All_Pro_Bills

My guesses... Seattle, Vegas, Houston.

My suspicion all along is the same people funding the groups on the left are funding the groups on the right. Much like neutral countries selling weapons to both sides of a war. Their objective is to produce chaos and disorder which will result in them easily acquiring more power and control. Look at concepts like crucial race theory. Its some crackpot theory contrived with all sorts of subjective and anecdotal inputs. Absent some underlying psychological or behavioral disorder, or heavy drug use, it seems impossible that any rational, intelligent, and critical thinking person could believe any of it. But that's the basis of all the "equality" and "systemic racism" narratives. So everybody leading these movements know its all horse crap but still go along with it because they're afraid to speak the truth or there is some unstated, hidden, or underlying motivation behind buying into the B.S. The elites aren't interested in producing equality. Their motivation is self-interest of gaining more power and wealth and control over everything. All sides in these conflicts are getting played.

My fear is this will quickly escalate into open warfare in the streets. As many of the so labeled "right wing" groups are composed of ex-military, pro-patriot combat veterans skilled in urban warfare situations from Middle East tours of duty I suspect any open engagement would result in the Antifa and their followers being slaughtered in the streets. You can play as many video games and take as many self-defense sessions as you like but nothing prepares you for the real thing. These conflicts can't be allowed to happen but without police in the streets empowered to act who is going to step in? Frankly, if I'm a rank and file cop on the street I'm not jumping in between any shooting match between the sides. Why get killed protecting people that hate you? If this plays out to a tragic climax the only certainty here is we already know who the media will blame and who the media will portray as the victim,

That's in alignment with the stats I've seen. I'm not going to claim that racial bias doesn't exist. But I don't see it as the motivating factor in the Blake shooting and I see no objective data or statistics in any form that support to theory that America is a "systemically racist" country. All I see and hear are subjective and anecdotal stores and pseudo-science conclusions, many using historical references of wrong and immoral actions and proclaiming they somehow still exist without providing any data points. Attributing the primary cause of problems faced by inner city communities of color to "racial bias" is dangerous because it not only identifies the wrong cause but it also results in actions that seek to solve the wrong problem. I'd argue we could resolve whatever perceived or real "bias" there is and still not improve the lives of the people in these communities. The root issues are what impacts the social-economic conditions for citizens of these communities. Statistics point to two main factors, low income and poor education. Fix these problems and the rest will take care of itself. A real life example of this search for racial bias is in my job working with analytics. A team in my organization was studying the problem of inner city communities and the level and extent of health care services they received. This study was generated as a result of the COVID outbreak. I suspect somebody wanted confirmation of their conclusions on race bias backed by some "scientific" study. The team concluded "racial bias" was a primary factor in low utilization rates and availability of health care services. Surprise. I asked them what data and statistics they had to "prove" their theory. None really, correlation is not causality. I suggested income level was the primary driver for low utilization and provision of health care services. I asked them to test their race theory with data on affluent minorities and confirm that race resulted in them receiving poor health care services. They could not. I also asked them if race explains why poor, rural whites received inadequate health care services. And they were dumbfounded by the question. The insight here is even with ACA and other legislation rich people get better health care services which is no big secret. Of course me doing so and questioning the "gospel" could put me at great risk of being exposed as a "non-believer".

Hey Tiberius - While I don't always agree with your views I respect your thoughts and as you seem to have a handle on the pulse of the African-American community I'd like to share my honest thoughts and get your feedback. The Jacob Blake shooting troubles me. Both because I see it as a case where excessive force seems to have been used and the social reactions that followed. I've listened and read comments and statements from various sources from sports personalities to people on the street. Most seem to be saying they believe motivating factor behind the police shooting the suspect was his race. And if all other things were equal and the encounter with the police was exactly the same and the suspect was white they would not have shot him. Is that really the majority view of the African-American community? My conclusion is they would have shot the suspect under those circumstances if he was White or Asian or Hispanic, or Native American. It wouldn't have mattered. And I base this conclusion on statistics that report the number of police shootings where the most common race of the suspect shot is white. Along with this I've seen interviews where black's are asked to provide a number of how many black and white suspects police shoot. The answers do not correlate to the actual data, they are way, way off. Why is the perception of the community so far away from the actual statistics? And if police presence in the community is a problem why do recent surveys report that African-Americans responses reported that 81% of those surveyed want the same amount of police patrols or more?

