Submitted by: Mike Spindell, guest blogger
“People, I just want to say, you know, can we all get along?” Rodney King 5/1/92
The arguments and divisions politically here and throughout this country are rampant and destructive. Anger and hatred of others of differing opinions rises at times to fever pitch and I admit that I am part of the problem as much as anyone else is. This is a somewhat different piece in that I am going to present some national problems, as I see them and elicit your comments on them, in an attempt to discover whether there is some common ground agreement, on some things plaguing our society. While I am more interested in whether or not people agree that these are indeed problems for us all to consider and work to solve, it is certainly apropos for people to comment on what they believe the solutions to be.
This is an experiment on the viability of people agreeing on the premise that a problem exists in a given area. We cannot begin to resolve issues, unless we first agree that they are issues to be contemplated by the entire body politic. My hope is to engender real, civil discussion and perhaps at the end reach something like consensus. This is not a plea for Bi-Partisanship because to me that is a fantasy, whoever may utter it. To be “partisan” is to hold strong opinions and srong opinions do not resolve themselves into agreement. The resolution reached by “partisans” is always one of compromise, without either side changing their core beliefs, but agreeing to take part of the loaf. I am “experimenting” to see if many of the diverse viewpoints represented here can at least agree that a specific issue is indeed a problem, or if it is indeed an issue. Beyond writing this, I will not take part in the ensuing discussion, since the formulation itself indicates my views on whether these are indeed problems. I will limit my questions to legal issues, with no particular order of importance intended.
A. Does the fact that we have the highest incarceration rate of any nation in the world indicate a problem?
B. Given the overcrowding and long delays inherent in our legal system, do we need to do something to reform it?
C. Have our Constitutional Rights been diminished?
D. Has the policing authority both State and Locally been extended beyond permissible bounds.
E. Has the War on Drugs been a failure and added to addiction rather than restricting it?
F. From the perspective of criminal/civil procedure, has the Right to Privacy been terminated and/or restrictively diminished?
G. Does State and Federal Government have the right to criminalize non-coercive sexual acts between adults?
H. Should the States and Federal Government admit the “War on Drugs” is a failure and seek new methods to deal with addiction?
As an illustration of what I am looking for I will present this. FFLEO and I both voted for Barack Obama, even though FFLEO and I have very different political and partisan beliefs. Yet we both agree that he has been an awful President. Where we respectfully disagree is that he has stated he will never vote for Obama again and I have stated I might, if there are no alternatives that seem viable. The most important element is that we, though vastly different politically, agree on the nature of the problem. With that agreement, there comes a mutual respect and a future hope of resolution, even though one is not now apparent or even likely. If there is no agreement on whether something is at least a problem, then the legacy of that disagreement is ongoing, unresolved strife.
Submitted by: Mike Spindell, guest blogger
@Slarti, @Tom,
Because I almost agree with Tom, because I do think Mike’s list contains very serious problems that a big government seems unable to solve, I would be willing to see what a Ron Paul would do.
I don’t trust crony capitalism, but I also no longer can trust government to work. At all.
And very good progressive senators that I do trust all say that Ron Paul is honest and has a lot of integrity, which is more than I can say for Obama or others Democrat or Republican.
Ask yourself which is preferable:
Progressive Democratic President, Obama Democrat as President, Ron Paul as President, Current Republican as President
Sort those out, and then cut out the ones that don’t seem possible to obtain, and tell us what happens.
tom,
You certainly have a right to your opinion, but for those of us who don’t share it (and those that feel raging against the dying of the light is something they want to do) your conclusion does not hold. In any case, what would you suggest that we do instead of trying to figure out a solution and how will that be an improvement? Your conclusion follows from your premise [although I don’t agree with it], so if we accept that society is doomed (or at least that things will come to some sort of crisis before there is potential for improvement), then the decision seems to be between joining the Republican’s Cloward-Piven strategy to cause the system to collapse under it’s own weight (hastening the rebirth of a [presumably] better society) or doing what you can to mitigate the damage to as many people as possible (or to protect them). It seems to me that trying to solve the problems is also an effective way to do the latter – and who knows, we might just get lucky…
There is an epidemic of malaise within this country that began about 1.5 decades ago, which has now reached its fever pitch.
Mike S., many others here, and I have had the opportunity to experience the ‘American Dream’ However; I do not see that opportunity for the middle class ever again unless there are drastic changes—which I seriously doubt will occur.
Mike, I will attempt to write more later on. I appreciate that others here are taking the time to answer your questions.
Signed
An eternal pessimist (who was once a thoroughly optimistic fellow)
With all due respect to Mr. Turley, whose views i agree with almost always, it seems to me that this blog article is worthless, other than as possibly to provide readers with a means to have confirmation that most of us can easily identify problems which nearly all here would agree are problems, indeed.
