Best SOTU in living memory

[anatess2]

Change my mind.

@Just_A_Guy, you get special call-out. 

 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sotu/

 

Edited February 6, 2019 by anatess2

[unixknight]

Just finished listening to it.  (Yes, I'm on a break from politics but I had to listen to the SOTU.  It's one thing to take a break from politics, it's another to start living under a rock.)

It was pretty good.  I liked hearing people chanting "USA!" and I can't believe he even had some of the Democrats dressed in white doing it.  That's pretty impressive.  The whole thing made me feel good about being an American.  

I also liked it w hen they started singing Happy Birthday to Judah, the Holocaust survivor.  That was pretty awesome.  

Overall pretty successful.  Not finished digesting it yet.

One thing I have been thinking about is the withdrawal from the missile defense treaty.  It seemed weird that we'd be doing that now, when global nuclear war is highly unlikely... But I'm betting it's to create a new treaty with better terms that will also include other nations not currently bound by it but who could become a threat (like China, which he mentioned.)  

[Midwest LDS]

37 minutes ago, unixknight said:

Just finished listening to it.  (Yes, I'm on a break from politics but I had to listen to the SOTU.  It's one thing to take a break from politics, it's another to start living under a rock.)

It was pretty good.  I liked hearing people chanting "USA!" and I can't believe he even had some of the Democrats dressed in white doing it.  That's pretty impressive.  The whole thing made me feel good about being an American.  

I also liked it w hen they started singing Happy Birthday to Judah, the Holocaust survivor.  That was pretty awesome.  

Overall pretty successful.  Not finished digesting it yet.

One thing I have been thinking about is the withdrawal from the missile defense treaty.  It seemed weird that we'd be doing that now, when global nuclear war is highly unlikely... But I'm betting it's to create a new treaty with better terms that will also include other nations not currently bound by it but who could become a threat (like China, which he mentioned.)  

I thought it was a fairly effective speech as well. I read the transcript (I don't like the constant commentary when I'm trying to focus on what's actually being said). I was impressed at some of the unifying moments as well, although it was a fairly standard SOTU as far as congratulating himself on the economy (all presidents do this) and presenting policy goals that I just don't see him achieiving unless he has some sort of deal he feels he can strike with Democrats on the border wall. 

As an aside, I absolutely approve of Trump pulling out of the IRBM treaty with Russia. They have been breaking that treaty for years and it's time for us to develop our nuclear arsenal without having one hand tied behind our back. I'm in favor of the treaty as long as both sides are abiding by it's precepts but, since the Russians are breaking it, it needed to go. 

I also appreciated his support for ending long prison sentances for non violent offenders. While I oppose decriminalizing drugs, I also oppose harsh sentances for casual drug users or stupid teenagers. Save the harsh sentances for the major suppliers.

Edited February 6, 2019 by Midwest LDS

[NightSG]

3 hours ago, Midwest LDS said:

I also appreciated his support for ending long prison sentances for non violent offenders. While I oppose decriminalizing drugs, I also oppose harsh sentances for casual drug users or stupid teenagers. Save the harsh sentances for the major suppliers.

Or save them for actual violent crimes.  Even for murder it's near impossible to get more than a 20 year sentence in a lot of places, and I can think of two first degree murderers who got only 10, (and could have gotten as little as five) yet our prisons are full of people serving 5-50 year sentences for drugs.

[Midwest LDS]

7 minutes ago, NightSG said:

Or save them for actual violent crimes.  Even for murder it's near impossible to get more than a 20 year sentence in a lot of places, and I can think of two first degree murderers who got only 10, (and could have gotten as little as five) yet our prisons are full of people serving 5-50 year sentences for drugs.

Agreed, I would much rather see violent offenders getting the harsh sentences.

[mordorbund]

13 minutes ago, Midwest LDS said:

Agreed, I would much rather see violent offenders getting the harsh sentences.

Do you think harsh sentences should be reserved solely for violent offenders, or are you using violence as a shorthand for how impactful a crime is? For instance, Bernie Madoff committed a non-violent crime. Is a 150-year sentence overkill (or even 15 for that matter)?

[unixknight]

Incidentally, I've been out of the political loop so I don't know what the deal was with all those women in white.  What was that about?

