California Doing California Things

[Elixir]

Trump supporters are going to be absolutely insufferable during the midterms.

I am surprised how far down the gas lit rabbit hole Swiz has dug himself. It must be hard to maintain, what with reality being, well, FUKKING EVERYWHERE.

 

[ZiprHead]

Well, for Los Angeles the fix is in. Spencer Pratt has been overtaken by Nithya Raman. So Los Angeles has to choose between two democrat lunatics for Mayor. I expect that Bass will win handily. The democrat party machine did not want a loser like Bass running against a popular and viable option who actually stood a chance of winning. No, no, no, better to run against Raman where victory is certain.

Trump supporters are going to be absolutely insufferable during the midterms.

FTFY

 

[Bomb#20]

Well, for Los Angeles the fix is in. Spencer Pratt has been overtaken by Nithya Raman. So Los Angeles has to choose between two democrat lunatics for Mayor. I expect that Bass will win handily. The democrat party machine did not want a loser like Bass running against a popular and viable option who actually stood a chance of winning. No, no, no, better to run against Raman where victory is certain.

Pratt never had a chance of winning. Do you think Raman's voters would have voted for Pratt?

Pratt wouldn't have needed Raman's voters. Turnout is a ton higher in November than it is in the primary. To win Pratt would only have needed to pick up a lot more of the skip-the-primary voters than Bass. Whether he could have pulled that off is questionable, but there are an awful lot of LA residents unhappy with Bass.

 

[Politesse]

Delusional thinking is a key element of being a California Republican, it would be too depressing otherwise. But no, a guy who managed to just squeak by the 30% mark is not well set up to win in November.

 

[Patooka]

Trae Crowder points out just utterly retarded this latest MAGA conspiracy is;

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Families: the term "trad wife" has become a derogatory term directed toward women who want to have a traditional marriage i.e. husband and children. These comments are almost exclusively pointed toward white women and therefore white families.

You need to learn what the terms mean! "Trad wife" is not simply about having a husband and children, but about him being completely in control and she stays at home.

I could go on e.g. illegal immigration, support of Hamas, antisemitism, the university system, etc.

I don't think the university system is flawed as such. Studying the sciences tends to move people to the left.

I do agree there's a problem with with supporting things that should not be supported, but that's due to a very large and well planned campaign of misinformation. The right demonizes those who won't roll over for fascism, the left demonizes those who won't roll over for Islamic fundamentalism.

And few are interested in trying to teach people how to avoid falling for the propaganda because it would work both ways.

"Trad wife" is a pejorative term directed at white American families and nothing less; and how that's spun into the husband dominating the wife is flat out bizarre. Your interpretation is a paper thin attempt to provide cover for yet another reason so many people have been pushed away from voting for more progressive candidates.

The DNC could put a stop to this by vocally rejecting people who say shit like this. It's mostly young people espousing this absurd point of view and they don't show up to vote anyway.

The university system has become a farce when it comes to things like the social "sciences" along with the advocacy of radical political history and systems. I've said it before and I'll say it again: I went back to college fairly late in life and I came away with an understanding of why conservatives are so up in arms. The far left complains about "hate" to the point it's lost any meaning. Anything that one disagrees with = hate. Just like the instant accusations of racism, misogyny, etc., it's an attempt to shut down honest conversation. Case in point: a certain someone here took what I said about another subject and then performed contortions in order to accuse me of wanting trans people put in jail.

I didn't respond because it wasn't worthy of a response.

The understandable perception among millions is that they're not wanted--that the Dems have become a party of exclusion. Meanwhile the GOP welcomes all but the smallest demographics. The GOP and its horrifying support for Trump is awful beyond words but they're a lot smarter than the people running the DNC.

Look at what a trad wife is.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The state assembly passed SB-97 today, a resolution denoting April 24 as a day of remembrance for the Armenian Genocide. While this is not a first for the state, globally there are still very few public recognitions of the tragedy, which was the first mass genocide of modern times and set the stage for many of the 20th century's worst horrors. Despite its checquered past in terms of recognition, the mas skilling of Armenian people by the Turkish government was actually the case study that pressed Raphael Lemkin to first define the term "genocide" and lobby for its treatment as a war crime under international law. For Californians, it is an especially poignant anniversary, as many Armenians fled here during and after the war, and did what they could to surpass the trauma and build a thriving community in the Los Angeles, San Joaquin and Sacramento valleys. In the "Little Armenia" neighborhood of Glendale CA, construction is currently ongoing for a Armenian American Museum and Cultural Center which is supposed to open later this year. My state assemblyman, Juan Alanis, co-sponsored the bipartisan bill, an infrequent instance of he and I seeing eye to eye on something.

