The televised protests after the George Floyd killing were just another example in a long line of examples of Democrats allowing people to rip apart the country in a fit of anger, same as they did during the Rodney King riots or the WTO riots.
I-5 wrote:The national protests are not an extremist example AT ALL, and can't be compared to Jan 6. Start by looking at what is being protested: the utterly calm and calculated murder of an unarmed black man in public vs a faked stolen election claim incited by Trump/Giuliani et all with absolutely zero evidence that could ever hold up in court. I never condone violence and destruction on any side, but the protests aren't remotely comparable.
That's the biggest false equivalency ever.
The continuous, nearly nonstop coverage of the protests following George Floyd was an example of some very poor judgment of our national press corps. Knowing full well that their coverage would result in a snowball effect of more violent protests, they should have de-emphasized and limited their coverage to just a few words and still pictures. But except for those pols that may have spoken at rallies, I cannot fault the Dems for the poor decisions made by the press, which is driven by competition with each other for viewers, and violent protests makes for dramatic videos that attract viewers.
I-5 wrote:And Riv, regarding Bernie's statement, if you apply that to the Uvalde tragedy, would you keep pumping money into those programs (because they had thousands of collective hours of active shooter training and did utterly nothing about it when the time came), or would you re-evaluate HOW you spend resources, including human resources? From all I've read about the incident, what happened in Uvalde is not abnormal when it comes to police looking after their own safety first. In this case, it was first, second, third, and last.
The answer to your question is an emphatic "YES". They should have insisted on those officers being fired and provided them with more funding to be earmarked for recruitment to replace them and more training if needed. In any industry or occupation, if you want to improve the quality of your work force, you don't do it by cutting their budget. What they need to do is to raise their salaries, improve their benefits packages, improve employee morale to reduce turnover, and widen the field of applicants so they aren't forced to hire the Officer Tackleberry's of the world.
BTW, Sanders wasn't talking about how PD's spend their resources. He specifically said that
" Every police department violating people's civil rights must be stripped of federal funding. Period." The "Period" he used at the end of that statement is an indication that he views his proposal to suspend funds as some form of punitive measure, not in the spirit of trying to improve their performance as you're trying to make it sound.
And there's worse statements than that coming out of the mouths of Democrats. Some want to disarm police and confine them to traffic control. It's talk like that which has caused me to conclude that there are a lot of Democrats living "on the fringe" of lunacy. Gone are the days when Bill Clinton once pledged to put 100,000 more cops on the workforce.