monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

The myth of systemic racism

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

That works for me. The Senate and House have different powers and responsibilties. The Senate represents state issues anf the House represent citizen issues. They balance it out. Two Senators per state keeps one big state from trumping smaller states, and the House keeps the populations from handful of small states from overriding the majority.

I have no problem with breaking say Texas and Californis into more states. Ireally don't think they'd lock-step the nation into anything. North and Southern California have a lot of conflicting interests as do the 3-5 potential Texican states.

But first things first: there are up to 10 GOP Senate states to fight over.

I also believe that the electoral college needs to stay specifically because its the last defense for another Trump, or Texas or California forcing something down the rest of the nation.

2 Replies

@bobsal u1553115,

The last two republican presidents have been elected not by popular votes but by the electoral collage. Not a shinning example of good government. Both have taken government down a disastrous road. And the senate has the power to put in place a supreme court that is destroying our constitution. The house should have a voice in the supreme court nominations.

I had to repair this post. This damn tablet is hard to type on.

2 Replies

@RABEL222,

Quote:

The house should have a voice in the supreme court nominations.

In capital letters and gold leaf.

0 Replies

@RABEL222,

RABEL222 wrote:

a supreme court that is destroying our constitution.

Upholding the Constitution is hardly destroying it.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Ok so all you got is two times, which is not equivalent to "repeatedly". In addition, the Palestians accepted the Taba proposal, which was withdrawn by Israel because Barak had waited the last weeks of his tenure to open talks, and was voted out. Ehud Olmert resigned dyring his very late (again) attempt at peace talks. So each of those 2 offers was sabotaged by Israel itself.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Ok so all you got is two times, which is not equivalent to "repeatedly".

I think it is.

Olivier5 wrote:

In addition, the Palestians accepted the Taba proposal, which was withdrawn by Israel because Barak had waited the last weeks of his tenure to open talks, and was voted out.

He was voted out because the Palestinians went on a massive murder spree.

Without the Palestinians murdering everyone, he would have stayed in office.

The Palestinians didn't actually accept the Taba offer. They wanted to keep negotiating. And with Israeli voters sick of being murdered, the time for negotiations was at an end. Had they accepted the offer, Ehud Barak would have been able to stay in office.

Olivier5 wrote:

Ehud Olmert resigned during his very late (again) attempt at peace talks.

The Annapolis Peace Conference was November 2007. Olmert didn't leave office until March 2009.

Olivier5 wrote:

So each of those 2 offers was sabotaged by Israel itself.

Ehud Barak's offer was sabotaged by the Palestinians murdering everyone and getting him voted out of office.

I'm not aware of any sabotage of Ehud Olmert's offer.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

The reason these two Israeli PM sabotaged their own offer was that they could not possibly deliver on the offers they made: to remove the Israeli settlers in the West Bank would be next to impossible without killing a lot of them.

So you don't even have 2 offers but twice a half-assed offer. 0.5 +0.5 = 1.

2 Replies

@Olivier5,

Denying Israel's offers to the Palestinians reminds me of denying the Holocaust.

2 Replies

@Olivier5,

Hey boys, there's a very active thread on this very topic right here ...

https://able2know.org/topic/127639-1

Please don't derail this one!

2 Replies

@oralloy,

All except the six million Jewish dead, of course.

Here's where that very topic is currently being actively pursued ...

https://able2know.org/topic/127639-1

2 Replies

@bobsal u1553115,

I wasn't comparing the number of dead.

I was referring to the ugliness of referring to Jewish history and saying "that never happened".

0 Replies

@bobsal u1553115,

This is a general thread for random nonsense. There is no derailing this thread.

Even JTT's goofy nonsense about American war crimes is on topic in this thread.

And enough with your vote-down abuse.

0 Replies

@bobsal u1553115,

Quote:

Here's where that very topic is currently being actively pursued ...

Good, why don't you go there and stay there.

0 Replies

@bobsal u1553115,

bobsal u1553115 wrote:

That works for me. The Senate and House have different powers and responsibilties. The Senate represents state issues anf the House represent citizen issues. They balance it out. Two Senators per state keeps one big state from trumping smaller states, and the House keeps the populations from handful of small states from overriding the majority.

I have no problem with breaking say Texas and Californis into more states. Ireally don't think they'd lock-step the nation into anything. North and Southern California have a lot of conflicting interests as do the 3-5 potential Texican states.

But first things first: there are up to 10 GOP Senate states to fight over.

I also believe that the electoral college needs to stay specifically because its the last defense for another Trump, or Texas or California forcing something down the rest of the nation.

Texas or California cannot force something down on anyone. Texas and California are piles of dirt, sand, and water. They are places where people live.

Both the Senate and the House of Representatives represent PEOPLE. We, the PEOPLE.

But, since I am convinced things will never change on this issue...I guess it makes little difference how I feel compared with you on it.

Apparently you are okay with Hillary Clinton getting 3,000,000 more votes than Trump...and Trump still winning. (Mind you, he won fair and square.)

1 Reply

@oralloy,

I'm not denying them. Israel made objectively two (2) offers and sabotaged both in similar circumstances. That's markedly different from your claim.

This was just an example, showing that you can't win your little game when you stick to verifiable facts...

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

I don't think that's what I said at all. I am not happy with the results of Clinton/Trump and can't figure out where you get that I'm not. I left here for over two years over it.

There was a lot more going on than just the Electoral College: the Russians, gaming the system, Clinton ignoring states like Michigan she felt were in the bag. None of the electors voted against how their states voted. I understand some states are winner take all, some apportion according to results.

There's also a lot wrong with our system to voting for Presidents starting with the primary system, again: the Electoral College wasn't the only thing.

I might have said that along with all those with thousands of square miles of sand and rock, Texas has a population of 29,500,000 and California has a population of 37,250,000. About 1/5th the population of the US and they have the fastest growing populations as well. Four Senators and 1/5th the population. Those two states very well could own a popular election. COULD. The whole system needs looking at.

I apologize for making you angry. I'll just shut up about it.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Israel did not sabotage anything.

I always stick to verifiable facts.

I am not playing a game. I merely promote truth and justice.

1 Reply

@bobsal u1553115,

Technically, nobody ever derails any thread, because threads are not like trains. They are more like rivers. They go in all sorts of meandres, especially this one.

1 Reply

@bobsal u1553115,

Quote:

I'll just shut up about it.

Fat chance. Laughing

0 Replies

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know