The Justice Act: Democrats slammed the door in a black man's face, and ultimately betrayed one of their key constituencies

[Crepitus]

These demands are based on stereotypes, not on actual facts.

That's blatantly untrue.

 

[Crepitus]

nice link. everyone now totally knows what you are whining about.

Do you really need a link to comprehend what I'm saying? Can you not do your own research? I might be gay, but I'm not into that whole hand-holding thing.

Thems the rules of the house. Link or lock.

If you think I broke the rules, why didn't you simply report my post instead of making a spectacle out of it?

The only thing I regularly report is racist remarks. That was just a friendly reminder.

 

[TemplarKormac]

What about the GOP Justice Act introduced by Tim Scott is insufficient? Can anyone tell me? What doesn't appeal to a Democrat more than a black man leading on an issue like this? Is it because the said black man is a Republican?

If another black man dies at the hands of a corrupt police officer, what explanation will Democrats give for not allowing debate on a bill that would have done something to solve this issue? How will they explain to the American people why they didn't act? Why did they offer resistance instead of cooperation?

Do some Democrats prefer bathing in the blood of innocent lives lost to perpetuate an easily solved problem? Were they not the ones who, two days ago, implied that if Republicans don't put forth a solution to this problem, they have blood on their hands? Now that they have, how did Democrats respond?

THEY SLAMMED THE DOOR IN A BLACK MAN'S FACE.

I will never vote for a Democrat in federal elections again. They have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are not interested in solving what ails our society, and are all the more interested in entrenching themselves in the problem instead. I am beyond disgusted. The congressional Democrats are no different than the Southern Democrats of old, fighting to preserve segregation and racist practices instead of working with their fellow Americans to rid our country of a toxic scourge. Working to preserve the problem of racism instead of solving it.

Spare me the tired refrain that you, a Democrat, will fight for minority rights, that you will stand for people of color, or that you will enact social justice.

No, you won't.

You were offered a chance to lead on an issue you so frequently champion, by a black man no less, but you slammed the door in his face.

They did not like the act he submitted , is all, it was not due to the color of his skin.

I beg to differ. What if Tim Scott had been a Democrat introducing the same bill?

Karen Bass has introduced a bill. In her opinion, a much better bill.

Congressional Black Caucus

The Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) has been committed to using the full Constitutional power, statutory authority, and financial resources of the federal government to ensure that African Americans and other marginalized communities in the United States have the opportunity to achieve the...

cbc.house.gov

"In her opinion"

Not yours. Speaks volumes man.

you lame ass ask hypothetical questions about what the reaction would be if a black person introduced the same bill as Scott.
no need for that, son.

A black person already weeks ago introduced a bill, which addressed more problems with policing. Democrats already took the lead.
As initially posted, you neither comprehend the situation nor present it honestly.

you are only interested in whining about race cards while playing the race card.

grow up, get a job.

Look at you evading the topic, again.

You only favor a bill that severely limits the ability of the police to police effectively.

Please, we all know what you want.

 

[TemplarKormac]

These demands are based on stereotypes, not on actual facts.

That's blatantly untrue.

Okay, prove it untrue. Cite the facts.

There are 800,000 police in America. Prove to me that they all employ targeted systemic racism and profiling against African Americans.

 

[TemplarKormac]

It doesn't do anything to address the problems. It's just an attempt to be able to say they "did something" when they didn't.

Have you even read the bill? Or were you convinced it would do nothing before it was drafted?

Both, actually.

Why do I get the feeling you're lying?

 

[Crepitus]

Let me give you a lesson... Democrats control the house... Best way to pass a bill is for the Democrats to write the bill consult with the GOP (especially Senate), amend, and pass it... OR GOP do same visa versa but they are more interested in the Democratic Congress...

The problem, professor, is that the Democrats didn't bother to consult Republicans on the construction of their bill. Republicans offered to work with Democrats to reach a compromise on the Justice Act, and Democrats refused to allow debate. Debate allows for amendments and changes, on a bipartisan level. Still Democrats refused.

Why would we work with those racist, tRump supporting, criminals? They haven't even attempted to work with us.

 

[colfax_m]

Because the bill doesn’t do as much as Dems want.

No, nothing they introduce will. What does that say about our legislative process?

Nonsense. Dems have made qualified immunity a core of their reform proposals.

And how would the police do their jobs effectively if qualified immunity was eliminated? I agree with eliminating no-knock warrants.

It doesn’t need to be eliminated, but limited. How can police have any accountability with the way it is now?

