The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

News and events of the day
Post Reply
User avatar
carmenjonze
Posts: 9614
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:06 am

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by carmenjonze »

Grass Is Greener wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 2:07 pm... common sense ...
Trump says it was ‘common sense’ for Jan. 6 rioters to chant ‘Hang Mike Pence!’ - WP
... rational ...
You guys are persistently freaked out by the very idea of police being held accountable for brutality and murder.

You're in no spot to be making judgments on what and what is not rational.
________________________________

The way to right wrongs is to
Shine the light of truth on them.

~ Ida B. Wells
________________________________
User avatar
carmenjonze
Posts: 9614
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:06 am

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by carmenjonze »

By the way, in case anybody is wondering, the Oneonta Star, where bradman's ridiculous op-ed came from, is a Dow Jones/News Corp/Rupert Murdoch rightwing propaganda rag.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Star_(Oneonta)
________________________________

The way to right wrongs is to
Shine the light of truth on them.

~ Ida B. Wells
________________________________
bradman
Posts: 2543
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:03 am
Location: Home of the DFL

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by bradman »

Bludogdem wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 2:07 pm I really liked this part of the editorial. Good common sense and rational.

“ But setting aside from the politically suicidal nature of "defund the police," it's simply misguided, reckless policy. There is certainly some merit to the argument that police have too much on their plates, and that some of this burden could be shouldered by other municipal departments. And those who decried the Pentagon's transfers of surplus combat gear to police raised important questions about whether such equipment is appropriate for civilian settings.

But the challenging nature of police work requires skilled professionals, and they deserve to be paid accordingly. Experts on corruption in developing countries have known for some time that low pay and benefits for police (and legislators, for that matter) create an incentive for bribery. Make these jobs desirable, and they will be filled with desirable candidates who don't want to risk losing them.

And most of us understand the misery that comes from lacking the staff or resources to do a job right. In our city, Oneonta Police Chief Christopher Witzenburg urged the Common Council on Tuesday to provide him with an assistant chief and an additional officer, lamenting that the burdens of the last year on his department have been exacerbated by a lack of manpower.

Voters expect their police to be held to high standards. But the verdict is in: candidates who misinterpret this as a sign that police aren't wanted at all are bound to fail at the ballot box.”
[bold] And i hate losing.
I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat. [Will Rogers]
User avatar
carmenjonze
Posts: 9614
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:06 am

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by carmenjonze »

bradman wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 2:31 pm [bold] And i hate losing.
Peddling Rupert Murdoch op-eds from the Oneonta Daily Star will never help you in this regard.
________________________________

The way to right wrongs is to
Shine the light of truth on them.

~ Ida B. Wells
________________________________
User avatar
Libertas
Posts: 6468
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 5:16 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by Libertas »

carmenjonze wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 2:32 pm Peddling Rupert Murdoch op-eds from the Oneonta Daily Star will never help you in this regard.
Thank you for keeping this bullshit in check.
I sigh in your general direction.
User avatar
carmenjonze
Posts: 9614
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:06 am

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by carmenjonze »

Libertas wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 2:40 pm Thank you for keeping this bullshit in check.
This is how dumb they think we are. They fall for conservative pro-cop propaganda. So I guess they think everyone else does, too. :problem:
________________________________

The way to right wrongs is to
Shine the light of truth on them.

~ Ida B. Wells
________________________________
User avatar
sam lefthand
Posts: 678
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 1:58 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by sam lefthand »

carmenjonze wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 2:28 pm By the way, in case anybody is wondering, the Oneonta Star, where bradman's ridiculous op-ed came from, is a Dow Jones/News Corp/Rupert Murdoch rightwing propaganda rag.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Star_(Oneonta)
I disagree with your assessment, the paper is not now a Dow Jones/News Corp/Rupert Murdoch paper. They once owned it but they sold it in 2006, 15 years ago.

Your source says, "The Daily Star is a daily newspaper in Oneonta, New York, United States. It is owned by Community Newspaper Holdings Inc."