CA - AR97

Relative to the Armenian Genocide.

www.billtrack50.com

I wish they would quit focusing on specific things like this. It should be a day of remembrance for genocide without trying to enumerate them.

So you think there should be a generic "State Genocide Day" to honor genocides as a abstract concept, but not ever list them by name, just have a general celebration in which it is implied genocides have happened somewhere, nowhere in particular?

I'd make it Genocide Remembrance day.

Like we have Memorial day--doesn't matter which war.

The important part is genocide, we shouldn't be quibbling about exactly what warrants inclusion.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The understandable perception among millions is that they're not wanted--that the Dems have become a party of exclusion.

Because it's the only party that supports anything other than straight white males and their interests, its the "party of exclusion"? Do you think that argument of yours is going to be convicning to any of your intended victims? "Shut up and sit down, you don't need rights, you might make this one specific social class feel discriminated against"?

The problem here is that in the name of stopping discrimination the Democrats are actually discriminating against white males. And many quite rightly feel they are being mistreated. The Democrats pretend to be for equality but are taking it on faith that there are no "race"-based differences. (Not that it's race, race is just a proxy for what's really going on. Lots of poor blacks, lots of Asians from a culture highly valuing education.) And even without this, when you try to fix "discrimination" over less that a career you end up wrong. People are a product of their history, waving a magic wand and declaring them equal does not change this. The old sexist retires, the department has 20 men and zero women. The Democrats will have a problem with the next hire being male even though the odds should be 50:50. The reality is you punish young white males for the sins of their forefathers.

Do you think most white straight women actually aspire to wait on your hand and foot as per the #tradwife manifesto? Because I think you and all the other lazy-ass men in this country are in for a rude awakening, if so! The 60s are over, man. Most women have other perogatives than just being a domestic servant to some asshole they met in secondary school, and they will vote accordingly.

Doesn't mean the Republicans are right. The Republicans are quite good at encouraging people to jump from the frying pan.

 

[Politesse]

The state assembly passed SB-97 today, a resolution denoting April 24 as a day of remembrance for the Armenian Genocide. While this is not a first for the state, globally there are still very few public recognitions of the tragedy, which was the first mass genocide of modern times and set the stage for many of the 20th century's worst horrors. Despite its checquered past in terms of recognition, the mas skilling of Armenian people by the Turkish government was actually the case study that pressed Raphael Lemkin to first define the term "genocide" and lobby for its treatment as a war crime under international law. For Californians, it is an especially poignant anniversary, as many Armenians fled here during and after the war, and did what they could to surpass the trauma and build a thriving community in the Los Angeles, San Joaquin and Sacramento valleys. In the "Little Armenia" neighborhood of Glendale CA, construction is currently ongoing for a Armenian American Museum and Cultural Center which is supposed to open later this year. My state assemblyman, Juan Alanis, co-sponsored the bipartisan bill, an infrequent instance of he and I seeing eye to eye on something.

CA - AR97

Relative to the Armenian Genocide.

www.billtrack50.com

I wish they would quit focusing on specific things like this. It should be a day of remembrance for genocide without trying to enumerate them.

So you think there should be a generic "State Genocide Day" to honor genocides as a abstract concept, but not ever list them by name, just have a general celebration in which it is implied genocides have happened somewhere, nowhere in particular?

I'd make it Genocide Remembrance day.

Like we have Memorial day--doesn't matter which war.

The important part is genocide, we shouldn't be quibbling about exactly what warrants inclusion.

And what are we supposed to do on Genocide Remembrance Day? Just have a drink and try not to name any specific genocides all day, or what?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If it pleases them to double their husbands' votes, their option

As is getting beaten, should hubby ever suspect them of voting differently from his direction. It’s a free country though.

That's ridiculous. You're better than that.