See that's the thing, I am not saying they shouldn't be held accountable. I am concerned with how much of a limiter democrats want to place on it.

It’s a rational concern, but if you’re for any limits, that puts you more in line with Dems than the GOP.

 

[Crepitus]

These demands are based on stereotypes, not on actual facts.

That's blatantly untrue.

Okay, prove it untrue. Cite the facts.

There are 800,000 police in America. Prove to me that they all employ targeted systemic racism and profiling against African Americans.

Don't be stupider than you have to be, Son.

I'm not playing the straw man game with you.

 

[Crepitus]

E

It doesn't do anything to address the problems. It's just an attempt to be able to say they "did something" when they didn't.

Have you even read the bill? Or were you convinced it would do nothing before it was drafted?

Both, actually.

Why do I get the feeling you're lying?

Because it goes against your bias. It would, after all, mean I'm better informed than you and you just can't handle that no matter how true it is.

Any more silly questions?

 

[22lcidw]

What about the GOP Justice Act introduced by Tim Scott is insufficient? Can anyone tell me? What doesn't appeal to a Democrat more than a black man leading on an issue like this? Is it because the said black man is a Republican?

If another black man dies at the hands of a corrupt police officer, what explanation will Democrats give for not allowing debate on a bill that would have done something to solve this issue? How will they explain to the American people why they didn't act? Why did they offer resistance instead of cooperation?

Do some Democrats prefer bathing in the blood of innocent lives lost to perpetuate an easily solved problem? Were they not the ones who, two weeks ago, said that "if Republicans don't put forth a solution to this problem, they have blood on their hands?" Now that they have, how did Democrats respond?

THEY SLAMMED THE DOOR IN A BLACK MAN'S FACE.

I will never vote for a Democrat in federal elections again. They have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are not interested in solving what ails our society, and are all the more interested in entrenching themselves in the problem instead. I am beyond disgusted. The congressional Democrats are no different than the Southern Democrats of old, fighting to preserve segregation and racist practices instead of working with their fellow Americans to rid our country of a toxic scourge. Working to preserve the problem of racism instead of solving it.

Spare me the tired refrain that you, a Democrat, will fight for minority rights, that you will stand for people of color, or that you will enact social justice.

No, you won't.

You were offered a chance to lead on an issue you so frequently champion, by a black man no less, but you slammed the door in his face.

Because the bill doesn’t do as much as Dems want.

A key component of Dems demands for reform is limiting qualified immunity which Scott’s bill seems to ignore. Additionally, Dems want more DoJ oversight of police and more teeth. Scott’s bill doesn’t make mandates but try’s to use money to compel change. Not exactly a bill with a lot of teeth.

See here for further explanation:

Senate Democrats say the Republican police reform bill is "not salvageable"

They’re now poised to sink the legislation during a vote on Wednesday.

www.vox.com

Is it any surprise the GOP bill would be watered down?

Scott said it was 70/80 % of what the Progs wanted. If the Progs win in November, they can complete it. What's the big deal? The Progs are winning, but it is not enough it seems.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Let me give you a lesson... Democrats control the house... Best way to pass a bill is for the Democrats to write the bill consult with the GOP (especially Senate), amend, and pass it... OR GOP do same visa versa but they are more interested in the Democratic Congress...

The problem, professor, is that the Democrats didn't bother to consult Republicans on the construction of their bill. Republicans offered to work with Democrats to reach a compromise on the Justice Act, and Democrats refused to allow debate. Debate allows for amendments and changes, on a bipartisan level. Still Democrats refused.

Why would we work with those racist, tRump supporting, criminals? They haven't even attempted to work with us.

See, that's why we never get anything productive done. Ever. Such a childish approach to solving our country's greatest problems.

 

[TemplarKormac]

E

It doesn't do anything to address the problems. It's just an attempt to be able to say they "did something" when they didn't.

Have you even read the bill? Or were you convinced it would do nothing before it was drafted?

Both, actually.

Why do I get the feeling you're lying?

Because it goes against your bias. It would, after all, mean I'm better informed than you and you just can't handle that no matter how true it is.

Any more silly questions?

Any more silly questions?

I'd prefer it if you didn't lecture me about my biases. If at all possible. Your words below.

Let me give you a lesson... Democrats control the house... Best way to pass a bill is for the Democrats to write the bill consult with the GOP (especially Senate), amend, and pass it... OR GOP do same visa versa but they are more interested in the Democratic Congress...