:|

This is the Wikipedia page which is linked to Community Newspaper Holdings Inc:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNHI

"CNHI, LLC (formerly Community Newspaper Holdings, Inc.) is an American publisher of newspapers and advertising-related publications throughout the United States. The company was formed in 1997 by Ralph Martin,[1] and is based in Montgomery, Alabama[2] (after moving from Birmingham, Alabama in September 2011). The company is financed by, and is a subsidiary of, the Retirement Systems of Alabama."

:|

This is the Wikipedia page which is linked to the Retirement Systems of Alabama:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retiremen ... of_Alabama

"Retirement Systems of Alabama is the administrator of the pension fund for employees of the state of Alabama. It is headquartered in the state capital Montgomery, Alabama. David G. Bronner is the chief executive officer."

At that third source it is mentioned that the Community Newspaper Holdings Inc. is being sold again.
User avatar
carmenjonze
Posts: 9614
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:06 am

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by carmenjonze »

sam lefthand wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 3:29 pm I disagree with your assessment, the paper is not now a Dow Jones/News Corp/Rupert Murdoch paper.
Yes I see I'm mistaken, the paper with bradman's ridiculous op-ed about the Dems needing to dump a platform no Dem ever ran on is owned by the Retirement Systems of Alabama.

https://www.rsa-al.gov/ :lol:

Thanks for the correction.
________________________________

The way to right wrongs is to
Shine the light of truth on them.

~ Ida B. Wells
________________________________
gounion
Posts: 17255
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by gounion »

carmenjonze wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 3:41 pm Yes I see I'm mistaken, the paper with bradman's ridiculous op-ed about the Dems needing to dump a platform no Dem ever ran on is owned by the Retirement Systems of Alabama.

https://www.rsa-al.gov/ :lol:

Thanks for the correction.
Not the kind of thing a pension plan should be owning. But, since Alabama is extremely Republican, I'm not surprised, I guess. And these papers are all going to have to follow the right-wing party line, eh?
User avatar
carmenjonze
Posts: 9614
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:06 am

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by carmenjonze »

gounion wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 3:46 pm Not the kind of thing a pension plan should be owning. But, since Alabama is extremely Republican, I'm not surprised, I guess. And these papers are all going to have to follow the right-wing party line, eh?
Well, according to the Encyclopedia of Alabama, the CEO of Retirement Systems of Alabama, David Bronner, thought that bringing Mercedes-Benz to Alabama was as important as bringing Wernher von Braun to Huntsville.

Wernher von Braun.

Really?

I sure hope this article is simply just making an assertion like that out of whole cloth, because Werhner von Braun is one of the most notorious Nazis in the USA, ever.

David G. Bronner - Encyclopedia of Alabama
Bronner saw establishing MB in Alabama as essential to the state's future and compared the significance to German scientist Wernher von Braun coming to Huntsville to start the space industry after World War II.
This statement is unsourced, so Jesus God I sure hope not.

Werner von Braun - Encyclopedia of Alabama
Wernher von Braun (1912-1977) was a German-born rocket engineer who headed up the U.S. space program in Huntsville, Madison County. He led the team that developed the Jupiter C and then the Saturn V rockets that carried Americans into space and to the Moon. Von Braun's work in the United States was pioneering, but he was a controversial figure.

He had been instrumental in developing the V-2 missiles for Nazi Germany that were built with forced labor and used as terror weapons against civilian targets in London, England; Antwerp, Belgium; Paris, France, and other locales late in World War II. For this he was considered by many to be a war criminal. He was also a member of the Nazi Party and the Schustzstaffel (SS, which was the paramilitary arm of the Nazi Party); historians largely believe that he joined those organizations out of expediency and was not a supporter of Nazi policies. His main goal, from childhood, had been to build rockets to take humans into space.
All of this probably has nothing to do with why this penny-annie paper from Oneonta, New York is publishing these kinds of deceptive, dishonest op-eds. So, nevermind.
________________________________

The way to right wrongs is to
Shine the light of truth on them.

