quote:The Republican presidential candidate Scott Walker said on Sunday that building a wall on the US northern border with Canada was “a legitimate issue for us to look at”.
Asked in an interview on NBC if he wanted to build a wall on the Canadian border, the Wisconsin governor cited his experience talking to voters “including some law enforcement folks” in New Hampshire, an early voting state in the Republican primaries. Such people, he said, were concerned about terrorists potentially crossing over from Canada.
“They raised some very legitimate concerns, including some law enforcement folks that brought that up to me at one of our town hall meetings about a week and a half ago,” Walker said. “So that is a legitimate issue for us to look at.”
posted
The only solution to deal with the flood, the glut, the deluge, the positive unending buffet of evil is to build a wall on one of the longer and more peaceful borders on earth.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Seriously, though, if pro-wall folks want to keep up the pretense that it is for national security (and not immigration), a Canadian wall would be equally important to a Mexican wall.
Of course, building a Game of Thrones style wall between us and Canada sounds absurd... which, really, is what it sounds when people talk about it with Mexico, too.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:#Obama, you are only the president. You have taken an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, not to shred it. Mt. McKinley.
Good old boy Steve is so big on the Constitution that when Supreme Court Justices interpret it in accordance with their written roles in the Constitution, why he spends tens of thousands of dollars to see them ousted. Or he sponsors efforts to say that his state should just be able to ignore unwanted rulings.
Not that any of that has anything to do with Mt. Denali, which apparently Alaskans both white and Native American want to rename. If I hadn't been reminded more than once that elected officials can be profoundly, frighteningly stupid I would be sure King was just a scumbag brazenly advancing a position he knew wasn't true to score votes.
But it's possible he's just an idiot and doesn't realize that renaming a mountain (or rather un-renaming it) doesn't have shit to do with the Constitution.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
I'm glad to see Greg Brown is still around and making music. He wrote one of my favorite songs. (one of my favorite albums, actually)
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
With what, the position as stated in the article? (I haven't read the broader story, though, so I can't credit its accuracy yet).
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
"“I mean, we’re talking about a private institution,” he said. “If I was running one, I might say, ‘Well you know even if there’s a 20-30% chance that this happened, I would want to remove this individual.”
Freedom for Individual Rights in Education policy director Joseph Cohn responded by telling Polis that the sort of standard he was discussing would be highly unlikely to pass the due process requirements that public universities must legally abide by."
He seems pretty straightforward in what he's saying there.
And no problem, Windermere? Look, I know rape is awful, but you know what else is pretty damn bad? A false rape accusation that got you expelled from college.
Not to mention if you don't happen to be able to afford lawyers like the Duke victims. Or some poor bastard who was barely able to go to school through loans and such and can't afford to go someplace else. And, of course, carrying the label rapist around.
Accusations should be taken seriously and investigated, but if your system of investigation is seeing an 80 percent ratio of innocent people expelled, that's monstrous and wrong.
Posts: 572 | Registered: Jun 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
I find it very hard to consider expulsion monstrous. Wrong perhaps but certainly not monstrous.
Posts: 891 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Wingracer: I find it very hard to consider expulsion monstrous. Wrong perhaps but certainly not monstrous.
I admit Wingracer I really don't follow how you can arrive at this conclusion. It is 'perhaps' wrong to advocate that for every one or two correct labeling of rapist and subsequent expulsion, seven or eight other incorrect labeling and expulsions should be permissible?
How is that not wrong? Those seven or eight other people weren't rapists and they or their families or scholarships paid legitimately for college themselves. Bear in mind that I don't normally take this side of these sorts of discussions, but isn't it basically by definition wrong to throw out seven or eight people who are innocent to catch two or three? Especially if you know in advance? The cavalier attitude of 'well it's just expulsion' is bizarre to me. How many people do you know who have heen expelled from college in disgrace?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Are you seriously suggesting his success is because of his expulsion rather than in spite of it?
While 80% is a ridiculously high number, I wouldn't approve of such a measure even if the rate of false accusations was only 2%. (which is probably somewhat closer to the actual rate) There's a lot of very good reasons due process exists, and one of the main reasons (other than because it's a basic human right) is because you *can't* have your life ruined just because you were accused of a crime, which is why false accusations are relatively rare for any crime now. Get rid of due process and you'll watch it skyrocket.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: How many people do you know who have heen expelled from college in disgrace?
One. Over a rape accusation. He is doing quite well for himself now.
