maxdancona
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 13 Jun, 2021 04:38 pm
The 1619 project is designed to push a political narrative. This in itself makes it problematic as an educational curriculum.

Furthermore the material in the project has been widely criticized by prominent historians. The project makes the dubious claim that the American Revolution was fought in large part to protect the institution of slavery. Most reputable historians reject this claim.

There is an interesting philosophical question about what good education should be. When I was in Ed school, I took a class dedicated to exploring different theories on the purpose of education (there are a suprisingly diverse set of opinions on this).

In my opinion using a education to push a single political narrative is a bad thing. It leads to students who are unquestioning and unable to see different perspectives.
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 13 Jun, 2021 05:16 pm
This was Tim Scott's response to Joe Biden's not quite SOTU speech. Yes, it is a bit of a gimmick that the GOP chose it's single African American Senator. But Tim Scott is an impressive American with a set of experiences and a legitmate voice.



I post this not because I agree with it completely (I think Senator Scott streches his point a bit too far). However, I do think is a valid point of view.

And his line "America is not a racist country" shows the political problem of the progressive position.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jun, 2021 05:18 pm
@Mame,
Mame, I just noticed your sugnature for the first time. Thanks for a good laugh.
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jun, 2021 05:28 pm
@snood,
It used to be: Always be sincere, if if you don't mean it" Smile
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 12:03 am
Stacey Abrams RESPONDS to
Tim Scott saying America is 'not a racist country'


0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 01:51 am
@maxdancona,
Quote:
This is a one-sided partisan political argument.

1. I am just one person posting articles and videos of views and opinions that are similar to my own.

2. This is an open forum.

3. You are free to post similar views or opposing views.
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 01:56 am
@maxdancona,
Quote:
Everyone just lines up on their predictable partisan sides on issue after issue.

Or people may simply just be posting their honest and true opinions, issue after issue.
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 02:05 am
@maxdancona,
Quote:
I do wish that RealMusic and Lash and others would show more propensity for independent thought.

1. First, I don't speak for Lash.

2. I prefer not even mentioning her name.

3. My thoughts are own independent thoughts.

4. If my thoughts happens to be the same or similar to someone else, that's fine with me.

5. With that being said, my thoughts are still independently my own.
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 02:18 am
@maxdancona,
Quote:
How many of these threads are you going to start Real Music? You already started a thread on this exact topic.

1. My reason for posting this specific thread is because I wanted that article at the beginning of this thread to be the first thing anyone sees when they click on to this thread.

2. I did not want that article to end up somewhere in the middle of a thread on some random page within the thread.

3. I feel that this particular article is too important.

4. And I want everyone to have the opportunity to see it at the start and not get lost somewhere within the thread.

5. That is the reason I started a separate new thread.
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 02:28 am
@maxdancona,
Quote:
I am glad you like my posts RM. That is very kind of you.

Don't worry, I am not going away.

Smile
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 09:25 am
A group of Texas Democrats plans to lobby senators as part of a broader pressure campaign to drum up support for the (For the People Act).

Published June 14, 2021

Quote:
The Texas Democrats who blocked a Republican-backed voting restrictions bill from becoming state law at the eleventh hour last month will head to the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday to lobby senators as part of a broader, last-ditch effort to rally support for a major voter rights bill.

Nearly two dozen state Democrats plan to lobby senators in behalf of the (For the People Act), a broad bill that would create a federal floor of voting rights access and kneecap laws like the one proposed in Texas and already enacted in other Republican-led states.

The schedule is still in flux, but a source with knowledge of the plans said the Texas legislators are scheduled to meet with Democratic Sens. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Republican Sens. Ted Cruz and John Cornyn, both of Texas. They will also meet with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and hope to meet with Sen. Raphael Warnock, D-Ga., in their push for federal voting rights legislation.

They will head to the White House for a previously announced meeting Wednesday with Vice President Kamala Harris, who is leading the Biden administration's push to protect voting rights.

"This is, in my mind, a now-or-never moment. It's an all-hands-on-deck moment," state Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer said Sunday. "On that last day" of the Texas House session, "on that gloomy Sunday, we knew we didn't have the votes, but we found a will, and we found a way."

Voting rights activists and Democrats in Washington and beyond have argued for months that it is time for the Senate to eliminate the filibuster — the 60-vote threshold needed to pass legislation — to get the (For the People Act) and other parts of President Joe Biden's agenda through the closely divided Senate.