The problem, professor, is that the Democrats didn't bother to consult Republicans on the construction of their bill. Republicans offered to work with Democrats to reach a compromise on the Justice Act, and Democrats refused to allow debate. Debate allows for amendments and changes, on a bipartisan level. Still Democrats refused.

Why would we work with those racist, tRump supporting, criminals? They haven't even attempted to work with us.

 

[L.K.Eder]

What about the GOP Justice Act introduced by Tim Scott is insufficient? Can anyone tell me? What doesn't appeal to a Democrat more than a black man leading on an issue like this? Is it because the said black man is a Republican?

If another black man dies at the hands of a corrupt police officer, what explanation will Democrats give for not allowing debate on a bill that would have done something to solve this issue? How will they explain to the American people why they didn't act? Why did they offer resistance instead of cooperation?

Do some Democrats prefer bathing in the blood of innocent lives lost to perpetuate an easily solved problem? Were they not the ones who, two days ago, implied that if Republicans don't put forth a solution to this problem, they have blood on their hands? Now that they have, how did Democrats respond?

THEY SLAMMED THE DOOR IN A BLACK MAN'S FACE.

I will never vote for a Democrat in federal elections again. They have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are not interested in solving what ails our society, and are all the more interested in entrenching themselves in the problem instead. I am beyond disgusted. The congressional Democrats are no different than the Southern Democrats of old, fighting to preserve segregation and racist practices instead of working with their fellow Americans to rid our country of a toxic scourge. Working to preserve the problem of racism instead of solving it.

Spare me the tired refrain that you, a Democrat, will fight for minority rights, that you will stand for people of color, or that you will enact social justice.

No, you won't.

You were offered a chance to lead on an issue you so frequently champion, by a black man no less, but you slammed the door in his face.

They did not like the act he submitted , is all, it was not due to the color of his skin.

I beg to differ. What if Tim Scott had been a Democrat introducing the same bill?

Karen Bass has introduced a bill. In her opinion, a much better bill.

Congressional Black Caucus

The Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) has been committed to using the full Constitutional power, statutory authority, and financial resources of the federal government to ensure that African Americans and other marginalized communities in the United States have the opportunity to achieve the...

cbc.house.gov

"In her opinion"

Not yours. Speaks volumes man.

you lame ass ask hypothetical questions about what the reaction would be if a black person introduced the same bill as Scott.
no need for that, son.

A black person already weeks ago introduced a bill, which addressed more problems with policing. Democrats already took the lead.
As initially posted, you neither comprehend the situation nor present it honestly.

you are only interested in whining about race cards while playing the race card.

grow up, get a job.

Look at you evading the topic, again.

You only favor a bill that severely limits the ability of the police to police effectively.

Please, we all know what you want.

i am addressing the topic. maybe you should read your whiny lame lying OP again.

 

[colfax_m]

What about the GOP Justice Act introduced by Tim Scott is insufficient? Can anyone tell me? What doesn't appeal to a Democrat more than a black man leading on an issue like this? Is it because the said black man is a Republican?

If another black man dies at the hands of a corrupt police officer, what explanation will Democrats give for not allowing debate on a bill that would have done something to solve this issue? How will they explain to the American people why they didn't act? Why did they offer resistance instead of cooperation?

Do some Democrats prefer bathing in the blood of innocent lives lost to perpetuate an easily solved problem? Were they not the ones who, two weeks ago, said that "if Republicans don't put forth a solution to this problem, they have blood on their hands?" Now that they have, how did Democrats respond?

THEY SLAMMED THE DOOR IN A BLACK MAN'S FACE.

I will never vote for a Democrat in federal elections again. They have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are not interested in solving what ails our society, and are all the more interested in entrenching themselves in the problem instead. I am beyond disgusted. The congressional Democrats are no different than the Southern Democrats of old, fighting to preserve segregation and racist practices instead of working with their fellow Americans to rid our country of a toxic scourge. Working to preserve the problem of racism instead of solving it.

Spare me the tired refrain that you, a Democrat, will fight for minority rights, that you will stand for people of color, or that you will enact social justice.

No, you won't.

You were offered a chance to lead on an issue you so frequently champion, by a black man no less, but you slammed the door in his face.

Because the bill doesn’t do as much as Dems want.

A key component of Dems demands for reform is limiting qualified immunity which Scott’s bill seems to ignore. Additionally, Dems want more DoJ oversight of police and more teeth. Scott’s bill doesn’t make mandates but try’s to use money to compel change. Not exactly a bill with a lot of teeth.

