American Politics / Current Events Thread

[Californication | 1,477]

20 hours ago, Rhino said:

Why are you the only one on this forum who gets it?

You guys get along because you are almost always on the same side of every issue. 

@SilentHill said that, "

16 hours ago, Silent Hill said:

I can only speculate, but the best I have is that I'm not so blinded by political affiliation and personal hatred for Trump that I don't let someone's political beliefs impact my ability to acknowledge evidence objectively.

Which I think is laughable. I thinks it's a lot easier to see what side of issues your on. All we have to do is see what side of an issue blacks and minorities are on and almost every time you two will be on the other side. 

Let's take a look at the last 40 pages 

Pg. 163 Rhino explains why it's discrimination not to eat at Chiq Fil A if you don't like their political or religous stances.

Pg 165 - Rhino explains why brand like Aunt Jemima are not racist.

pg - 171 SH People are promoting racial divide by talking abouy systemic racism.

Pg 175 - SH doesn't believe systemic racism existed except prior to the civil war.

pg 175 affirmative action has uintended negative results "this is a privelige that white people don't have."

Pg 1 - Rhino explains why it was Michael Browns fault he was killed by police.

Pg. 9 - SH explains how link's data on racial profiling is probably because of other reasons then racial profiling.

Pg 9 SH explains how the cop that killed George Floyd tried to de-escalate the system (despite greeting Floyd with a knock on the window with a gun).

Pg 4 - SH explains why stop and frisk is not racist.

Pg 7 - Rhino explains why disproportionate arrest of minorities isn't racist.

 

 

(The old thread is on pg 4 of everything else)

 

[Kguillemette | 1,545]

After watching the videos, it is clear to me that this kid is not a hero. He is a wannabe vigilante that should have stayed home and stayed far away from trouble and danger. From my perspective, he chased a person who threw what appeared to be a Molotov cocktail at a building with his weapon. That's when others intervened, not knowing why he was chasing down a dude with a gun. The man with the skateboard began attacking him as Rittenhouse tried to escape his pursuers. Another man pulled a firearm.

Now consider the fear of the 17 year old kid who in his misguided head, thinking he is acting as police friendly vigilante only helping the small business that is having bombs thrown at it. Now 3 men are forcibly trying to take the gun from his hands. Any reasonable human being, never mind a 17 year old kid would absolutely fear for their life. Laying on the ground wounded from being bludgeoned with a skateboard, he also sees another man pointing a pistol at him. In his head he has seconds to react or he is going to die. So he opens fire on his attackers to save his own life. 

One thing we need to do is stop labeling all these people as protesters. As previously pointed out, the survivor is a felon with no business holding a pistol. One of the gentleman who died was a convicted child molester who served 10 years in prison. The dude with the skateboard by all accounts seemed to be a decent human being, but what was he doing trying to disarm Rittenhouse with a skateboard? Perhaps he did not see the context that Rittenhouse was pursuing someone? After all, it's not like Rittenhouse was uniformed. Maybe he didn't see what appeared to be a bomb lobbed at a building? So he went into a form of vigilantism himself. Only he clearly outgunned. So he very foolishly tried to disarm him and paid the ultimate price for this terrible lapse in judgement.

The bottom line is that I can't stand here after watching the video that this kid went out looking to kill someone. Being pro-cop and a Trump supporter doesn't make you a murderer. But if he really wanted to help the police, he should have just stayed home. It's enough that police have to deal with dudes throwing bombs at buildings(or at least things that strongly resemble them). Now they need to deal with 4 numbnuts playing with guns that had no business being out there in the first place, and the bomb thrower runs away into the night.

And if you want to protest, do so in an organized assembly. Just rolling up into bedlam does nothing for BLM and only stands to hurt the cause. And BLM is one the most important causes this century.

 

[CodysGameRoom | 2,008]

1 hour ago, spacepup said:

Does anyone want to reach their hand across the aisle just a teensy bit, to help us stop this nonsense?

Who's on the other side of the "aisle"?

The NRA? They don't want to stop this.

The GOP/RNC? They want poor people dead so they can't vote and the GOP can stay in power. 

I get your point but it's just not going to happen. You have to look at things more realistically. It's nice to think about how things should be but America should be focused on how things are and how to solve them.

 

[CodysGameRoom | 2,008]

5 minutes ago, Kguillemette said:

if he really wanted to help the police, he should have just stayed home.

