• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama expected to nominate Loretta Lynch to be attorney general: CNN

You mean Peter can't look at a tit Ashcroft? :lamo

that was stupid. Ashcroft had a very good resume though, Yale and Chicago Law, AG of his home state, as well as a governor (2 term) and Senator. The AG is mainly a managerial position-the top trial attorney for the US Government is the Solicitor General. Ashcroft was a very good executive.
 
Nonsense. People learn about platforms through the news and other sources and discuss various political issues at home, the office and during recreation. I can't go a day without a political conversation initiated by someone, even at a place like a bar.

Why do you discount ground level education and interaction?

Yeah, I have been around a lot of those conversations in a bar and elsewhere. So and So sucks is usually what it boils down to. Platforms, I would bet 90% of the people do not even know what a platform is. That is outside of someone shoes.
 
Yes, I do. And I know the states won't, which is why the feds need to step in. Gerrymandering is the single greatest and most prevalent tool of disenfranchisement that exists.

I agree whole heartily. As my signature line attest. I live in a gerrymandered congressional district, everyone knew who exactly the winner would be 2 years before the first vote was cast. Gerrymandering is nothing but jury rigging an election. I would like to see a constitutional amendment that on the congressional level where counties had to remain whole as much as possible.
 
Yeah, I have been around a lot of those conversations in a bar and elsewhere. So and So sucks is usually what it boils down to.

Just like here, for many.
 
Just like here, for many.

LOL, yeah. You are so right. I love Obama because he is a Democrat or I hate Obama because he is a Democrat. I usually stay away from those folks. I like good conversations.
 
5 Most Interesting Cases of Attorney General Nominee Loretta Lynch



It's not directly related to the requirements for the position, but it indicates a general level of intelligence. They don't pluck people off the street.

Thanks for the link, But I must say...Other than case 1, and 5 the others seem awfully boiler plate...Nothing standing out...But considering 1 and 5 that would place her right in line with the bent of the current administration. Prosecuting cops, and republicans that is.
 
Thanks for the link, But I must say...Other than case 1, and 5 the others seem awfully boiler plate...Nothing standing out...But considering 1 and 5 that would place her right in line with the bent of the current administration. Prosecuting cops, and republicans that is.
Oh, you actually made prosecuting a cop who raped a detainee with a broom handle into a political issue? Good ****ing job bro! Also, prosecuting an Al-Qaeda operative whose goal was to blow up a branch of the FED is not in any way, shape or form "boiler plate."
 
Watching all the conservatives complain about Loretta Lynch being nominated while praising Mia Love for being nothing other than a black flight attendant/fitness instructor/community organizer who was elected is pretty funny. What were her qualifications before being elected? :lol:
 
Watching all the conservatives complain about Loretta Lynch being nominated while praising Mia Love for being nothing other than a black flight attendant/fitness instructor/community organizer who was elected is pretty funny. What were her qualifications before being elected? :lol:

elections select the person the voters who actually vote most want. not the most "qualified" or the best and the brightest.

Obama could pick any attorney in the USA for the office of AG. him alone. do you think this woman is anywhere near the best and the brightest attorney in public or private sectors? or even the best attorney in the Dept of Justice

or even the US Attorney's office in her district?
 
elections select the person the voters who actually vote most want. not the most "qualified" or the best and the brightest.

Ummm elections are about picking the most qualified person. Actually, here you are arguing that for you to vote for a black person, they'd need to be qualified:

well if a qualified black candidate came along I'd surely vote for him

Would you say that the voters of Utah and Mia Love's fans feel she was qualified? Or did the fact that she was black (and unqualified in every metric used to define the word) make all the difference? Remember, flight attendant, fitness instructor, possible beneficiary of affirmative action. I'm just trying to see where the line is for you.
 