I say this, because, imo, unless one is hopelessly naive, we surely understand that there are no realistic solutions to any of these problems.
I’m sorry to have to say it, but as a society, we are “too far gone”.
Mike
I mixed my pronouns and made it sound like I was talking to you personally. I wasn’t. I said if anyone was interested in justice and honestly they would get behind Ron Paul. Then I used the pronoun YOU in the next sentence that made it appear to be addressed to you personally. Sorry about that. I meant the universal you, not “you” Mike.
A. Does the fact that we have the highest incarceration rate of any nation in the world indicate a problem?
Yes, but like most industries they have become propaganda…I am aware of a number of facilities during the prison building boom that are basically mothballed….But what is the best way to disenfranchise voting rights? Just google up CCA….
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corrections_Corporation_of_America
B. Given the overcrowding and long delays inherent in our legal system, do we need to do something to reform it?
Yes….get Prosecutors that are not interested in a notch in the belt…but actual truth….and Judges that do not rubber stamp the Prosecutors decisions….and then get Criminal Defense Attorneys that actually give a shit…one that is not afraid of putting the Prosecutor and or judge to the test…..
C. Have our Constitutional Rights been diminished?
Without a question….Somedays I awake and wonder what is really left after Nixon was in office…needless to say…they have become less and less with each administration…..
D. Has the policing authority both State and Locally been extended beyond permissible bounds.
You got this right…including but not limited to the admission of hear say as an exception by an officer which has traditionally been excluded as unreliable….very treacherous grounds especially in Domestic cases…..
E. Has the War on Drugs been a failure and added to addiction rather than restricting it?
An addition is an addition…regardless of what started it…but the “War on drugs” is a misnomer and should be considered with A above…..It is profit…profit…profit….for the local governments…the number one revenue raisers are Domestic Assault, Drunk driving and Drugs….
F. From the perspective of criminal/civil procedure, has the Right to Privacy been terminated and/or restrictively diminished?
You mean we have had this since the Rehnquist court? You have got to be kidding me….
G. Does State and Federal Government have the right to criminalize non-coercive sexual acts between adults?
Not at all….maybe tax it if for profit…..
H. Should the States and Federal Government admit the “War on Drugs” is a failure and seek new methods to deal with addiction?
Enable the states to properly fund Mental Health….and NOT PRIVATIZE it…. in all aspects…..
Mike:
Your sentiments are to be commended and your quest honorable.
finis
Anyway, on question G, YES the states have the right viz a viz the 10th amendment to criminalize non-coercive sex acts. The feds do not. Let the people be free to determine these things. Let the 50 laboratories of self-government operate as intended.
Everything else is yes and some overlap. Since F is true C HAS to be true.
The biggest criminal types in America are not those in prison (except for murderers and rapists) but those in Congress and those in the White House (except for Ron and Rand Paul) .
Cops are currently more a threat to the people than street gangs. Cops ARE the street gangs. The operate like mobsters. They ARE the mobsters. Anyone who supports the DHS supports a proto-Stazi organization. Anyone who thinks what the TSA does is not sexual molestation is a pervert and doesn’t know it. I could go on.
But I could never be a Republican or a Democrat. Both advocate the slaughter on the innocent and I detest that. The Dems advocate the slaughter in the womb. And the GOP overseas in phony wars (which Obomber continues and code pink ignores). Of course, the Democrats led the nation to war all last century except for the imbecile GW. He led us that time. Democrats are the Communist party of America. Communism is organized theft. I eschew theft.
Ron Paul is the greatest statesman of our time and if anyone is genuinely interested in justice and honest with themselves they will get behind him regardless of the party affiliation. If you don’t you are not the good person you think you are. At least he is headed in the right direction (though none are perfect). That direction is liberty, peace, prosperity, nullification, and a strict adherence to the Constitution.
In the mind of the ruling elites those things are treason (treason to corruption).
Pauls service to the country is evidence of his fidelity to these principles. Ever single vote is proof of his work towards justice. Every single Democrats voted for a president (Obama) who had not provided one shred of evidence that what he said is what he would do. And yet the left has the audacity to say that the right wingers are stupid.
The truth is you cannot continue be a Democrat and be interested in righteous judgment. The two are mutually exclusive. And this is why Obama and crowd want to spy on you, destroy your life with lawyers and cops, strike terror and fear in your heart, threaten you and your family, and shut down free speech on the internet.
The gig is up and he knows it because freedom of speech was unleashed over the past 15 years and such things don’t sit well with evil doers like Obama or Bush, or Clinton, FDR, Wilson, and so forth going all the way back to murderous genocidal despots like Abraham Lincoln.