~ Ida B. Wells
________________________________
User avatar
sam lefthand
Posts: 678
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 1:58 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by sam lefthand »

carmenjonze wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 3:41 pm Yes I see I'm mistaken, the paper with bradman's ridiculous op-ed about the Dems needing to dump a platform no Dem ever ran on is owned by the Retirement Systems of Alabama.

https://www.rsa-al.gov/ :lol:

Thanks for the correction.
I don't know, I read the editorial. It was an editorial board editorial not an op-ed. It didn't seem all that slanted to me.

This part seemed OK to say:
But the challenging nature of police work requires skilled professionals, and they deserve to be paid accordingly. Experts on corruption in developing countries have known for some time that low pay and benefits for police (and legislators, for that matter) create an incentive for bribery. Make these jobs desirable, and they will be filled with desirable candidates who don't want to risk losing them.

And most of us understand the misery that comes from lacking the staff or resources to do a job right. In our city, Oneonta Police Chief Christopher Witzenburg urged the Common Council on Tuesday to provide him with an assistant chief and an additional officer, lamenting that the burdens of the last year on his department have been exacerbated by a lack of manpower.

Voters expect their police to be held to high standards. But the verdict is in: candidates who misinterpret this as a sign that police aren't wanted at all are bound to fail at the ballot box.
:|

Guessing about who owns a paper and then translating that to be evidence that the paper is slanted, and then carrying that to addressing the integrity of Bradman here is about the nuttiest bit of political slander BS I've seen pulled in a while.

You and GoUnion can pat each other on the back if you both want to.

What I want to do is laugh at the nuttiness of the idea!

:lol:



I looked up the town and it appears to vote Democratic most of the time. The county it's in is called a bell weather for the state. The town is Democratic and the rural leans Republican such that it balance's out to make it a bell weather for a state that leans blue. Currently a Democrat is their US Congressperson.

Why would anyone jump to the conclusion that their local paper is going to be slanted hard to the right? Writing papers that appeal to the customers who live where the paper is published and sold is how news papers make money.

:)
Last edited by sam lefthand on Sat Nov 13, 2021 5:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
carmenjonze
Posts: 9614
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:06 am

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by carmenjonze »

sam lefthand wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 4:59 pm


troll
________________________________

The way to right wrongs is to
Shine the light of truth on them.

~ Ida B. Wells
________________________________
User avatar
sam lefthand
Posts: 678
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 1:58 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by sam lefthand »

carmenjonze wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 5:01 pmtroll
It's time for another projectionist award.

:D

Carmenjonze you are hereby awarded the Kisspng Vintage Projector award for excellence in thin film projection.

Image
User avatar
carmenjonze
Posts: 9614
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:06 am

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by carmenjonze »

sam lefthand wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 5:10 pm

troll
________________________________

The way to right wrongs is to
Shine the light of truth on them.

~ Ida B. Wells
________________________________
gounion
Posts: 17255
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by gounion »

sam lefthand wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 4:59 pm I don't know, I read the editorial. It was an editorial board editorial not an op-ed. It didn't seem all that slanted to me.

This part seemed OK to say:



:|

Guessing about who owns a paper and then translating that to be evidence that the paper is slanted, and then carrying that to addressing the integrity of Bradman here is about the nuttiest bit of political slander BS I've seen pulled in a while.

You and GoUnion can pat each other on the back if you both want to.

What I want to do is laugh at the nuttiness of the idea!

:lol:

I looked up the town and it appears to vote Democratic most of the time. They county it is in is called a bell weather for the state. The town is Democratic and the rural leans Republican such that it balance's for to make it a bell weather. Currently a Democrat is their US Congressperson.

Why would anyone jump to the conclusion that their local paper is going to be slanted hard to the right? Writing papers that appeal to the customers who live where the paper is sold is how they make money.