But moderate Democrats, including Joe Manchin of West Virginia, have repeatedly said they aren't on board with changing Senate rules. The (For the People Act) isn't backed by any Republicans, and in a recent opinion piece, Manchin firmly opposed the legislation, citing its lack of bipartisan support. Without GOP votes and without eliminating the filibuster, the bill, filed as H.R. 1, is all but dead.

Even so, advocates who see the bill as their only hope of countering Republican-led election limits say they're not ready to throw in the towel.

"We can't take no for an answer," said Rahna Epting, executive director of MoveOn, a progressive group. "If anything, Manchin raised the stakes on how much energy we're putting into this."

In interviews, more than a half-dozen prominent advocates of the legislation promised more lobbying, marches and ad campaigns and a summer of pressure that would seek to persuade Manchin and others to defy Republican opposition, change the filibuster rules and pass the legislation.

Beto O'Rourke, the Texas Democrat who narrowly lost a Senate race in 2018 and has been hosting voting rights events around the state, said he believes the group will bring "much-needed courage and backbone" to the fight in Washington this week.

"I hope those Texas state House Democrats are able to show their colleagues in the U.S. Senate the way to fight," he said Sunday.

He said he plans to draw more than 10,000 voters for a rally Sunday night at the Texas Capitol in Austin, featuring the Texas legislators after their week of lobbying in Washington. The Senate is expected to vote on the (For the People Act) for the first time next week.

"It is absolutely clear that only Congress can definitively stop this vote suppression and restore fair elections," said Wendy Weiser, vice president of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law.

Nsé Ufot, who leads the New Georgia Project and is working with advocates in West Virginia to pressure Manchin at home, said Manchin's op-ed was "a sign that it's time to escalate, not that the fight is over."

"I refuse to believe that one conservative Democrat is literally what is going to bring down the entire American government and the sort of 200-plus-year experiment in democracy," Ufot said.

Stacey Abrams' Fair Fight Action is reported to be planning a "Hot Call Summer" effort, with plans to text 10 million people in states with voting restrictions on the books or under consideration, to rally support for the (For the People Act).

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/hope-federal-voting-rights-rescue-dims-state-democrats-advocates-turn-n1270480
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 09:52 am
Why Congress must pass the (For the People Act)
and the (John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act).



Published March 2, 2021


Quote:
In the 2020 election, we used our vote, whether it was cast early, by mail or on Election Day, to determine the future for our family, community and country. In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, racial injustice and the confusion and sudden changes to the voting process thrown at us, we showed up and decided the outcome of a free and fair election.

Now, after showing our power as voters, some partisan politicians in state legislatures are pushing bills that would restrict our freedom to vote, while Congress is on the verge of passing laws to protect and strengthen it.

Already in 2021, more than 250 bills in 43 states have been introduced by Republican state legislators that create more unnecessary barriers to voting. From cutting early voting, to increasing purges of voter registration lists, to limiting absentee voting options, these bills are shameless, partisan attempts to silence us. It is not a coincidence that these bills are being introduced after a free, fair and secure election with record turnout. Americans exercised their right to vote, and these politicians’ response is “We don’t want you to vote.” Under the guise of “election integrity,” many of these bills target voters of color and young voters who already face many barriers to the ballot box. They have nothing to do with election integrity and are simply an attack on our freedom to vote.

Instead of erecting new barriers to voting, we should be working to build a democracy that is truly of, by and for the people, where all eligible Americans can vote and make their voices heard. That’s why Congress must pass, and President Joe Biden must sign into law, the For the People Act and the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act.

Let’s start with the For the People Act, which the House is expected to vote on this week. It’s the boldest pro-democracy reform package introduced in Congress since the Watergate era. If enacted, it would strengthen our ethics and conflict-of-interest laws, stop unaccountable secret and special interest money from corrupting our politics, end partisan gerrymandering and protect voting rights and election security.

The For the People Act would set standards so every voter, regardless of their race, age or ZIP code, has equal access to the ballot box. The bill would improve our elections in several ways. First, it would streamline the voter registration process by allowing voters to register securely online or on Election Day. It would also stop the purging of voters from registration records and instead modernize the process by simply registering eligible voters when they interact with a state government agency.

Secondly, the bill would increase the security and integrity of our elections by requiring the use of paper ballots, increasing oversight of election vendors and encouraging states to conduct risk-limiting election audits, which help us have confidence in the election results. The For the People Act would also crack down on voter intimidation and the spread of disinformation by increasing penalties for promoting false information about the right to vote.

Finally, the For the People Act would ensure that there are more secure and accessible options to vote and reduce long voting lines by expanding early and absentee voting. It would also restore the right to vote to people who have completed their felony sentences and declare that Washington, D.C., residents deserve full voting rights and representation by supporting D.C. statehood.