It continues to amaze me how much dis-information and propaganda is being distributed from across the political spectrum. That is not what the agency stated. The agency stated that briefings will occur but they insist committee members cease and refrain from the prior practice of leaking sensitive intelligence information. And want assurances from members they will comply and follow protocols when receiving sensitive information.

I like to understand what other people believe but more importantly why they are thinking what they're thinking and what information or facts drive their conclusions. That's hard here with these social causes because I find most arguments are based on subjective and anecdotal observations that upon being dissected and examined by applying facts and data prove to be wrong and invalid. It requires checking your emotions and feelings at the door. There's a litany of examples but to pick a couple. Inner-city African-American communities are demanding less police. So the action is for mayors and city councils to "de-fund police" and cut back on patrols and police presence. But surveys show the majority of black inner-city residents want either the same or more police patrols, 81% in the most recent survey I read. This contradicts the assumption there should be less police. It also calls into question the judgment of city officials. Are they out of touch with the people? Maybe the BLM organization wants less police but data suggests they are not representative of the views of the community. Why are white liberal politicians and black activists dictating the level of policing in neighborhoods that are in disagreement with the needs of the community? Why not put the idea on the ballot in November? Ask the voters, do you want less police or the same/more? At a minimum the decisions made by some of these mayors need to be questioned. Another is that police are engaged in a systematic execution of young unarmed black men. But facts show they shoot more unarmed white men on an annual basis as a percentage of police encounters by race. How can this be possible? But if you ask people in the streets they "think" 100's of unarmed black men are gunned down by the police and maybe 3 or 4 white guys. So maybe attributing the recent shooting in Kenosha to race rather than some other factor is an unsupported or rushed conclusion? So in the Kenosha example those pushing the race theory "believe" all other circumstances equal if the suspect was white he wouldn't have been shot. And that no other attribute or circumstance of the encounter had anything to do with the shooting other than race. That seems to be a wildly biased conclusion along with concluding he was unarmed. To me the issue is one of plain and simple use of excessive force rather than the race of the suspect. So yes, liberals can be reasoned with, along with conservatives, if they agree to make sound and logical judgments and conclusions based on facts rather than subjective and anecdotal observations and emotions.

Some giggles on CNN "reporting"..

What will they do if Trump wins another term?

Name calling and labeling is not a very effective counter argument. And I guess he should have done the honorable and moral thing and let those armed street thugs, or if you prefer armed peaceful protesters, beat the crap out of him or kill him? Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. Expect to be disappointed when he's acquitted for self-defense. Video accounts of the altercation seem to support that conclusion.

Another victim speaks. "Two protesters"? Armed and chasing the suspect is a minor detail to the story that appears to be avoided. And that sets the context for the entire confrontation and outcome. They are well coached and use some standard and effective debating techniques that help them squirm out of an uncomfortable argument. 1. Introduce false comparisons. In this case mention another situation in an attempt to portray the opponents argument as inconsistent. 2. Introduce suggestions of motive. Gratuitous mention of White Supremacists is standard. Has anyone ever met a white supremacist? I haven't and I don't know anyone else that has either. What are there? Like maybe 50 of them in the country hiding out somewhere? 3. Change the subject. Now the argument is the other side supports white supremacists that kill innocent people rather than debating an act of self-defense against an angry and armed mob.. My view is this. Its real simple. If you don't want anybody to screw with you then don't screw with them. First, if you going to start a confrontation with somebody you'd better be prepared to suffer and accept any consequences. Don't get into anybody's face, make a lot of threats, and start pushing people around and then piss and moan when it doesn't turn out the way you expect. If I start a fight with somebody and end up getting the crap kicked out of me its my own damn fault. I'm not going to claim I'm the victim. After all, I started it. That's the case with these two dead guys. They confronted an armed guys with significant force and he killed them before they killed him. End of story. Can we introduce these people to the concepts of responsibility and consequences for actions? Can they please just stop playing the victim all the time?