:)
You know, because of my profession I know quite a bit about the local newspaper business. I also know quite a bit about Editorial staff.

Most of my experience is that the editorial staff lean far to the right, even in blue areas. This editorial is very short on actual facts, as the argument was never about doing away with Police. It was about no longer sending police to situations where a gun and a bully isn't necessarily the right idea for a peaceful resolution. It's also about dialing down the militarization of police forces. I mean, we have small towns like this with fucking tanks. That's a problem.

Further, I will again point out that a chain of newspapers shouldn't be what a pension plan owns. It also looks as if the only public sector unions are the teachers, cops and firefighters. Without a great deal of research, it would be hard to tell who is really pulling the strings at the pension plan. But the newspaper ownership of this nation has been toward pulling all newspapers far to the right.
User avatar
Libertas
Posts: 6468
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 5:16 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by Libertas »

Why are cons on here pretending dems wanted to defund police?

Wait, I think I know.


https://www.cnn.com/factsfirst/politics ... 9c70b1765d



Hi, I am a pretend democrat who is gonna say if only the democrats had not run on defunding the police, which in reality they did not.

Now in fact what is needed and makes more sense than anything any con or pretend dem will ever come up with is my idea of firing every city, county, state and federal police person in any capacity and rehiring them with an entirely new system in place that weeds out as best it can racists and bigots and liars and murderers.
Done over a 3 - 5 year period so there is no reduction in police at any time.
Last edited by Libertas on Sat Nov 13, 2021 5:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I sigh in your general direction.
User avatar
sam lefthand
Posts: 678
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 1:58 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by sam lefthand »

gounion wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 5:23 pm You know, because of my profession I know quite a bit about the local newspaper business. I also know quite a bit about Editorial staff.

Most of my experience is that the editorial staff lean far to the right, even in blue areas. This editorial is very short on actual facts, as the argument was never about doing away with Police. It was about no longer sending police to situations where a gun and a bully isn't necessarily the right idea for a peaceful resolution. It's also about dialing down the militarization of police forces. I mean, we have small towns like this with fucking tanks. That's a problem.

Further, I will again point out that a chain of newspapers shouldn't be what a pension plan owns. It also looks as if the only public sector unions are the teachers, cops and firefighters. Without a great deal of research, it would be hard to tell who is really pulling the strings at the pension plan. But the newspaper ownership of this nation has been toward pulling all newspapers far to the right.
I agree that a pension plan shouldn't own news papers in other states.

:)

But that's neither here nor there where as Bradman's post is concerned.
User avatar
Libertas
Posts: 6468
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 5:16 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by Libertas »

If only a certain someone spent as much time fact checking those who are known for never getting their facts straight.
I sigh in your general direction.
gounion
Posts: 17255
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by gounion »

sam lefthand wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 5:37 pm I agree that a pension plan shouldn't own news papers in other states.

:)

But that's neither here nor there where as Bradman's post is concerned.
My problem is the editorial was based on the false characterizations of what the groups are REALLY trying to do. Across the nation our police departments have been militarized, and there is zero accountability for departments and officers.
User avatar
sam lefthand
Posts: 678
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 1:58 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by sam lefthand »

Libertas wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 5:33 pm Why are cons on here pretending dems wanted to defund police?

Wait, I think I know.


https://www.cnn.com/factsfirst/politics ... 9c70b1765d



Hi, I am a pretend democrat who is gonna say if only the democrats had not run on defunding the police, which in reality they did not.
Libertas there have been some Democrats who want to. Especially a year ago.

I don't want to, nor do our major national elected officials such as Biden. But none the less there are some activists and small post politicians who do appear to want to defund the police.

Some who appear to want to get rid of police all together.

:|
User avatar
sam lefthand
Posts: 678
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 1:58 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by sam lefthand »

gounion wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 5:48 pm My problem is the editorial was based on the false characterizations of what the groups are REALLY trying to do. Across the nation our police departments have been militarized, and there is zero accountability for departments and officers.
Some groups really are trying to defund the police GoUnion. Here take a look at this:

https://blacklivesmatter.com/defundthepolice/
#DefundThePolice
May 30, 2020
Enough is enough.