[anatess2]

1 minute ago, unixknight said:

Incidentally, I've been out of the political loop so I don't know what the deal was with all those women in white.  What was that about?

Suffragette White.

It's the color of the Women's Suffrage Movement.

[Guest Godless]

5 minutes ago, unixknight said:

Incidentally, I've been out of the political loop so I don't know what the deal was with all those women in white.  What was that about?

It was a tribute to the women's suffrage movement of the early 20th century. 

[NeuroTypical]

Yep.  I liked parts of what I heard from Pres Obama's SotU addresses.  Just a show for Bushes and Clintons.  I watch Reagan clips and wish I had been paying more attention.   But yes indeed, I was filled and motivated by Trump's SotU.

[anatess2]

13 minutes ago, mordorbund said:

Do you think harsh sentences should be reserved solely for violent offenders, or are you using violence as a shorthand for how impactful a crime is? For instance, Bernie Madoff committed a non-violent crime. Is a 150-year sentence overkill (or even 15 for that matter)?

I'm going to put my 2 cents...

I believe Prison should not be used for "vengeance" but done for the safety and security of society including the offender (preventing him from succumbing to the same weakness).  I believe that the Prison should be a place for rehabilitation.  In the case of Bernie Madoff, there is no reason for him to have had a lifetime sentence.  Being able to con people into giving him all your money is only effective when you don't know the guy is a conman.  Bernie Madoff, stipped of all his assets, and with a requirement to publicize any business holdings he owns or manages would be sufficient to prevent him from doing what he did again.

By the way, my husband and I can argue about prisons the entire drive from coast to coast.

Edited February 6, 2019 by anatess2

[Midwest LDS]

45 minutes ago, mordorbund said:

Do you think harsh sentences should be reserved solely for violent offenders, or are you using violence as a shorthand for how impactful a crime is? For instance, Bernie Madoff committed a non-violent crime. Is a 150-year sentence overkill (or even 15 for that matter)?

Sorry I was refering specifically to drug crime and agreeing with @NightSG about murderers who get off light. White collar criminals (depending on the crime) still deserve to have the book thrown at them. If you ever feel like being disgusted with the Bernie Madoff types, just watch an episode or two of American Greed. Watching all those poor people who lost life savings so some scammer can get a third boat is enough to convince me of that.

Edited February 6, 2019 by Midwest LDS

[mirkwood]

Yes let's just let those druggies have short sentences.  The sooner they are back on the streets breaking out your car window to steal your stuff, kicking in your back door and stealing all your stuff,  taking your mail and committing credit card fraud and forgeries on your accounts the better.  Yea, drugs, the victimless crime.

You don't serve 5 years for simple possession.  Quit drinking the kool aid.

 

 

 

 

[Guest MormonGator]

2 hours ago, Midwest LDS said:

Sorry I was refering specifically to drug crime and agreeing with @NightSG about murderers who get off light. White collar criminals (depending on the crime) still deserve to have the book thrown at them. If you ever feel like being disgusted with the Bernie Madoff types, just watch an episode or two of American Greed. Watching all those poor people who lost life savings so some scammer can get a third boat is enough to convince me of that.

That, and white collar crime has other effects as well. It gives all of us who work in the financial industries a bad reputation. Remember the Enron/Worldcom/Tyco scandals of 2008?  Now people thing all corporations are "evil" or out to get you. Not true. 

I know of banker friends who who considered "fat cats who ripped off the little guys" even though that's far from the truth. 

So yes, white collar crime deserves a harsh punishment too. 

Edited February 7, 2019 by MormonGator

[unixknight]

12 minutes ago, mirkwood said:

Yes let's just let those druggies have short sentences.  The sooner they are back on the streets breaking out your car window to steal your stuff, kicking in your back door and stealing all your stuff,  taking your mail and committing credit card fraud and forgeries on your accounts the better.  Yea, drugs, the victimless crime.

You don't serve 5 years for simple possession.  Quit drinking the kool aid.

What about in places that have the "3 strikes, you're out" rule, like CA?  I'm not that well versed in how they do things, but isn't it possible for a nonviolent offender with three arrests for possession potentially get a long sentence? 