Paid and professional agitators too, likely out of uniform Antifa. I compare them to the Brown Shirts of Germany before the Nazis came to power. If you're familiar with the history of the era they were the street muscle of the party before they assumed complete control of Germany. After that the Brown Shirts were brutally eliminated. As their behavior is consistent, I like to compare Antifa to them. Since the Nazi's were "national socialists" and not "fascists" in the pure sense of the term I believe it is completely appropriate. There's really 3 options available in dealing with these street thugs: 1. appease them, give them what they want (whatever that is) and surrender. 2. just learn to live with it. 3. eliminate the problem by whatever means necessary. I expect at this point most would vote for option 3.

I expect all the white people would be out in the streets burning cars and businesses, looting stores and beating up any people of color they could find! ?

The media and the left and the BLM propaganda narrative is to always describe the suspects as 100% peaceful "victims" of some unwarranted attack or action by a suppressor. Be it law enforcement or the imaginary "white supremacists". Victim of racism, victim of inequality, victim of bias, victim of this and victim of that. They want everyone to believe white people secretly belong to clandestine organizations that meet on a regular basis to discuss and execute an organized plan to oppress and discriminate against people of color. Nothing the victim does or says or any actions they take have any connection to the outcome. There is no personal responsibility for consequences. They know its a total load of crap but that's their angle. Play the victim while inciting other to action, like the shootings in Kenosha, and then point the finger at them as the instigator and hater. Use hate, deny its hate, and then accuse others of hate. They want people to ignore facts and just rely on emotions. They try to silence others that oppose them because the act of others speaking out exposes their lies and facilitates discussions. Their problem at this point is they've over-played their hand and a huge majority of Americans of all demographics are sick and tired of seeing this nonsense play out every night. They see idiot "reporters" from CNN broadcasting with fires and rioter in the background describing the scene as "peaceful". A total disconnect from reality. Now jerks like Don Lemon on CNN suggest they rein in these riots. Not because they are immoral, illegal, or destructive but rather because they are helping Trump close the gap or take the lead in Presidential polls.

In most states getting a license to cut hair requires more hours of training than it does to become a police officer. So better training and situational awareness is part of the problem. That said, I grow weary of the narrative that the suspect in each and every one of these situations is 100% the "victim". Such as in this case the usual apologists assigning 100% of the blame for the outcome to the cops. That avoids any consideration that the actions and behavior of the suspect contributed to the outcome. Bad actions lead to bad consequences. Why didn't he just comply with their requests during the stop? Plain and simple. Its been reported he guy was driving drunk with 3 kids in the vehicle. An action that is completely irresponsible. So as you say "he runs they will get him". What if he gets in the car, takes off, the cops pursue him, and he crashes and kills his 3 kids in the vehicle? Perhaps blame the cops for chasing the suspect? The suspect struggles and fights with the cops on the right side of the vehicle and moves around to the driver side door. What do you think is going to happen next? The conflict most likely will escalate. The knife is an issue. Why does anyone carry weapons in their vehicle? Either to initiate a confrontation or to be prepared to respond to one. And what other weapons might he have then? If you're the cops you've got to be thinking that too. I know I would be. But you wouldn't? He's got a rap sheet so you know he's no first-timer with encountering law enforcement so you need to be prepared. Maybe he's got a gun and goes to the car, you passively allow him to do so, he retrieves the weapon and kills both of you. Shoot him in the leg? Unless its a high caliber round that generally is not going to instantaneously "take down" a suspect that is ignoring the instructions of the police and reaching into a vehicle for some unknown item. Should they have fired so many shots? Probably not, but its not like you're standing around with all the time in the world to react looking at a clip board with the checklist of things you should do and go through.