See here for further explanation:

Senate Democrats say the Republican police reform bill is "not salvageable"

They’re now poised to sink the legislation during a vote on Wednesday.

www.vox.com

Is it any surprise the GOP bill would be watered down?

Scott said it was 70/80 % of what the Progs wanted. If the Progs win in November, they can complete it. What's the big deal? The Progs are winning, but it is not enough it seems.

And if they don’t win in November they’ve missed a huge opportunity to do the right thing now.

 

[TemplarKormac]

These demands are based on stereotypes, not on actual facts.

That's blatantly untrue.

Okay, prove it untrue. Cite the facts.

There are 800,000 police in America. Prove to me that they all employ targeted systemic racism and profiling against African Americans.

Don't be stupider than you have to be, Son.

I'm not playing the straw man game with you.

Why do you tuck and run? Afraid of being rebutted by actual facts instead of confirmed by mere bias and emotion?

 

[TemplarKormac]

What about the GOP Justice Act introduced by Tim Scott is insufficient? Can anyone tell me? What doesn't appeal to a Democrat more than a black man leading on an issue like this? Is it because the said black man is a Republican?

If another black man dies at the hands of a corrupt police officer, what explanation will Democrats give for not allowing debate on a bill that would have done something to solve this issue? How will they explain to the American people why they didn't act? Why did they offer resistance instead of cooperation?

Do some Democrats prefer bathing in the blood of innocent lives lost to perpetuate an easily solved problem? Were they not the ones who, two days ago, implied that if Republicans don't put forth a solution to this problem, they have blood on their hands? Now that they have, how did Democrats respond?

THEY SLAMMED THE DOOR IN A BLACK MAN'S FACE.

I will never vote for a Democrat in federal elections again. They have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are not interested in solving what ails our society, and are all the more interested in entrenching themselves in the problem instead. I am beyond disgusted. The congressional Democrats are no different than the Southern Democrats of old, fighting to preserve segregation and racist practices instead of working with their fellow Americans to rid our country of a toxic scourge. Working to preserve the problem of racism instead of solving it.

Spare me the tired refrain that you, a Democrat, will fight for minority rights, that you will stand for people of color, or that you will enact social justice.

No, you won't.

You were offered a chance to lead on an issue you so frequently champion, by a black man no less, but you slammed the door in his face.

They did not like the act he submitted , is all, it was not due to the color of his skin.

I beg to differ. What if Tim Scott had been a Democrat introducing the same bill?

Karen Bass has introduced a bill. In her opinion, a much better bill.

Congressional Black Caucus

The Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) has been committed to using the full Constitutional power, statutory authority, and financial resources of the federal government to ensure that African Americans and other marginalized communities in the United States have the opportunity to achieve the...

cbc.house.gov

"In her opinion"

Not yours. Speaks volumes man.

you lame ass ask hypothetical questions about what the reaction would be if a black person introduced the same bill as Scott.
no need for that, son.

A black person already weeks ago introduced a bill, which addressed more problems with policing. Democrats already took the lead.
As initially posted, you neither comprehend the situation nor present it honestly.

you are only interested in whining about race cards while playing the race card.

grow up, get a job.

Look at you evading the topic, again.

You only favor a bill that severely limits the ability of the police to police effectively.

Please, we all know what you want.

i am addressing the topic. maybe you should read your whiny lame lying OP again.

Nah, you want me to get a job. You are in the least bit concerned about the topic.

Move along.

 

[L.K.Eder]

What about the GOP Justice Act introduced by Tim Scott is insufficient? Can anyone tell me? What doesn't appeal to a Democrat more than a black man leading on an issue like this? Is it because the said black man is a Republican?

If another black man dies at the hands of a corrupt police officer, what explanation will Democrats give for not allowing debate on a bill that would have done something to solve this issue? How will they explain to the American people why they didn't act? Why did they offer resistance instead of cooperation?

Do some Democrats prefer bathing in the blood of innocent lives lost to perpetuate an easily solved problem? Were they not the ones who, two days ago, implied that if Republicans don't put forth a solution to this problem, they have blood on their hands? Now that they have, how did Democrats respond?

THEY SLAMMED THE DOOR IN A BLACK MAN'S FACE.

I will never vote for a Democrat in federal elections again. They have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are not interested in solving what ails our society, and are all the more interested in entrenching themselves in the problem instead. I am beyond disgusted. The congressional Democrats are no different than the Southern Democrats of old, fighting to preserve segregation and racist practices instead of working with their fellow Americans to rid our country of a toxic scourge. Working to preserve the problem of racism instead of solving it.