Have you ever lived in the Bible Belt?
(Characterization is not argument)

It doesn't matter where I've lived. I no longer practice law but one of my specialties was domestic violence restraining orders (DVROs). I did hundreds. Of all the things I ever saw, a woman getting beaten or even being castigated for not voting the way her husband did wasn't one of them. Further, lawyers talk to each other and I never heard of another attorney representing a client where such facts existed.

The issuance of a DVRO can occur for a very wide variety of reasons. These are extremely serious matters, so to trivialize it by making such an unsubstantiated claim is an insult to actual victims who actually need a DVRO.

I'm sure some assholes somewhere committed DV against their wife for exercising an independent political view, but those must be extremely rare. My guess is that when it does happen, it's part of an already existing coercive control pattern exercised by an abuser who is likely already committing some form of DV rather than it being a sole cause.

If there was going to be DV over voting there would be DV over a lot more than just voting. Thus the lack of data points means nothing.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

2. You seem to think that I'm not in favor of treatment when I clearly am. Addiction and severe mental illness have been allowed to get out of control to the point where it's a massive blight on the entire nation yet despite the desire by the vast majority to begin solving the problem, it's only getting worse. There should be treatment and housing for the homeless and there are various ways it could be done, but it's not going to happen.

The problem is that not only must treatment be available but people need to want treatment.

And that's assuming treatment even exists.

3. You seem to think that simply taxing "the rich" could solve the problem. It can't. This one is especially irritating because cursory math will show that it wouldn't be enough. There's also no consideration for what would happen to the people who work for large corporations and midlevel businesses. Also, with respect to money, it wouldn't be a one time infusion that would solve the problem. The practical and logistical costs would be ongoing. You could drain the pockets of every single billionaire in the country and it might get the program off the ground, but then what? Finally, you seem to be okay with simply taking the property of others while at the same time unwilling to carve out other legal exceptions. Hypocrisy isn't a good look nor does it add to your hoped for credibility.

How dare you question eating the rich?!?! That's the magic answer to everything!

4. Biden's proposed immigration reform was fucking cynical and disingenuous. It was an election year farce. If that administration had been serious about the issue it would've been done something far earlier. It had paid little attention to a matter that most people were concerned about up until that time, which is the Democratic Party in a nutshell: out of touch, apathetic, and prioritizing idealism over national interests.

The problem was the Republicans were very interested in ensuring there was no fix. Thus what Biden proposed wasn't correct, it was an attempt to get a few Republicans to cross the aisle. Didn't work.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

2. The left, as has become their norm, is out of touch with the average voter and simply isn't aware of the invective constantly bombarding social media with anti-family messaging.

What anti-family messaging??

I haven't seen anything that I would call anti-family. Rather, what I see is accepting that humans are not one size fits all. Kids should be because you want to, not because of duty or because of an oops. Not pushing the family narrative doesn't mean you are anti-family.

 

[TSwizzle]

what an absolute tool Newsom is

California Governor Gavin Newsom revealed that he is the latest to land on President Donald Trump's political 'hit list.' The 58-year-old announced on social media that he and his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, 51, are the subjects of a Department of Justice investigation. 'Today, my wife & I joined Donald Trump’s hit list,' the Democrat posted. 'He has directed his Department of Justice to investigate us. They have not found a crime - they are simply trying to find one. He isn't coming after me because of mean tweets, but because I am considering running for president.'

Daily Mail

Newsom and his wife are corrupt af.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The fourth largest economy in the world hasn’t got a pot to piss in but has millions of dollars for this nonsense.

New babies? Families? Are "nonsense"? That's what gets me.

lol, you really are something else. Handing out millions of dollars worth of diapers to a few new borns does nothing to help the poor in any significant way. This is a bs publicity sham and another grift. I think you know this but you can’t help but defend this shit.

I don't see this as grift.

But I do see it as a standard problem with politicians--they want to be seen doing something. The result is things are done by a disorganized mess of separate projects (almost certainly with lots of extra overhead) rather than putting more effort into existing things (that someone else gets credit for.) America does far too many things. We need fewer, more comprehensive things to get the same result.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So your problem isn't that families are being helped in the wrong way, it's that they are being helped at all. That, to you, is inherently "grift". You offer no suggestions on how this could be done better, or what could be done instead, or how the same money could be better spent. You're just furious that babies are receiving material assistance from the state.