Our pain, our cries, and our need to be seen and heard resonate throughout this entire country.

We demand acknowledgment and accountability for the devaluation and dehumanization of Black life at the hands of the police.

We call for radical, sustainable solutions that affirm the prosperity of Black lives.

George Floyd’s violent death was a breaking point — an all too familiar reminder that, for Black people, law enforcement doesn’t protect or save our lives. They often threaten and take them.

Right now, Minneapolis and cities across our country are on fire, and our people are hurting — the violence against Black bodies felt in the ongoing mass disobedience, all while we grapple with a pandemic that is disproportionately affecting, infecting, and killing us.

We call for an end to the systemic racism that allows this culture of corruption to go unchecked and our lives to be taken.

We call for a national defunding of police. We demand investment in our communities and the resources to ensure Black people not only survive, but thrive. If you’re with us, add your name to the petition right now and help us spread the word.
:|

It's dated a year ago but you could go there and sign that petition now. It's still up on their website.
gounion
Posts: 17255
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by gounion »

sam lefthand wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 5:50 pm Libertas there have been some Democrats who want to. Especially a year ago.

I don't want to, nor do our major national elected officials such as Biden. But none the less there are some activists and small post politicians who do appear to want to defund the police.

Some who appear to want to get rid of police all together.

:|
Isn't such anger understandable? Yes or no?

I mean, look at the crazy, ridiculous, insane anger on the right.

At least I can say the anger on the left for this is justifiable. Instead of just constantly attacking the left for being angry, you could look at it and see that they have a point.
gounion
Posts: 17255
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by gounion »

sam lefthand wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 5:55 pm Some groups really are trying to defund the police GoUnion. Here take a look at this:

https://blacklivesmatter.com/defundthepolice/



:|

It's dated a year ago but you could go there and sign that petition now. It's still up on their website.
I only read what you posted. What part of what they are saying do you disagree with? It's pretty fucking easy for us white guys, I mean, we don't have a fucking target on OUR back! Our lives aren't in mortal danger when stopped by the police.
User avatar
sam lefthand
Posts: 678
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 1:58 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by sam lefthand »

gounion wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 6:01 pm Isn't such anger understandable? Yes or no?

I mean, look at the crazy, ridiculous, insane anger on the right.

At least I can say the anger on the left for this is justifiable. Instead of just constantly attacking the left for being angry, you could look at it and see that they have a point.
It's easy GoUnion don't try to say something doesn't exist when it does. Even if it's small it does exist. Whether it's understandable is nether here nor there.

Defunding the police is in my estimation is a political non starter. The right wing papers have been trying to make hay with it, and some of our liberal activists have been hand feeding them the fodder to bale into that hay.

:(

But none of our major politicians have been so inclined.

:)

I think it will be OK. Compared to some of the Fox News articles I've seen that local paper editorial was like milksop. Like an average thing to read in an average town.
User avatar
sam lefthand
Posts: 678
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 1:58 pm

Re: The Yes 4 Minneapolis charter amendment, explained

Post by sam lefthand »

gounion wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 6:03 pm I only read what you posted. What part of what they are saying do you disagree with? It's pretty fucking easy for us white guys, I mean, we don't have a fucking target on OUR back! Our lives aren't in mortal danger when stopped by the police.
I didn't make a statement indicating that I disagreed with it GoUnion. I said it was a politically destructive position to take. That's what that news paper editorial said about it too.

I have made plenty of statements in the past which are similar to yours about what Black people face, I feel for them, I really do. I can also understand why words like "reform" have been worn out by the past usage, then noting changes, there is no reform.

:(

However that doesn't change the assessment that it's a politically destructive position to take. My position is tempered by the question, do you want Democrats or Republicans to be in charge?

The math is straight forward.
Post Reply