Spare me the tired refrain that you, a Democrat, will fight for minority rights, that you will stand for people of color, or that you will enact social justice.

No, you won't.

You were offered a chance to lead on an issue you so frequently champion, by a black man no less, but you slammed the door in his face.

They did not like the act he submitted , is all, it was not due to the color of his skin.

I beg to differ. What if Tim Scott had been a Democrat introducing the same bill?

Karen Bass has introduced a bill. In her opinion, a much better bill.

Congressional Black Caucus

The Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) has been committed to using the full Constitutional power, statutory authority, and financial resources of the federal government to ensure that African Americans and other marginalized communities in the United States have the opportunity to achieve the...

cbc.house.gov

"In her opinion"

Not yours. Speaks volumes man.

you lame ass ask hypothetical questions about what the reaction would be if a black person introduced the same bill as Scott.
no need for that, son.

A black person already weeks ago introduced a bill, which addressed more problems with policing. Democrats already took the lead.
As initially posted, you neither comprehend the situation nor present it honestly.

you are only interested in whining about race cards while playing the race card.

grow up, get a job.

Look at you evading the topic, again.

You only favor a bill that severely limits the ability of the police to police effectively.

Please, we all know what you want.

i am addressing the topic. maybe you should read your whiny lame lying OP again.

Nah, you want me to get a job. You are in the least bit concerned about the topic.

Move along.

yeah, you should get a job. i can tell you that while addressing the topic.

why are you not addressing the topic?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Because the bill doesn’t do as much as Dems want.

No, nothing they introduce will. What does that say about our legislative process?

Nonsense. Dems have made qualified immunity a core of their reform proposals.

And how would the police do their jobs effectively if qualified immunity was eliminated? I agree with eliminating no-knock warrants.

It doesn’t need to be eliminated, but limited. How can police have any accountability with the way it is now?

See that's the thing, I am not saying they shouldn't be held accountable. I am concerned with how much of a limiter democrats want to place on it.

It’s a rational concern, but if you’re for any limits, that puts you more in line with Dems than the GOP.

And to correct the record, I am not "GOP" or "Democrat". I don't associate myself with cowards who time and again never seem to want to work together to fix America's problems.

 

[TemplarKormac]

yeah, you should get a job. i can tell you that while addressing the topic.

why are you not addressing the topic?

Easy, because I am responding to you not addressing the topic. Which is a mistake, admittedly.

Ignored.

 

[Dragonlady]

The bill is a stunt. Instead of taking it to the committee where both parties could have worked out the details and presented a bipartisin bill, he took it directly to the floor where he knew it would fail. He didn't present a bill. He presented what would become talking points. A political stunt.

How is it a stunt when it has 80% of what Democrats want in it? Are you really that butthurt about qualified immunity?

it does not address the problems....

-choke holds

-no knock warrants

-shooting suspects in the back, running away

McConnell had no intention for the bill to pass... it should have followed the normal procedure for legislation.... the Committee develops the legislation within a bipartisan committee with responsibility.... they vote within the committee on the bill, adding to and taking out, to make a strong bill, then that is presented to the floor, to amend and vote on.

Mitch is playing games....

Allowing debate on the bill would have allowed for amendments and changes. No. Your argument is invalid. They didn't even want to discuss the topic.

That is political gamesmanship, Care4.

NO it would not, because any amendments would require 60 votes, and that was never going to happen. If McConnell had genuinely wanted to pass police reform instead of making this big sham of a bill, he would have had the Senate Judicial Committee - whose members HE appointed, draft it. He would have consulted with Democrats on it.

McConnell doesn't want to do anything but confirm conservative judges. This is his way of deceiving the American people into thinking it's the Democrats fault that nothing is going to pass. He tried the same trick with the 2nd covid19 bailout bill with no money for the states or for testing, and Democrats didn't let him get away with it then either.

Democrats are reaching out to sane Republicans and saying they are ready to negotiate. With 80% of Americans demanding real police reform, if Republicans refuse to work in a bi-partisan way for substantive change, it'll just be one more nail in the Republicans coffin come November.

You can fool all of the voters some of the time, and some of the voters all of the time, but the number of voters that Republicans are fooling all of the time, is dwindling every day. Mitch McConnell has proudly proclaimed himself the "Grim Reaper". His Senate is where bills go to die. One only need to look at his legislative record to see that.

Americans want these obstructionist tactics to end. You apparently are one of those voters who continue to be fooled all of the time. Doesn't say much for you.