Ummm elections are about picking the most qualified person. Actually, here you are arguing that for you to vote for a black person, they'd need to be qualified:



Would you say that the voters of Utah and Mia Love's fans feel she was qualified? Or did the fact that she was black (and unqualified in every metric used to define the word) make all the difference? Remember, flight attendant, fitness instructor, possible beneficiary of affirmative action. I'm just trying to see where the line is for you.

voters might claim they are voting for the most qualified person but in reality they are voting for the person they want in office

for example-we might have a mediocre republican with low qualifications but I might vote for him against a very well qualified liberal who wants to raise my taxes, ban my guns etc.

I don't care about whom voters in other states elected since I cannot influence that

I care about Obama picking another person like Holder (who was a decent line attorney, decent DC judge but sadly ascended beyond and above his level of competence) whose main qualification is her race when the DOJ needs a super star after Holder

after Gonzalez, Bush wisely convinced Peter Keisler to stay and run the DOJ for a few months. Keisler was everything you could want in the AG

brilliant: editor Yale Law Journal (no affirmative action for him getting in there-he was my college suite mate)
extremely experienced (WH counsel under Reagan, Supreme court clerk, partner and supreme court practitioner)
and a straight shooter who even liberals admitted had integrity beyond reproach

that's the kind of person obama needs in office now
 
voters might claim they are voting for the most qualified person but in reality they are voting for the person they want in office

for example-we might have a mediocre republican with low qualifications but I might vote for him against a very well qualified liberal who wants to raise my taxes, ban my guns etc.

I don't care about whom voters in other states elected since I cannot influence that

I care about Obama picking another person like Holder (who was a decent line attorney, decent DC judge but sadly ascended beyond and above his level of competence) whose main qualification is her race when the DOJ needs a super star after Holder

after Gonzalez, Bush wisely convinced Peter Keisler to stay and run the DOJ for a few months. Keisler was everything you could want in the AG

brilliant: editor Yale Law Journal (no affirmative action for him getting in there-he was my college suite mate)
extremely experienced (WH counsel under Reagan, Supreme court clerk, partner and supreme court practitioner)
and a straight shooter who even liberals admitted had integrity beyond reproach

that's the kind of person obama needs in office now

Much of Loretta Lynchs' experience is from being an prosecutor.

She was in charge of handling the Abner Louima case that happened in 1997.

The Abner Louima Case, 10 Years Later - NYTimes.com
 
Many centrists and most conservatives support stop and frisk. Liberals oppose it.

Authoritarians from both ends of the spectrum might like stop and frisk. Libertarians oppose it. As usual, the Bill of Rights is on the side of the libertarians.
 
Which is Lynch's point. She didn't make any determinative statement as to whether or not the practice should be halted altogether, she was simply commenting on the public controversy that it has drawn.

She said it depends on who is doing it. It does not depend on who is doing it. Anyone doing it is exercising unconstitutional powers and is likely to abuse those powers.
 
Many centrists and most conservatives support stop and frisk. Liberals oppose it.



Wrong.

Some liberals oppose it.



Do you see how you screwed up here? You blamed an entire group for the attitudes and actions of some members of that group.
 
Last edited:
Oh, you actually made prosecuting a cop who raped a detainee with a broom handle into a political issue? Good ****ing job bro! Also, prosecuting an Al-Qaeda operative whose goal was to blow up a branch of the FED is not in any way, shape or form "boiler plate."
Before getting your panties in a bunch, I already said that Obama in entitled to pick his own people. The problem with progressives today is not only do we as the opposition have to acknowledge the fact, but have to be enthusiastic in support of it.

Let's see you enthusiastically support repub/conservative ideas then we can talk
 
Before getting your panties in a bunch, I already said that Obama in entitled to pick his own people.

Of course he is. You acknowledging that reality doesn't wipe away the absurdity of politicizing the prosecution of a heinous crime. Low class doesn't even begin to describe it.

The problem with progressives today is not only do we as the opposition have to acknowledge the fact, but have to be enthusiastic in support of it.

No you don't. That's just a silly strawman.

Let's see you enthusiastically support repub/conservative ideas then we can talk

Sure thing. I support school choice, right to work laws, a stronger presence in the middle east, trade liberalization and lowering the corporate tax rate. I also voted for Scott last week, and donated to conservative causes in the past. You don't have to be a partisan to call out this type of inanity :shrug:
 
You mentioned how America appears to an outsiders eyes. I think to mine we as a society are very sick right now-and I am NOT religious, I merely try to be virtuous, failing often.

Ive read about how the soviets, despite living amongst some of the most fertile land on earth could not even feed themselves. And when a calf was sick and crying all night, it was left to die-why bother? You dont get any benefit from helping, and so would be a fool to do so. It turned ethics and morality on its head. As you state the Good Samaritan can not exist in this state.

Theres NOTHING virtuous about destroying the institutions of society (family, etc) and the state ripping initiative from the minds of people in order to assure a supplicant culture of the entitled, disaffected, and dependent. That is what the left is doing here, case in point the war on poverty and its resultant welfare state. And it was done for votes.

The same lefties teach children everyday how bad Americans are throughout history (we are histories bad guy), without context. In college its stepped up. Our universities should be about the free discussion of ideas, but instead are merely a pulpit and a means to sanction the right.

And our media paints a biased picture intended to elicit an emotional response, one that paints the left as good, and the right as evil. The left denies this even happens or suggests its equivocation (fox news!!!!!)

And then hollywood blasts presents warped views of morality, always wrapped in a shiny-cool wrapper. That guy MUST be right because he's cool and hip and gets the ladies. Conservatives are irrational, and mean. Its all about feelings.

One can hardly wonder why at the end of this onslaught "joe six pack" is left angry, resentful, and frustrated. And THATS where the left lives, like a jealous kid who didn't get as much candy on Halloween-there to rectify things-just vote democrat. They will be your family. They will be your God.

The decay of this nation has been something to behold, and its come from within. China and India dont yet hate themselves, it will be interesting to see where they are in 50 years. Like I said, we are quite sick.


Most of that I agree with, but in perspective, it was the opposite when the circumstances of my parentage allowed me a first class American education, from fifth grade on we learned about the Bill of Rights, how the land was "discovered" and the west was "won", a highly skewed John Wayne version of events. But, they taught us too well, when guys like me started asking where was the constitutionality of forcing people into slavery called military service when they have no right to vote they started handing out detentions, which was really stupid because that only annealed our resolve, just as lobbing tear gas did.
We became a questioning society and were branded all sorts of ****, "hippies", "yippies", "long hairs", "queers" and of course "lefty pinkos"...

I watched the film "Joe" not too long ago, with Easy Rider and Kent State thrown in you get the idea.

What we really were was defenders of the constitution and the right to live free. we were the embodiment of Vermont's license plate "Live Free or Die". And we seriously questioned the John Wayne Story, especially after the Pentagon Papers were published, a copy of which lies on my desk to this day, a reminder that anything any government says is suspect and when it comes to war, a probable lie.

We found out that America wasn't "discovered" after all, a guy named Lief Erikson beat him too it and old Chris from which much of the US get its name was 12,000 miles off course and nowhere near where he said he was, resulting in the native being misnamed as "Indians" when India is half a world away.

We learned that the west was not "won" but ****ing stolen, and that the last righteous war, a legitimate case of defense and liberation of many various peoples was probably the last righteous war and that when the bullets start flying, truth starts dying.

All that was righteous and reasoned, truth in fact. A truth Nixon had to face. But it was not learned. I suspect because that naive push back caused by irrational high school detentions was hijacked by agenda-fed idealogues from the far left to the dark and violent, we had our "mojo" ripped off by the likes of clown acts like the Symbianese Liberation Army and some morons who think a brainless and failed philosophy requiring all things to be surrendered to the state is the road to utopia. But, they are not the "left" of my generation who got their heads beat revealing that anything government cannot on its own be trusted; they will lie, cheat, steal, beat, jail and ultimately kill if they have to.

Today, the "left" are a bunch of has-beens wallowing in slogans and fighting ancient fights like higher minimum wage and free money called "assistance" while wiping their asses with what was once the finest legal document in the known universe, the United States Constitution. They have no concept of "rights" as individuals but surrender all such identity in a clamoring mob whose main tool is shouting down any and all opponents and turning their leaders into demons or, in the tragic case of the great demon Sarah Palin, "sluts", "bimbos", and "whores", while going into hysterics over the fact she actually has a family that is still together and actually talks to one another. Shame.

The result is what I post almost daily, the nation reels in cheap, tawdry, ineffective ideological image making while the real issues, crime, break down of family, drugs, school drop outs, the real problems get completely ignored.

In the real world, a misfit country like Canada should be the one with the problems, ****, 30% of the population aren't even signatories to the constitution, half of them have been threatening to quit for four decades and our political system appoints members of the Senate, they aren't even elected. The United States, as I NEVER tired of pointing out has faced and beaten every obstacle it has faced and they have been mightier than almost every nation. Born out of war against the mightiest power on earth, faced them again later to a draw, fought the deadliest civil war in history. When you remove the moral judgments, which are worthy of discussions, the US is indestructible...at least from the outside.

The problems you face can be solved, but not when there is a wall running down the middle of the country that would dwarf the Berlin wall....a wall in my opinion the left in America need to stay powerful for as soon as true "liberal" thinking arrives, both left and right have to open their close minds and ask if there isn 't merit in what they thought had none before. And while I repeat, the American left and I have little in common politically, I suggest the right is more capable of thinking "parachute mind", as in it only works if its open.
 
Yep, it all boils down to getting involved. Voting is the average American involvement in our political process. No more, no less. But in any presidential election only a bit more than half of Americans even bother to vote. So that mean 45-50% depending on the presidential election do not get involved at all. Then around 38% average in midterms bother to vote, that mean 62% of all Americans do not get involved. Fewer than 10% bother to vote in a primary which picks the two candidates that will face each other in November. But a whole lot of Americans will bitch about their choices.

But so far those who are involved only voted. How many actually worked on a campaign outside of putting a bumper sticker on their car. I think for most Americans, non-involvement outside of bitching is their motto.



We have had the same issues here, as when turn out drops into the 70's the limited thinkers, usually the left start talking about making a law and forcing people to vote. When the only tool you have is a hammer, all solutions involve nails and the left has only force.

Having said that, there is no easy solution. In taking part in the above debate I wrote that if politicians want people to change their schedule, go out of their way and go into a polling station and mark it with a pencil [we do that here - the most trusted way] then they should have something worth selling. if all their doing is spewing party line, then their a lamp post that talks and I have better things to do...like writing essays about lamp post politicians and asking really, really rude questions as at all candidates meetings. But in the end, if none of them meets the minimum requirement, then no. What I did in the last federal election was work for an independent because I was bored, but we had an impact, the other slobs started having to talk about what we were talking about...that's the start.

And I agree, but I always think of this one candidate I covered in the late 70's. He was a Roman Catholic Priest who ran for the New Democratic Party nomination - left, leftists who hate God etc. and won. He won the riding against odds and served one term in Parliament. In an interview I asked him if his success was divine intervention. He replied immediately, "No, a lot of hard work and sweat. But you know what? I learned something the first day. I asked people to help me and they did. Most of them said they had never been asked by the candidate today.

Part of the US problem is the system. Who in the US can expect to be able to shake a presidential candidates hand? Here, we all can and often do.
 
So it's important to you they are not black as heaven forbid there's no way a black person can be qualified.

I could care less. This administration does not.
 
Are you saying there aren't black women who are qualified for this job, or does it have to be a white man? I think you are just showing your true colors.

Oh. Well I think you are a fool :).

I'm sure you can find lots of black women who meet the minimum qualifications of the job. The problem being that that is the standard this adminsitration looks for, rather than looking for the person who would be best at the job.
 
Oh. Well I think you are a fool :).

I'm sure you can find lots of black women who meet the minimum qualifications of the job. The problem being that that is the standard this adminsitration looks for, rather than looking for the person who would be best at the job.

I think Obama picked her because of her experience as a prosecutor.
 
Back
Top Bottom