[Midwest LDS]

2 hours ago, MormonGator said:

That, and white collar crime has other effects as well. It gives all of us who work in the financial industries a bad reputation. Remember the Enron/Worldcom/Tyco scandals of 2008?  Now people thing all corporations are "evil" or out to get you. Not true. 

I know of banker friends who who considered "fat cats who ripped off the little guys" even though that's far from the truth. 

So yes, white collar crime deserves a harsh [punishment too. 

It really stinks to get lumped in with a bunch of criminals like that. I don't blame you for being frustrated. My very much amateurish view of things (I don't have any firsthand experience with our legal system like @mirkwood or @Just_A_Guy so I tend to take their points of view on this a little more seriously than mine) is that the more people are affected by your (generic) crime the harsher the sentence should be. First time drug offender with a joint? Get a fine. Dealing drugs to users? Much harsher sentance with serious jail time.

Edited February 7, 2019 by Midwest LDS

[JohnsonJones]

I don't share your opinion @anatess2 on the SotU, but I don't think I would be able to change your mind either.

[Just_A_Guy]

13 hours ago, anatess2 said:

Change my mind.

@Just_A_Guy, you get special call-out. 

 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sotu/

 

Haven’t read it yet, but the tidbits I’ve seen were very, very good.  Seems to have pleased the right people, ticked off the right people, and tripped up the people and factions who needed to be tripped up.  

Not gonna weigh in on the superlative, just because I don’t have time to go through and read thirty-eight other SOTUs.  

[Just_A_Guy]

3 hours ago, unixknight said:

What about in places that have the "3 strikes, you're out" rule, like CA?  I'm not that well versed in how they do things, but isn't it possible for a nonviolent offender with three arrests for possession potentially get a long sentence? 

Those would be violations of state laws; and the federal government has no power to fix that (unless Trump nominates judges who plan to declare three-strikes laws unconstitutional).  

I agree with @mirkwood and would add that if your criminal case goes federal, you’ve likely (not inevitably, but very probably) been a very bad boy indeed. 

Edited February 7, 2019 by Just_A_Guy

[unixknight]

20 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Those would be violations of state laws; and the federal government has no power to fix that (unless Trump nominates judges who plan to declare three-strikes laws unconstitutional).  

That makes sense in the context of the speech, but I was asking in relation to @mirkwood commenting about not serving 5 years for simple possession.

[mirkwood]

15 hours ago, unixknight said:

What about in places that have the "3 strikes, you're out" rule, like CA?  I'm not that well versed in how they do things, but isn't it possible for a nonviolent offender with three arrests for possession potentially get a long sentence? 

I don't work in an state with the three strikes laws, so I can't answer your question.  I don't know.

[unixknight]

4 minutes ago, mirkwood said:

I don't work in an state with the three strikes laws, so I can't answer your question.  I don't know.

I don't think I do either.  (Having not tested it )

I'm not a fan of the 3 strikes mentality anyway.  I was just wondering.

[mirkwood]

I will offer this up.  Almost every conviction is some sort of plea bargain.  Oh hey, we charged you with distribution of methamphetamine (felony 2), but we will let you plea to attempted possession (class a).  The actual conviction may not reflect the actual crime.

[unixknight]

5 minutes ago, mirkwood said:

I will offer this up.  Almost every conviction is some sort of plea bargain.  Oh hey, we charged you with distribution of methamphetamine (felony 2), but we will let you plea to attempted possession (class a).  The actual conviction may not reflect the actual crime.

That's a great point.  Food for thought when watching a speech like this. 

As I think about it, my question is:  I can imagine a felony assault being pled down to a misdemeanor assault, but could a crime that was initially charged as a violent offense be bargained down to a nonviolent charge?

[Just_A_Guy]

2 hours ago, unixknight said:

That's a great point.  Food for thought when watching a speech like this. 

As I think about it, my question is:  I can imagine a felony assault being pled down to a misdemeanor assault, but could a crime that was initially charged as a violent offense be bargained down to a nonviolent charge?

(Stepping in) Sure, as a defense attorney I used to do it all the time (assault or child abuse down to criminal mischief or disturbing the peace, for example).