This makes sense, as you belong to a political party that is and has always been, fiercely anti-child, anti-woman, anti-family, and anti-prosperity.

We don't have a proper word for this.

It's useful, but done in an inefficient way.

 

[Politesse]

So your problem isn't that families are being helped in the wrong way, it's that they are being helped at all. That, to you, is inherently "grift". You offer no suggestions on how this could be done better, or what could be done instead, or how the same money could be better spent. You're just furious that babies are receiving material assistance from the state.

This makes sense, as you belong to a political party that is and has always been, fiercely anti-child, anti-woman, anti-family, and anti-prosperity.

We don't have a proper word for this.

It's useful, but done in an inefficient way.

I do not disagree with that. But I would rather see inefficient action than inaction or negative action.

 

[Elixir]

Newsom and his wife are corrupt af.

If “evidence” of the corruption you decry is even remotely mentioned in that post, you must be very smitten with the corrupt orange tub of brainless lard that you voted for.
Is he REALLY your type, Swiz?
I’ve heard how kinky Brits are, but this is over the top!

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Los Angeles does more to protect criminals

The Los Angeles City Council voted 14-0 to advance restrictions on police traffic stops rooted in one dangerous idea: That cops enforcing traffic laws are somehow the real threat on the streets of LA. Not the drunk driver. Not the gang member carrying an illegal gun. Not the reckless driver blowing through intersections at 90 miles per hour. Only in LA could elected officials look at street disorder and decide the problem is still too much policing. Traffic stops routinely lead police to illegal guns, wanted suspects, impaired drivers, gang members and violent criminals. LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell has repeatedly defended traffic enforcement as a critical public safety tool.

CA Post

This came about because it was felt that too many blacks or hispanics were being pulled over.

Similarly, the state did away with "jaywalking" tickets and the result has been more pedestrians being injured.

California doing California shit.

You know damn well that "jaywalking" was only ever treated as a crime in the barrios. White people in their little suburban neighborhoods cross the street to get to their mailbox or chat with Mrs Macready about the petunias and no one bats an eye.

Observation: How are they jaywalking.

Most jaywalking I see in the suburbs is safe--people are looking out for cars, not walking into danger. But I see two examples to the contrary: around high schools and the bums. Personally, I have had three really close calls with pedestrians: a little kid that somehow managed to crash their bike into a traffic lane while going along the sidewalk with what I assume was their father. A bum. And a really dark dude, dressed entirely in near-black colors--I do not think he was law abiding. (But he was very lucky, if it wasn't for a split-second flash I would have spotted him at about 1 second out.) And a couple of encounters where I had plenty of stopping distance--for bums on roads no pedestrian should have been on.

And remember the Michael Brown shooting started from him walking down the middle of the street.

Why do I think jaywalking in poor areas is different than jaywalking in non-poor areas??

And that no white person is ever subjected to random search and seizure in LA unless its a DUI cordon on New Year's Eve.

You think it's random anywhere??

You've seen the numbers, they've been quoted at you dozens of times. You know the police are racist, it just doesn't bother you because it isn't you.

Yeah, we've seen the numbers. And we see you falling into the standard trap of disparate outcomes being taken as proof of discrimination.

Poor people are more likely to commit obvious crimes. Of course they get arrested more. As always, the data showing "racism" fails to control for socioeconomic status. (The drug buy at the corner can be observed with a long lens. The drug buy behind closed doors can't be observed unless someone talks. Which do you think the cops are more likely to catch??)

 

[Elixir]

“The Los Angeles City Council voted 14-0 to advance restrictions on police traffic stops“

Presumably Swiz believes the LA City Council is comprised of 14 insufferable pricks.

it was felt that too many blacks or hispanics were being pulled over.

Such insufferable pricks! How DARE they rely on statistics!

Similarly, the state did away with "jaywalking" tickets and the result has been more pedestrians being injured.

I guess they should have consulted TSwizzle before allowing those insufferable jaywalking pricks to get away with such egregious behavior. After all, he IS the self-appointed arbiter on the sufferability of pricks.
Apparently nobody else wanted the job.

 

[Politesse]

You think it's random anywhere?

Seriously? Have you ever even been to a city? Or talked to someone who isn't white? I don't understand how someone can live in this country and have no idea what life is like here...