It's quite interesting because when they organized the event on Facebook, police officers were reaching out and thanking them for their support. The police encourage this situation which is incredible shameful. This child's parents and the police officers who encouraged him to be put into this situation should be held accountable as well.

[spacepup | 2,405]

4 minutes ago, CodysGameRoom said:

Who's on the other side of the "aisle"?

The NRA? They don't want to stop this.

The GOP/RNC? They want poor people dead so they can't vote and the GOP can stay in power. 

I get your point but it's just not going to happen. You have to look at things more realistically. It's nice to think about how things should be but America should be focused on how things are and how to solve them.

 

It is more a rhetorical question, and/or a sad plea given our ridiculous situation.  I'm not so naive to think that everyone is going to just magically get along and work together, singing songs and dancing while everything is perfect.  

I get and agree that we should be realistic and focus on solving problems as opposed to naively hoping for pie in the sky solutions.

However, one place we can start, is maybe by not biting each other's heads off at ANY remark, both out in the world and here on the forum. [This isn't directed at you specifically, but other comments we've seen when people get nasty]

[Kguillemette | 1,545]

Just now, CodysGameRoom said:

It's quite interesting because when they organized the event on Facebook, police officers were reaching out and thanking them for their support. The police encourage this situation which is incredible shameful. This child's parents and the police officers who encouraged him to be put into this situation should be held accountable as well.

I'm not aware. What is the context? Bring your guns and help by acting like a militia? Or was the context just thank you for publicly saying you think cops are awesome?

[Silent Hill | 276]

4 hours ago, Californication said:

On 9/2/2020 at 2:05 PM, Rhino said:

Why are you the only one on this forum who gets it?

You guys get along because you are almost always on the same side of every issue. 

@SilentHill said that, "

21 hours ago, Silent Hill said:

I can only speculate, but the best I have is that I'm not so blinded by political affiliation and personal hatred for Trump that I don't let someone's political beliefs impact my ability to acknowledge evidence objectively.

Which I think is laughable. I thinks it's a lot easier to see what side of issues your on. All we have to do is see what side of an issue blacks and minorities are on and almost every time you two will be on the other side. 

And where within these topics did I not acknowledge evidence objectively? Where did my political bias affect my reasoning? Did I inject any unrelated comments about how much of a piece of shit Trump is to reinforce my political bias?

Let's take a look at the last 40 pages 

Pg. 163 Rhino explains why it's discrimination not to eat at Chiq Fil A if you don't like their political or religous stances.

Pg 165 - Rhino explains why brand like Aunt Jemima are not racist.

pg - 171 SH People are promoting racial divide by talking abouy systemic racism.

I still feel this way. Pushing that systemic racism is the cause for all unequal outcomes is not helping close any racial divide. It's setting an unrealistic expectation that the only cause for unequal outcomes, is your skin color. 
You're looking at a disparity and assuming it's solely due to racism, when there are many other factors that contribute to outcomes.

Pg 175 - SH doesn't believe systemic racism existed except prior to the civil war.

I assume you meant Civil Rights? Because that's when there were actual laws/policies that affected equal rights based on skin color. None of that exists today, everyone has equal rights under the law.

pg 175 affirmative action has uintended negative results "this is a privelige that white people don't have."

Assuming this was a statement I made, I believe I explained how those results come to be, and it's obvious that Affirmative Action isn't a privilege for white people.

Pg 1 - Rhino explains why it was Michael Browns fault he was killed by police.

Pg. 9 - SH explains how link's data on racial profiling is probably because of other reasons then racial profiling.

Other reasons in addition to racial profiling. Thin, blurred line between criminal profiling and racial profiling. Doesn't mean every cop is racially profiling, or that every cop isn't racially profiling.

Pg 9 SH explains how the cop that killed George Floyd tried to de-escalate the system (despite greeting Floyd with a knock on the window with a gun).

He didn't knock on the window with a gun, only pulled the gun when George ignored commands to show both of his hands. Once he did, the officer holstered the gun. They actively tried to de-escalate the situation, and gave George countless opportunities to comply. (George asked to be placed on the ground after resisting many times, and refusing to get in the car) Doesn't mean the end result is right, but the evidence doesn't point to racism, or intent to kill.

Pg 4 - SH explains why stop and frisk is not racist.