It makes no sense to attempt any rational debate with snowflakes, wokesters, or social justice warriors. And its the nature of the leftist and BLM movements to portray themselves as victims no matter the circumstances. The mommies and daddies of these well off middle class white kids participating in these street battles never taught them the concepts of responsibilities and consequences. And the schools have become social engineering & propaganda centers. Their minds are totally screwed up. The hardcore BLM members, not the real people out peacefully protesting for social justice, are simply Marxists and black racists that hate white people consistent with the Black Panthers with a shinny new marketing plan. Their game is to push for institution of more redistribution rackets and extract revenge. So did any rational person think the lefties would say "well we attacked the guy so he shot a couple of us so that's okay". No, the reflex actoin is to cry about injustice . That's also what we'll here from the political activists posing as journalists and reporters too. That's their game. The problem they have at this point is theyvre overplayed their hand. Most Americans of all demographics are sick and tired of this nonsense. Live by the sword, die by the sword has some application here. As far as the specific circumstances here I'll leave it to the legal system to decide. Of course they'll cry the blues once more if the courts rule self-defense. We know that already. And if they rule the other way so be it. The saying "I'd rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6" applies well here.

A second cell phone video of the officer-involved shooting of 29-year-old Jacob Blake on Sunday has emerged, showing the incident in a slightly new light. The footage showed Blake fighting with officers before he took off and ran to the driver’s door of his vehicle with police on his heels (video showed). The video suggests he may indeed have had a knife, and had ignored orders to drop it, before being shot. It also suggested that Blake's girlfriend lied to police when she claimed he hadn't been hostile. So potentially armed, offending, dangerous to correct your assertions. Also, with the state of Wisconsin accepting Federal help national guard and federal law enforcement are on the way. So expect all the out of town BLM agitators, mostly from Chicago is what I've seen, to take off. Antifa won't leave until the DNC orders them out.

I like the description of the confrontation - "protesters" vs. "armed militia". The should have said "peaceful protesters" for more emphasis. Unfortunately for the fringe left and their media activist stooges nobody is interesting in hearing or buying their horse crap narrative. Thank you - 4 more years of Trump! Mission accomplished.

Trump is causing the riots? That's a bunch of male bovine manure. The riots just reinforce the idea in voters minds that Trump is right. These liberal mayors, city government, and governors are impotent weaklings and incapable of maintaining or even attempting to maintain any sense of social order in the communities. All they're accomplishing is to push undecided voters in key swing states into Trump's camp. I wouldn't be surprised if the next Presidential election poll shows it a dead heat or Trump in the lead. That would render the Dem's "run out the clock" strategy useless. Reality is nobody wants to see anybody killed in the streets. And regardless, its unacceptable for a civil society to tolerate and allow rioting and looting every time there's a questionable police encounter with a person of color. What are they accomplishing by destroying and looting businesses frequented and sometimes owned by people in the neighborhoods. How about this. Maybe next time a cop shoot a white guy (something you really need to dig into the news to find because it gets buried) all of the white people can riot and loot too? There's a lot of stuff at Home Depot and Costco and Best Buy that can be had for free!

I've seen disturbing reports that two people were killed last night during the riots in Kenosha. What the left-leaning politicians pandering to all this think its accomplishing except to re-elect Trump isn't clear.

4. People on drugs or drinking don't have good judgment. So don't drive while under the influence. Also, you might think the cops stopped you for no good reason or just to hassle you and you might be right but don't try to practice law and the application of probable cause in the streets. If you get arrested and charged with something the courts are the place for that. Telling the cops they have no reason to stop you after they stop you invites a confrontation that you most likely will lose. I've been pulled over in traffic stops where I wasn't breaking any law. They asked for my license and registration, ran it, found both were clean, and that was the end of it.