The other bill Congress must pass to protect voting rights is the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act (introduced in the Senate as the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act). In 2013, in a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court eroded key parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which protected voters from racial discrimination and intimidation. This decision led to numerous states passing new anti-voter laws that restrict access to the ballot box and cut the number of polling places in our communities.

These changes have disproportionately restricted the freedom to vote for voters of color, often leading to long lines and less resources to run accessible elections in Black and brown communities. The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act is our chance to reverse this trend by restoring the Voting Rights Act and strengthening the provisions in it to protect the freedom to vote for all Americans, particularly voters of color.

As more Republican state legislators seem focused on selling debunked conspiracy theories and lies about the integrity of our elections, we — the voters who determine the outcome of our elections — need to make sure our members of Congress know they must focus on delivering bold action to protect voting rights.

Nothing, including the filibuster, which is a relic of the Jim Crow era and subverts the basic notion of majority rule in our democracy, should stop Congress from passing comprehensive democracy reform to strengthen our elections like the For the People Act and the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act.

https://www.rollcall.com/2021/03/02/why-congress-must-pass-hr-1-and-the-john-r-lewis-voting-rights-act/
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 10:19 am
There is a Fundamental Problem with RM's one-sided rhetoric.

Real Music wants the Democratic Party to force through a set of sweeping changes to how we do elections. These changes unquestionably will help the Democrats win future elections.

The Democrats are pushing through changes that will benefit them. And they are doing it on a party-line vote with no compromise.

If there is one thing that should be bipartisan.... this is it. You can't have one party unilaterally changing the rules to benefit themselves.
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 02:32 pm
@maxdancona,
A one-sided argument doesn't (necessarily) make the argument wrong.
A one-sided solution doesn't (necessarily) make the solution wrong.
There are times when bi-partisan is simply not feasible for all sorts of reasons.

Yes, I believe that if more people vote in every single election, that the democrats would by and large do better than the republicans.

But, being that we are a democracy, that would be wonderful thing to see happen.

So, anything that makes voting more accessible and easier to do in free and fair elections is a beautiful thing.

1. Is it fundamentally wrong in stopping the closure or relocation of polling stations that had served predominantly African American or minority voters, forcing them to travel long distances or to wait in long lines to cast their ballots?

2. Is it fundamentally wrong in stopping the elimination or reduction of early voting period?

3. Is it fundamentally wrong in stopping the restrictions or outright bans on voter registration drives?

4. Is it fundamentally wrong in stopping large-scale purges of voter rolls (ostensibly to remove voters whose addresses could not be verified) and voter caging, a related tactic in which a political party sends non-forwardable mass mailings to registered voters who are unlikely to support the party’s candidate or agenda and then uses any returned mailings as a basis for challenging the voters’ registration or right to vote?

5. Is it fundamentally wrong in stopping restrictive voting laws, that enables Republicans to win office or to stay in power in jurisdictions where less than a majority of likely voters supports their candidate or agenda?

6. Is it fundamentally wrong in stopping bills that criminalizes the act of giving food or water to people waiting for hours in long voting lines?

7. Is it fundamentally wrong in stopping bills from giving partisan state legislatures significant control over election administration while reducing the traditional administrative authorities of the executive branch and of state and local (county or municipal) election boards?

For example, Georgia’s omnibus “Election Integrity Act of 2021,” signed into law in March, included provisions that replaced the secretary of state as chair of the State Election Board with an appointee chosen by the legislature, effectively giving the legislature control of the board.

Democratic leaders and other critics of the law asserted that this provision enabled the legislature to take effective control of local decision making on matters such as polling station locations and closures, challenges to voters’ eligibility, and, crucially, the certification of election results. Similar bills relating to election administration were introduced in several other state legislatures and enacted into law in some states.
maxdancona
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 14 Jun, 2021 03:45 pm
@Real Music,
1. In my opinion, having one party unlaterally change the voting rules in a way that is benefits them is not a good thing. It is a bad thng for Democrats to do on a national level. It is also a bad thing for Republicans to do at a state or local level. On either level, a filibuster to prevent this is appropriate.

2. You are phrasing your questions in a sort of double negative "is it fundamentally wrong in stopping". I am going to simplify this for you. I am glad that you are separating the issues so we can consider them one by one.

3. I agree with you that closing polling stations in minority neighborhoods to prevent people from voting is fundamentally wrong.