The terse replies are beginning to vex, Wingracer. That wasn't my only point even if your response *wasn't* completely anecdotal, which it was.
Oh course using the grounds you did for your anecdote, I can make your reasoning seem very ugly indeed: I know a woman who was raped, and she is doing quite well for herself now. So what's the big deal?
There. It happens to be true and doesn't it also neatly show how silly your reasoning is?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wasn't using it for grounds to prove anything, merely answering your question truthfully. It has little to no bearing on how I feel on the issue.
As for due process, completely agree when it comes to the law. One innocent person locked up is one too many. We are not talking about prison here. We are talking about a private college which in my opinion has the right to accept or reject any student it wishes for almost any reason. I mean if you can show that expelling someone for an unproven rape accusation is somehow discriminatory, then yes I would have a problem with that but otherwise, I really don't care.
Posts: 891 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
How about a private school that expels students who make rape accusations that don't result in criminal convictions? We still cool with that?
Posts: 572 | Registered: Jun 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bearing in mind that 80% is likely hyperbole, and how difficult prosecuting rapists is in the US, I'm not against it either.
Posts: 12931 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
So because it sucks that it can be hard to prove rape, we should change the system around so that we can add an entirely new class of victims to the whole mess.
Sounds like a good plan to me!
Posts: 572 | Registered: Jun 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it depends on what is provable. If there is behavior that could not, in a court of law, be proved as rape - dubious consent incidents, harassment - but the behavior itself could be proved, I would say that a private institution would have the right to expel.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
But you see, it's easy to avoid a false rape accusation. You just shouldn't be caught outside alone at night without an alibi or friends to collaborate your story; shouldn't be drinking; by drinking you make yourself vulnerable of being taken advantage of at best, or wearing clothes that make you look like your typical rapist. Especially if you go to a wealthy affluent college and thus are likely wealthy and can afford a high settlement; really it's their vault for allowing themselves to be in such a vulnerable position, they were asking for it.
Posts: 12931 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:“Are they really escaping tyranny, are they escaping poverty, or are they just running because we’ve got cable TV,” Huckabee told a weekend conference of the ultraconservative Eagle Forum. “I don’t mean to be trite — I’m just saying we don’t know.”
quote:“Are they really escaping tyranny, are they escaping poverty, or are they just running because we’ve got cable TV,” Huckabee told a weekend conference of the ultraconservative Eagle Forum. “I don’t mean to be trite — I’m just saying we don’t know.”
“This idea that we have an obligation to receive vast numbers of people . . . We have a real obligation to make sure that we protect the sovereignty of the United States.”
Mr Huckabee is having an awful time serving two masters, Jesus, and the GOP.
Posts: 1194 | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:“Are they really escaping tyranny, are they escaping poverty, or are they just running because we’ve got cable TV,” Huckabee told a weekend conference of the ultraconservative Eagle Forum. “I don’t mean to be trite — I’m just saying we don’t know.”
"I don't mean to be trite - so I'll just be ignorant, and scaremongering instead."
Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't agree with the position that we can't afford to bring in any, or at least a lot, of the world's oppressed, but it's at least intellectually coherent.
Trying to claim that things aren't even that bad in Syria? That they don't really have a good reason for running? That's just ignorance, and the worst part is that I don't believe for a second that Huckabee actually believes it. No doubt which slice of the pie he's aiming for, at least.
Posts: 572 | Registered: Jun 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:“Are they really escaping tyranny, are they escaping poverty, or are they just running because we’ve got cable TV,” Huckabee told a weekend conference of the ultraconservative Eagle Forum. “I don’t mean to be trite — I’m just saying we don’t know.”
“This idea that we have an obligation to receive vast numbers of people . . . We have a real obligation to make sure that we protect the sovereignty of the United States.”
Mr Huckabee is having an awful time serving two masters, Jesus, and the GOP.
The version of Jesus he thinks he is serving is unrecognizable.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jon Boy: Thanks, Imogen, for providing translation services.
Anytime. I also do a good line in sarcastic responses to Australian politicians, if you're interested.
Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:“Are they really escaping tyranny, are they escaping poverty, or are they just running because we’ve got cable TV,” Huckabee told a weekend conference of the ultraconservative Eagle Forum. “I don’t mean to be trite — I’m just saying we don’t know.”
"I don't mean to be trite - so I'll just be ignorant, and scaremongering instead."
Also, I eagerly await the application of this new wary skepticism on the part of Huckabee towards his faith in Christianity;)
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