A primary driver of income inequality has been federal reserve monetary policy especially QE. The Fed buys government and corporate debt from the primary banks and dealers then the banks need to do something with the money. Other foreign central banks do this too. They also buy stocks and ETFs. The Bank of japan is the biggest holder of all ETFs on the Tokyo market. The Bank of Switzerland is one of the biggest shareholders of Facebook. The banks could buy more bonds and sell them to the Fed but with interest rates lower and lower there's not enough profit margin. So they buy stocks and with that major indexes and share prices rise. Who owns most of the equities? People with a lot of assets, rich people, well-off baby boomers that benefit simply because of age and timing, major insiders and corporate officers with generous stock options selling into the uptrend. It's all quite a nice little racket. Welfare for the rich. This happens whomever is in the White House. That's why you see a lot of 55+ guys driving around in new Corvettes and Porches all over town. Meanwhile, I'm driving around town in a 13 year old vehicle, you have younger workers or those entering the workforce, or working poor that have no "extra" funds to invest in markets. They're not benefiting at all from all the Fed monetizing of debt because none of it gets into the "real" economy. And as an added kicker they get to pay for it all with hidden and ignored inflation in things they need to live which further erodes their living standards. By the way the Fed denies any hand in all of this. They're quite the con artists. By the way, I consider myself a fiscal conservative. I agree with my liberal friends that something is seriously wrong with income disparities and opportunity. I just don't agree with them on how to solve the problem and what solutions should be implemented.

First all politicians lie. The entire system depends on lying. And I believe that no matter who "wins" the election there's going to be trouble. Expect court battle over vote fraud and/or suppression in the hotly contested battle ground states. We might not know the winner for months. This will cause all kinds of social and economic disruptions. And if Trump happens to pull it off again in November the fringe left is going to completely freak out. If Biden wins I don't see him completing the entire 4 year term. I'm expecting trouble with the economy no matter which candidate wins. There's simply too much debt and not enough productive activity. Eventually, all that borrowing which pulls future consumption to the present consumes all of your income. Most important, the U.S. is afforded a "grand privilege" from the world's use of the U.S. dollar as the official reserve and trade settlement currency of the world. It's a blank check that others do not have the ability to access and use. Its what allows huge deficits and the consumption of goods and services way over and above what we produce. That is slowly but surely coming to an end. If there's one place where Trump has done the most damage it has been in pulling forward this day of reckoning. The immediate impacts will be much higher prices for everything and a downward adjustment in everyone's standard of living that doesn't do some preparation and planning for that event.

Although its fashionable to blame Trump for everything the decline of union membership has nothing to do with Trump and everything to do with the globalization movement. The decline began in the late 1970's and accelerated into the end of the 20th century. First factories and businesses fled the Northeast and Midwest for the union-free South and "right to work" states. Later to other countries like Mexico with NAFTA and China via the granting of most favored nation trade status. The deal with China and other Asian countries like Japan was a trade of American jobs and access to the lucrative U.S. market in exchange for creating a market for the purchase of U.S. debt that funded deficit spending and all shorts of social and defense programs. These former union and middle class workers that saw their standard of living downsized voted for Trump because nobody else even recognized their existence. Or provided them any hope for the future. Certainly not the Democratic party or Hillary Clinton who labeled them as "deplorables". The Democrats long abandoned these people for fringe social causes that caused the party platform to drift to the left while embracing the promise of the new economy and the technology provided by the silicon valley oligarchs. So here we are today with a hollowed out economy massively in debt with no hope of paying any of it back with everybody on their iPhones hiding in their homes watching riots and looting in the streets demanding all kinds of free stuff and payoffs while we wait for a November election disaster and what should be a long and painful economic depression when it finally hits home that there's nothing left to redistribute and everybody's on their own.

BLM is a rebranded version of the Black Panthers and their "black nationalist" philosophy with a fresh new coat of social justice paint to make it all look nice and shinny and clean.