Rep Joe Kennedy III Speaks Out For All Americans

[Vanny]

Yes I agree, new fresh faces and not another Kennedy. The old dynasties are out.
While we need to help the poor of course, the Right to life is also the most important.

 

[sallybutler]

We really shouldn’t prevent people from participating in politics because of who they are related to, should we?

 

[Raxus]

)Some white nationalists

That right there proves my point. Also, a white nationalist isn’t a Nazi by definition; “Nazi” is a truncation of “National Socialist”.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

The problem is that the young people who are likely to make the best politicians often come from political dynasty families. Kids often are interested in the same professions as their parents and grandparents, and they learn a lot about these professions from their older relatives, plus they have access to a great support network through all of Dad’s or Grandpa’s connections.

That’s not to say that someone with zero relatives in politics can’t make a name for himself, but it’s considerably harder and riskier. And it may take him until an older age to get the needed experience and connections.

 

[Vanny]

No of course not, but people are less likely to vote for someone like that, at least for president. right now people want fresh faces. I personally think that’s why Obama was elected over Hillary Clinton in 2008 in the primaries.
I think it’s a lot of reason Jeb Bush was rejected as Republican nominee(although I think he would have been a good President.)

 

[HCTC]

right now people want fresh faces.

To millennials he is a “fresh face.”

 

[HCTC]

Good question, I believe it has been eroded by an ever growing welfare state that supplanted the family in many cases amongst our poor. Progressivism actively undermines the family unit, LBJ’s great society was a tool used to break the backs of the working poor family.

Well, all of that is another discussion altogether. As a Catholic, however, I believe that emphasis should be put on the responsibility of the parents and specifically the mother for the safety of her unborn child. The role of government is to institute policies that facilitate the bearing and raising of children. In my opinion, these are the same policies that offer the equality of opportunity to children in poverty and that have been effective in breaking the cycle of poverty.

Equality of opportunity is what America is all about, and it is the foundation of our economic success.

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

I agree, where I disagree is that the progressive wing of the democrat party seems to be trying to effect equality of outcome in many places through social and economic engineering via the government.

 

[Imdaman]

We really shouldn’t prevent people from participating in politics because of who they are related to, should we?

So then you are OK with so called Nazi’s being able to make their point of view known!

 

[RandomAlias]

The transcript has quite a few transcription errors (sound-alike word substitutions) but I get the idea. Quite positive. Not a partisan speech, in my opinion. I’m not sure what he said that his detractors here at CAF could object to.

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

Do you not believe in unlimited freedom of speech, even if you find that speech disgusting and vile?

 

[sallybutler]

Yes. I am also ok with people not having anything to do with them socially. And as long as they don’t act out those opinions (the nazi/neo-nazi opinions) in the course of their jobs, I am also okay with them holding jobs in the public sector.

 

[HCTC]

Do you not believe in unlimited freedom of speech, even if you find that speech disgusting and vile?

I think it is generally agreed that Freedom of Speech should not be unlimited:

‘Legal systems sometimes recognize certain limits on the freedom of speech, particularly when freedom of speech conflicts with other rights and freedoms, such as in the cases of libel, slander, pornography, obscenity, fighting words, and intellectual property. Justifications for limitations to freedom of speech often reference the “harm principle” or the “offense principle”. Limitations to freedom of speech may occur through legal sanction or social disapprobation, or both.[26] Certain public institutions may also enact policies restricting the freedom of speech, for example speech codes at state schools.”

As far as nazis expressing their opinion, I believe that it should be allowed. However, I think that it should be identified for what it is - hateful, intimidating, and dangerous - and that it is rightfully subject to “social disapprobation.”

 

[Axsenex]

Meanwhile GOP trainwreck literally happened in real time…

 

[dvdjs]

The vast majority of those people were not Nazis. That word is quickly losing all meaning in the regressive left’s attempt to paint everyone with whom they disagree with it.

HCTC noted that Nazi’s marched in Charlottesville. She did not say that everyone there was a Nazi. She did not say that everyone there that she disagreed with is a Nazi. I am not sure that anyone has ever said that.
Can you identify some one who has said that?

 

[dvdjs]

I do paint everyone’s statements in the regressive left with the same brush, but the things I paint them with are demonstrably true.

please demonstrate.

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

As far as nazis expressing their opinion, I believe that it should be allowed. However, I think that it should be identified for what it is - hateful, intimidating, and dangerous - and that it is rightfully subject to “social disapprobation.”

I agree completely

 

[Raxus]

please demonstrate.

"The regressive left incorrectly calls people ‘Nazis’ " is a good example.

 

[Raxus]

HCTC noted that Nazi’s marched in Charlottesville.

She would be incorrect.

She did not say that everyone there was a Nazi.

Her first statement implied it.

She did not say that everyone there that she disagreed with is a Nazi.

Correct, nor did I suggest that she did.

I am not sure that anyone has ever said that.

Can you identify some one who has said that?

Nobody has said the exact words as such, but have done so in so many. Here’s a HuffPo writer examining the problem, and giving an example of someone who tacitly does so:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/roger-dubar/anyone-who-disagrees-is-a-nazi_b_9592174.html

 

[7_Sorrows]

Xystus:

All Americans? LOL. He did not even speak for all Democrats. There were something like 5 or 6 separate Democrat responses.

The speech was about the values that Americans have shared over time - obviously not shared by every single variety of American such as the Nazis that marched in Charlottesville - just the predominant values that built this country.

That seemed to be the content of our president’s speech too. America and American values.

I thought Rep Joe Kennedy III’s speech seemed hollow. He was not passionate.