4. I disagree with you about voter registration drives. They certainly need to be restricted. There are clear abuses, for example collecting registrations and throwing all of the Democratic registrations in the trash (and keeping the Republican ones) would be a clear foul.

5. I don't believe that everyone should be pushed to vote. Everyone should be able to vote... but pushing people to register and vote doesn't seem right particularly if you are pushing people who you think should vote for you and especially if you are giving these people things for their support.

6. Political parties giving people food and water while they vote can a problem. There is a line to be drawn here... but giving away gift certificates, or massages would be a problem. The question is where do you draw the line. Giving "MAGA" cookies to people in line at the poll wouldn't be appropriate (I am sure you agree).

7. The ethics of the question of federal versus state control of elections isn't at all clear to me. If you give federal control, than the next time the Republicans have control of all three branches of government, you can expect changes in your state.

Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Fri 18 Jun, 2021 08:30 pm
@maxdancona,
Quote:
In my opinion, having one party unlaterally change the voting rules in a way that is benefits them is not a good thing.
1. In my opinion, it is a good thing to make it more easier and more accessible for all eligible voters to vote.

2. If the result of more people voting ends up benefitting one party or candidate over another party or candidate, then so be it.

3. If a party or candidate loses when more people vote, then it is up to that candidate or party to either modify their policy positions or convince more voters to be in agreement with their policy position.

4. If their policy position ends up being a losing position when more voters vote, then so be it.

Quote:
It is a bad thng for Democrats to do on a national level. It is also a bad thing for Republicans to do at a state or local level. On either level, a filibuster to prevent this is appropriate.
1. The only way to stop these assaults against American democracy being waged by Republicans, is to address it at a national level.

2. And this crisis must be addressed at a national level, specifically because of what the republican party is doing at sate and local levels.

Quote:
You are phrasing your questions in a sort of double negative "is it fundamentally wrong in stopping".
1. The phrasing I used to ask the questions in my previous post that you are referring to was intentional and by design.

2. In that particular post I worded those questions in that way by design.

Quote:
I don't believe that everyone should be pushed to vote. Everyone should be able to vote... but pushing people to register and vote doesn't seem right particularly if you are pushing people who you think should vote for you and especially if you are giving these people things for their support.
1. I am not sure what you mean when you use the word (push).

2. I believe that every eligible voter should be encouraged to vote.

3. I don't know what you mean when you say ("giving these people things for their support").
0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Fri 18 Jun, 2021 09:00 pm
Manchin Is ‘Incredibly Frustrated’ On Voting Rights Says Sen. Doug Jones

Former Senator Doug Jones (D-AL) weighs in on Republicans pouring cold water on Senator Joe Manchin’s voting rights compromise and says Democrats will need to decide whether or not Congress will be the backstop to voting restrictions in states

Manchin floats Voting Rights (compromise).

Mitch McConnell: No Republican will back Manchin's proposal.

Published June 18, 2021

0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Fri 18 Jun, 2021 09:16 pm
Manchin’s Voting Plan Backed By Stacey Abrams, Panned By Mitch McConnell.

As Sen. Joe Manchin tries to find 10 Republicans to support his proposed changes to a voting rights bill, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced plans to bring the bill to the Senate floor for a procedural vote next week. Congressman Colin Allred says Manchin’s proposal is like “Christmas come early.”

Published June 17, 2021

0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Sat 19 Jun, 2021 07:03 pm
Sen. Manchin Signals Support For Filibuster Reform.

Former Senator Al Franken (D-MN) and congressional historian Norm Ornstein join Lawrence O’Donnell to discuss Senator Joe Manchin’s possible support for reforming the 60-vote filibuster threshold.

Published June 16, 2021

0 Replies
 
Real Music
 
  2  
Reply Sun 20 Jun, 2021 01:17 am
Republicans Reject Manchin Election Bill Changes After Stacey Abrams Endorses It.


Less than 24 hours after Senator Joe Manchin released a list of changes to the voting rights bill he could now support, many Democrats and Republicans are speaking out, including the founder of Fair Fight Action, Stacey Abrams. While it seems like the bill could be moving forward, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell slammed Abrams and Manchin, releasing a statement that reads, "Senate Democrats seem to have reached a so-called 'compromise' election takeover among themselves. In reality, the plan endorsed by Stacey Abrams is no compromise. It still subverts the First Amendment to supercharge cancel culture and the left's name-and-shame campaign model." Judith Browne Dianis, executive director of the Advancement Project, joins "Prime with Charles Blow" to discuss the topic.


Published June 17, 2021


0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 11/24/2024 at 11:31:48