A. Does the fact that we have the highest incarceration rate of any nation in the world indicate a problem?
The number itself is not a problem, some country is always going to be #1. That one of the contributing factors is because we have the longest sentences for equivalent crimes in the West is something that needs to be looked at. That medical problems are criminalized is a problem. That crimes not punished by incarceration in other Western countries are punished here needs to be looked at. Our prison system reflects our culture. We have cultural problems that need to be separated from our Justice system.
B. Given the overcrowding and long delays inherent in our legal system, do we need to do something to reform it?
Yes. The large number of behaviors criminalized clogs the court system. See A. Fix A and B goes away.
C. Have our Constitutional Rights been diminished?
Yes.
D. Has the policing authority both State and Locally been extended beyond permissible bounds.
Yes.
E. Has the War on Drugs been a failure and added to addiction rather than restricting it?
Yes.
F. From the perspective of criminal/civil procedure, has the Right to Privacy been terminated and/or restrictively diminished?
Yes.
G. Does State and Federal Government have the right to criminalize non-coercive sexual acts between adults?
No.
H. Should the States and Federal Government admit the “War on Drugs” is a failure and seek new methods to deal with addiction?
Yes. A and B and some-to-much of D should be alleviated by doing so.
Blouise is right about G. Mike, I assume you mean ~G and worded it poorly. Otherwise, do tell us more about G.
Hey Mikey!
Good post.
The answer is “maybe” … after we figure out what that means.
Here is my bumber sticker contribution to the 2012 election erotica:
FOR DEMOS: “Kiss Lips, Not ASS!”
FOR REPOS: “Stop shitting where you eat!”
Meanwhile, there is a breaking news story for y’all.
oops … my eye skipped right over G … No to G
Actually, I prefer that people be held accountable for their crimes as well. I just don’t see how it can possibly happen (absent major reform). We screwed up holding Nixon responsible for Watergate and we’ve been paying for it ever since, but I don’t think we can put the genie (no pun intended) back in the bottle. Any attempt to go after a Republican president but not a Democratic one (or vice versa) will never get through Congress nor will an attempt to do both at once (although I’m sure a couple of principled people on both sides of the aisle would support it). Furthermore, in this economy, I don’t think that this issue will catch fire with the grassroots. I hosted a house party to restore the American dream for Van Jones’ organization and this issue was nowhere to be seen (and rightly so, in my opinion). I think this is a case where we should ignore the fact that our compass is broken* until we pull out of our tailspin, but I can understand if you rate the priorities differently – or if you think it’s too late for this system and you think that is an appropriate way to rage against the dying of the light (I’m not sure that there is an inappropriate way to rage against the dying of the light…). I can’t help thinking about the people being ground under the heel of the corporate boot to the exclusion of the (equally worthy) high ideals that you’re talking about. How about this – I’ll work on the problem I see as most important and you do likewise. Whichever one of us finishes first helps the other (and gets bragging rights). Deal? And if you figure out a way to simultaneously investigate and prosecute both President Obama and President Bush, I’ll give you all the help I can.
*and I do feel that this country’s moral compass is broken.
p.s. The poo flinging remark was kind of in bad taste, but I was too lazy to start the conversation myself… sorry.
Yes, to all, and I too voted for Obama, and I too would happily state, publically (perhaps not even using the name anon), I will not vote for him again.
If you read Glenn Greenwald in the past week, he describes well how the Democratic Party is *enabled* by US to swing to the right because they know that us idiots will vote for dumbasses like Obama because we have no where else to go.
And Greenwald continues (though some is my paraphrase and recollection) that this is made worse by useful tools who then go out of their way to demonize people as DINOS, trolls, old bitter white guys, racists, sexists, or any of the speech policing and gatekeeping tactics very familiar to all of us.
The only way to stop this, I currently believe, is to stop it. I will vote for ANY third party whose goal is to get more third parties accredited in states and on ballots.
I will vote for a Republican if there is no such third party, because I would rather have an honest Republican tear down the state, than have voted for a self-claimed Democrat who, to get elected and re-elected, helps Republicans tear down the state.
By the way Mike, go through your list. How many of your objections would occur, could occur, under a teeny, tiny, incredibly small, government? That is one reason I would favor seeing an honest libertarian or Republican tear down all the state apparatus — so that it might one day be rebuilt without the corruption and kruft we have now — instead we see faux Democrats with their Wall Street Buddies in conjunction with ALEC and other corporatist monsters take away rights, criminalize all behavior, destroy the middle class, and imprison as many people as they can.
Enough of that shit.
Do not empower Obama and Democratic sellouts further. Vote for a third party, or vote for whomever you feel has more integrity and honesty, almost regardless of their beliefs.
To quote Mr. Miyagi:
Miyagi: Now, ready?
Daniel: Yeah, I guess so.
Miyagi: [sighs] Daniel-san, must talk.
