RITTENHOUSE, Law, Verdict

newtboy says...

It sends a message that some accountability will be enforced….and with luck removes his DNA from the gene pool.
It just might stop more retaliatory arsons and riots too, which if they occur likely would cause more damage and injury than one house and family….so in that way it would help quite a few.

vil said:

No point crying over spilt milk, someone should have shot the kid first to prevent the violence. Or someone should have not allowed him to have a gun. What does burning his house down now do to help anyone?

Gun Laws: Jon Stewart Interview w/ Former ATF David Chipman

newtboy says...

15% of all violent crime is domestic violence. It stands to reason then that 15% of killings are direct domestic violence, if not far more.
Nearly 50% of women killed in the us are killed by their intimate partner.
Guns are involved in over 50% of intimate partner homocides.
That’s guns in domestic violence cases accounting for 25% of femicides (women killed).
It’s impossible to give an accurate number for violence tangential from domestic violence (ie shot by police, collateral injuries, suicides, etc) but it’s far from zero.

https://ncadv.org/STATISTICS

https://efsgv.org/learn/type-of-gun-violence/domestic-violence-and-firearms/

The National Gang Center under the Department of Justice based on annual surveys of local law enforcement agencies tallied 11,934 "gang-related" homicides in the U.S. from 2007 through 2012. The FBI reported 93,253 total murders during the span. Comparing the numbers, the Center estimated that "gang-related homicides typically accounted for around 13% of all homicides annually."

Researcher John Lott stated that the U.S. has a high homicide rate compared to other developed countries because of “drug gangs.”
According to the National Youth Gang Survey Analysis by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Gang Center, and Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, most gun homicides are not related to gangs.
A December 2020 Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report by the CDC of 34 states, four California counties, and Washington, D.C., found that 9.7% of homicides in 2017 were gang-related

So, 25%+- of all women killed (and a similar number for men one assumes) vs 9-13% for gang violence (including tangential)…but you want to focus on “inner city gang killing” (read “black thugs”) as if it’s 90% of homocides and domestic violence death is non existent.

Again, you devolve into making up fake racist statistics to turn any issue into a racist argument. This is where you fail every single time. Fail to say what you really mean. Fail to be honest. Fail to offer true statistics. Fail as a human being….you completely racist liar.

Downvote your comment because as usual you ignore the topic, likely didn’t watch the video, and make up statistics to be a blatantly lying, unapologetic worthless piece of racist excrement.

How can you possibly be so stupid you thought no one would call you out on these easily debunked blatantly racist lies, Bob?

bobknight33 said:

OF all the killings per year how many are domestic violence?

1%
2%

OF those domestic violence what % are from guns, Knifes , other?
Evil White conservative owners are the problem? No bias here.

What about the 90+% gun violence ? inner city gang killing?
This is where you start.

Down vote since it not about any meaningful discussion of root causes.

Let's talk about people defeating the Texas tip website....

newtboy says...

I love the idea, echoed by the Supreme Court, that if this methodology is found to be legal, there’s nothing at all stopping states from using it to outlaw things protected by the constitution, like arms, religions, hate speech, anything the state legislature decides is unwanted, and using cash prizes to incentivize citizens into enforcing them. One can only hope Republicans see the truth in that prognostication and quickly move to make these laws constitutionally invalid….otherwise these laws will quickly invalidate the constitution.

Edit: If California decides the bounty on anyone owning an “assault style weapon” is $1000000, what’s to stop them? What’s to stop Austonians and Houstonians voting for the same thing in Texas? Suddenly it doesn’t sound like such a great idea…..right? Republicans only love the constitution when it’s convenient….so we have to make it convenient (or make end running around it unthinkable).

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Oops….how did I forget Marjorie Traitor Green, the ringleader?! Mea culpa.

Sounds like the two who testified also delivered corroborating documentation to prove their accusations to congress.

She isn’t helping by going on Bannon’s show and saying the coup was justified because the Declaration of Independence says we should overthrow tyrants (by which I guess she means the elected but not yet sworn in Biden, her tyrant to be). I guess she’s too dumb to understand that she just admitted the riot WAS an attempted coup, and that she fully supports the attack against democracy she helped plan. D’oh!

Possibly charges coming….but you are correct when you said congress won’t throw them out. Republicans don’t believe in the law, personal responsibility, or consequences for your actions, and with Republicans refusal to have any standard besides red=good blue=bad, the technical majority Democrats hold isn’t enough to enforce the law.

newtboy said:

Ruh roe….. Coordinators of the coup were working directly with Paul Gosar, Lauren Bovert Mo Brooks, Madison Cawthorne, Andy Biggs and Louie Gohmert pre planning the attack. Katrina Pearson, former Trump aide was on some of those calls. She acted as what they call the liaison between these, uh, organizers and the white house itself. And of course direct contact with Mark Meadows. all coordinated with the planners of the riot at the capitol before the attack. Reports are that Gosar may have, according to these individuals, offered them blanket pardons on Trump’s behalf for whatever the hell was going to happen that day.


D’oh! Becoming more and more obvious why Trump is terrified White House records of those interactions might be presented as evidence. Promising preemptive blanket pardons for people planning to commit treason against the US is treason. Too bad ex presidents can’t invoke privileges….not.

Edit: and…..today it was revealed that on Jan 6 Trump made repeated phone calls to the coup command center manned by Bannon at a nearby hotel, but not The Trump hotel because they wanted to pretend Trump wasn’t involved….but moron that he is, Trump couldn’t help but call every 5 minutes to get updates and give directions. These calls from the whitehouse would likely be recorded too. Ruh roe!



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon