Current Events Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
thebigabd said:
Alright, you caught me in something I have a heavy interest in, so I can't resist getting all philosophical on you here.

I just don't agree with that... I think we have outgrown and become too diverse our current model, but most people believe it to be so sacred that they are scared to reform it.

Our system was brilliant and changed the world, don't get me wrong, but we are too diverse for it. Also, packing most of the population into two political parties is toxic, divisive, and ineffective as well.

The fix, in my opinion, is a proper system of representation. A diverse society needs proper representation in government.

Norway is always such a good case study for Democracy, because they are so well setup. They are a small country, but they had 8 political parties qualify for representation in their government.

They have 169 seats in their parliament.

The conservative party has 45 seats
The christian democratic party has 8 seats
The labour party has 49 seats
The centre party has 19 seats
The progress party has 26 seats
The socialist party has 11 seats
The green party has a seat
The red party has a seat
Etc....

Their population, though not NEARLY as diverse as ours, has proper political representation in government. This is also true in Canada, Germany, France, Sweden, Italy, etc. Most of the free world has a proper system of representation. We just don't.

If we wanted our government.... OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, and FOR THE PEOPLE to be properly represented, we would probably have something like this:

The Conservative Party
The Liberal Party
The Progressive Party
The Tea Party
The Green Party
The Libertarian Party
The Moderate Party

Whatever... but one of the keys to a good democracy is proper representation in government. We just don't have that. We are way too big and way too diverse for our current 2 party system. We need an overhaul, badly.

This concept that other countries use to achieve better/proper representation is called "Proportional Representation".. Basically you have a lot of active political parties, and however the votes fall you earn representation. Parties that don't receive enough votes to meet the threshold don't get representation. It's not winner take all like ours. The more votes you get, the more representation in government you have. Ours is... If Ted Cruz wins by 0.1% in Texas, he represents ALL of Texas.

Ted Cruz and John Cornyn are the political representation for Texas. They are both Republicans. The 40% of the population of Texas that voted against John Cornyn has NO political representation in government. The 48% of Texans that voted against Ted Cruz in Texas have NO political representation in government.

Think about that... nearly half the citizens of Texas have zero political representation in government. That's why the rest of the free world does something different.

And, in fact, John Adams was one of the first to suggest it.

"It should be in miniature, an exact portrait of the people at large. It should think, feel, reason, and act like them. That it may be the interest of this Assembly to do strict justice at all times, it should be an equal representation, or in other words equal interest among the people should have equal interest in it"
-John Adams, 1776

"A representative body is to the nation what a chart is for the physical configuration of its soil: in all its parts, and as a whole, the representative body should at all times present a reduced picture of the people, their opinions, aspirations, and wishes, and that presentation should bear the relative proportion to the original precisely."
-Gabriel Riqueti, one of the leaders of the French Revolution
Click to expand...

I would have no issues with adding more political parties or just doing away with them
 
BCSooners said:
I know why they do, it's outdated.

Vatican City is a country that uses the EC. Those are the only countries that uses them, so I don't get how you have a hare time believing it.
Click to expand...

Dude, I'm Catholic. Saying the Vatican is an EC is laughably disingenuous. They have a Papal conclave to elect the Pope. THey don't have an EC
 
It's not called "breaking in" when you have a no-knock warrant.
Click to expand...

re-read what I said... I said they broke her door down in the middle of the night. Which is true. I didn't say they broke in.

That gave the police the right to NOT KNOCK. I understand why the guy shot, but under KENTUCKY LAW, the police had every right to shoot back.
Click to expand...

Law doesn't make something right.

You can't charge the police just b/c you don't like the outcome, when they broke no law. You sound ridiculous right now.
Click to expand...

I would argue that as usual, you are looking at something through a very narrow scope.... If protests ensue here, it will be about the system itself that made this ok. That's what it is always about... You guys always try to boil it down to some very specific thing.

It has been and still is (in some places) legal to lock someone away for life for non-violent crimes if it is their 3rd offense... It is legal for the police to raid your home in the middle of the night without knocking... It is legal for officers to kill you if you don't do what they say. It is legal to put a human being in a cage for life for a first time, non-violent drug charge. Thank God Trump granted her a full pardon. But that was legal. Life sentence for that. Probably the best thing Trump has done for an individual human being. Can you imagine the horror that person went through? And it was legal.

The very fact that police can break your door down in the middle of the night without declaring themselves is probably a good example of a systemic problem in the criminal justice system.

That very law seems to infringe on the 4th Amendment.

Is it an "unreasonable" search and seizure for an armed squad to break down someone's door in the middle of the night when they know the person of interest isn't there, and they have no direct proof that narcotics were in the house, which they weren't.

I guess the next time someone breaks into my house I will grab my pistol and and make sure they announce themselves as police before I shoot, which of course will end up with at least me being dead. Hopefully they really are police and my wife and children don't get killed.
 
steverocks35 said:
Hunter Biden did not receive any such wire transfer. It was an investment in the company he was part of. This is hilariously and predictably overblown.

Also LMAO at using that idiot Posobiec as a source.
Click to expand...

congrats...now you know how republicans feel with the Trump investigations
 
WTSooner said:
It's not called "breaking in" when you have a no-knock warrant.

What don't you understand about the no-knock warrant? That gave the police the right to NOT KNOCK. I understand why the guy shot, but under KENTUCKY LAW, the police had every right to shoot back.

You can't charge the police just b/c you don't like the outcome, when they broke no law. You sound ridiculous right now.

I think the guy charged was actually outside the apartment, down at ground level. He shot from there, which is why he caught the charge he did. I have no problem with that charge based on what I currently know.
Click to expand...

yep

i'm just going to take a break from the news for the next couple weeks
 
SoonerBounce13 said:
Pizzagate is real. I know you will laugh at this. But its real
Click to expand...

Come on, you can't possibly be this dense. It was one of the most idiotic conspiracy theories ever floated. If you really believe this then I can't take anything else you ever say seriously because you aren't a serious person.
 
steverocks35 said:
Come on, you can't possibly be this dense. It was one of the most idiotic conspiracy theories ever floated. If you really believe this then I can't take anything else you ever say seriously because you aren't a serious person.
Click to expand...

dead serious. I have not doubt that people involved with pizza gate were involved in criminal activity that is most likely sex trafficking.

It would be pretty naive at this point in history to think this wasn't happening
 
thebigabd said:
Law doesn't make something right.
Click to expand...

It might not make it right, but it makes it legal. I, and many others others tha affiliate with the right in this thread, have said there probably needs to be some changes to no-knock warrants. But again, just b/c you don't like the outcome doesn't mean those officers that fired back are in the wrong, or did anything illegal or that they should be arrested for.

And I'm sorry, but no-knock warrants aren't racist. There was a case a few years ago where police executed one, startled a deaf white guy, and shot him when he reached. Where was the f'ing outrage then?
 
SoonerBounce13 said:
dead serious. I have not doubt that people involved with pizza gate were involved in criminal activity that is most likely sex trafficking.

It would be pretty naive at this point in history to think this wasn't happening
Click to expand...

There. Is. No. Pizzagate.

This is so moronic.
 
thebigabd said:
And protesting unjust laws that will one day be a black eye and stain on our history is legal.
Click to expand...

so you think a cop shouldn't be allowed to defend himself?

Or are you saying the no knock warrant needs to be done away with?
Because that is already well on its way to being outlawed. "protesting" this isn't needed

These "protests" that are happening and about to happen are not about any laws. They are about a misguided opinion that cops are killing people of color and are inheritable racists. It isn't about justice.
 
thebigabd said:
It has been and still is (in some places) legal to lock someone away for life for non-violent crimes if it is their 3rd offense... It is legal for the police to raid your home in the middle of the night without knocking... It is legal for officers to kill you if you don't do what they say.
Click to expand...

You are starting to sound more and more like cool with every passing day. That isn't a compliment.

Why shouldn't people be locked away for life if they have shown over and over and over and over and over that they cannot follow the laws of a society? Do you know how much it costs, both the local government and the victims of the crimes, to leave these people on the streets? A LOT.

It is legal for officers to kill you if you don't do what they say.
No, it's legal for officers to kill you if you don't do what they say AND YOU DO SOMETHING THAT POTENTIALLY PUTS THEIR LIFE IN DANGER. You stand in the middle of the street with your hands up, no visible weapon, not moving, and they tell you to lay down, you don't, and they shoot? They are going to prison.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
A theory on what’s causing a late year slump & maybe fewer wins this year
Replies
1
Views
2K
Soonerinkc
Soonerinkc
B
Moving forward
Replies
2
Views
2K
Oliver Hardy
Oliver Hardy
B
Pioneer to progress
Replies
2
Views
2K
womenssports
W
Sooner04
Board Observations From Afar
2 3
Replies
51
Views
6K
TINY
T
B
Washington helps propel NHS girls past Edmond North
Replies
1
Views
1K
mikeareese
M
Back
Top