Miyagi: Walk on road, hm? Walk left side, safe. Walk right side, safe. Walk middle, sooner or later
[makes squish gesture]
Miyagi: get squish just like grape. Here, karate, same thing. Either you karate do “yes” or karate do “no.” You karate do “guess so,”
[makes squish gesture]
Miyagi: just like grape. Understand?
Daniel: Yeah, I understand.
Miyagi: Now, ready?
Daniel: Yeah, I’m ready.
Vote Obama, get squish [makes squish gesture] just like grape.
I dont think we can ever get along, there is a fundamental difference on how each side sees the world.
There are literally 2 perceptions of the same reality. And each believes his perception to be the correct one. There is only one reality. One of us is wrong.
Are people free or are they not. You cannot be partially free, even 10% of your income in service to the state means that some portion of your life is not yours.
However I could accept a 10% or even 15% tax burden [all taxes] as fair to support the court system, the military, the police force and a few other things but not many.
I dont owe my neighbor anything except respect and only then if he has earned it.
I don’t think I’ve ever heard that question before.
I’m not sure I want to hear it again.
Not as far as I’m concerned because, to paraphrase Beck, “In the time of chimpanzees I was an orangutan”.
So do we start flinging poo at each other now, Gene? 😉
A. Does the fact that we have the highest incarceration rate of any nation in the world indicate a problem?
Yes. So does the very existence of for-profit prisons who lobby for the ever increasing criminalization of everyday life.
B. Given the overcrowding and long delays inherent in our legal system, do we need to do something to reform it?
Absolutely.
C. Have our Constitutional Rights been diminished?
Yes. And to disagree with Slartibartfast, this problem won’t be fully addressed until our domestic war criminals are held accountable.
D. Has the policing authority both State and Locally been extended beyond permissible bounds.
Yes. We are now a police state where the police watch the people, not watch over the people. In many jurisdictions, the police a little better than criminals with badges.
E. Has the War on Drugs been a failure and added to addiction rather than restricting it?
Yes and yes. Addressing a public health issue as a criminal issue never works and this is a lesson we should have learned from Prohibition. Criminalizing ordinarily occurring human behavior only results in two things: overflowing prisons and maximized profits for organized crime.
F. From the perspective of criminal/civil procedure, has the Right to Privacy been terminated and/or restrictively diminished?
Yes. Being that it was on shaky ground to start with, the only remedy to this issue with any teeth is Constitutional Amendment.
G. Does State and Federal Government have the right to criminalize non-coercive sexual acts between adults?
No, but that won’t stop them from trying if certain parties gain stronger control of the legislative and judicial processes.
H. Should the States and Federal Government admit the “War on Drugs” is a failure and seek new methods to deal with addiction?
Yes and yes. See answer E.
A. Does the fact that we have the highest incarceration rate of any nation in the world indicate a problem?
Yes.
B. Given the overcrowding and long delays inherent in our legal system, do we need to do something to reform it?
Yes – I’m not sure that this is a critical concern however.
C. Have our Constitutional Rights been diminished?
Yes – I don’t think we can act on this until we give up blame – neither President Bush nor President Obama will ever be prosecuted for war crimes they may have committed. We can’t change that (in this hyper-partisan environment), but it might be possible to fix the problems (and other Constitutional abuses) if we can detach the blame and focus on what went wrong and how to prevent it from happening again. I guess I’m saying that I don’t think this can be addressed within the framework of the current legal system.
D. Has the policing authority both State and Locally been extended beyond permissible bounds.
Yes.
E. Has the War on Drugs been a failure and added to addiction rather than restricting it?
Hell yes.
F. From the perspective of criminal/civil procedure, has the Right to Privacy been terminated and/or restrictively diminished?
Yes.
G. Does State and Federal Government have the right to criminalize non-coercive sexual acts between adults?
No. I’d prefer not to see examples of rule #34, though…
H. Should the States and Federal Government admit the “War on Drugs” is a failure and seek new methods to deal with addiction?
Absolutely.
To me the question boils down to “Are you acting in good faith?” If the answer is yes, then everything is fine (regardless of the fact that you disagree, compromise is possible), but once one person starts acting in bad faith, everything tends to go to hell. It’s a kind of massively parallel prisoner’s dilemma – everyone who reads a thread gets to decide whether or not to participate and whether to be nice or mean (so to speak). In most instances, one or two people who decide not to play nice can effectively derail the conversation. I think this is an extremely interesting experiment you’ve set up here and I’m going to pay attention to this thread.
I should get my communications chief and beer advisor to put that on my crazy idea list… just sayin. (I was recently reminded of the importance of keeping a “crazy idea list” by a good friend and former [well, and current…] mentor – good advice to anyone…)
Yes to all except a portion of E … I’m not at all certain that the war on drugs has added to addiction but would agree it is a failure and has not restricted addiction.