Another example of unequal outcomes must solely be racist. An additional factor couldn't be that stop and frisk was applied heavier in crime areas which have their own demographics?

Pg 7 - Rhino explains why disproportionate arrest of minorities isn't racist.

 

 

(The old thread is on pg 4 of everything else)

 

Edited September 3, 2020 by Silent Hill

[Silent Hill | 276]

23 minutes ago, Kguillemette said:

After watching the videos, it is clear to me that this kid is not a hero. He is a wannabe vigilante that should have stayed home and stayed far away from trouble and danger. From my perspective, he chased a person who threw what appeared to be a Molotov cocktail at a building with his weapon. That's when others intervened, not knowing why he was chasing down a dude with a gun. The man with the skateboard began attacking him as Rittenhouse tried to escape his pursuers. Another man pulled a firearm.

Now consider the fear of the 17 year old kid who in his misguided head, thinking he is acting as police friendly vigilante only helping the small business that is having bombs thrown at it. Now 3 men are forcibly trying to take the gun from his hands. Any reasonable human being, never mind a 17 year old kid would absolutely fear for their life. Laying on the ground wounded from being bludgeoned with a skateboard, he also sees another man pointing a pistol at him. In his head he has seconds to react or he is going to die. So he opens fire on his attackers to save his own life. 

One thing we need to do is stop labeling all these people as protesters. As previously pointed out, the survivor is a felon with no business holding a pistol. One of the gentleman who died was a convicted child molester who served 10 years in prison. The dude with the skateboard by all accounts seemed to be a decent human being, but what was he doing trying to disarm Rittenhouse with a skateboard? Perhaps he did not see the context that Rittenhouse was pursuing someone? After all, it's not like Rittenhouse was uniformed. Maybe he didn't see what appeared to be a bomb lobbed at a building? So he went into a form of vigilantism himself. Only he clearly outgunned. So he very foolishly tried to disarm him and paid the ultimate price for this terrible lapse in judgement.

The bottom line is that I can't stand here after watching the video that this kid went out looking to kill someone. Being pro-cop and a Trump supporter doesn't make you a murderer. But if he really wanted to help the police, he should have just stayed home. It's enough that police have to deal with dudes throwing bombs at buildings(or at least things that strongly resemble them). Now they need to deal with 4 numbnuts playing with guns that had no business being out there in the first place, and the bomb thrower runs away into the night.

And if you want to protest, do so in an organized assembly. Just rolling up into bedlam does nothing for BLM and only stands to hurt the cause. And BLM is one the most important causes this century.

 

Just want to clarify, are you implying that Rittenhouse was pursing people, or that he was an aggressor? Also, I assume the "bomb thrower" you're referencing is the first guy who was shot (Rosenbaum)?

[Silent Hill | 276]

31 minutes ago, CodysGameRoom said:

1 hour ago, spacepup said:

Does anyone want to reach their hand across the aisle just a teensy bit, to help us stop this nonsense?

Who's on the other side of the "aisle"?

The NRA? They don't want to stop this.

The GOP/RNC? They want poor people dead so they can't vote and the GOP can stay in power. 

I get your point but it's just not going to happen. You have to look at things more realistically. It's nice to think about how things should be but America should be focused on how things are and how to solve them.

Ah the RNC, pushing for riots just so poor people kill themselves, diminishing the Democratic voter pool. Thankfully the Democratic leaders of the cities most affected are accepting assistance to help mitigate the violence/crime, and prosecuting associated criminals to the full extent of the law or else the RNC's grand scheme would come to fruition. 

[Kguillemette | 1,545]

Don't know. Did rosenbaum throw the bomb? It's not clear from the video. I look at Rittenhouse as this kid attempting to place someone under a citizen's arrest and it goes bad from there.

[Silent Hill | 276]

12 minutes ago, Kguillemette said:

Don't know. Did rosenbaum throw the bomb? It's not clear from the video. I look at Rittenhouse as this kid attempting to place someone under a citizen's arrest and it goes bad from there.

Rosenbaum threw something, but I haven't heard concrete evidence on what exactly it was. There's no evidence of Rittenhouse trying to place anyone (especially Rosenbaum) under citizen's arrest. The first video starts with Rosenbaum chasing Rittenhouse through that parking lot. Unless you're watching some footage that I'm not aware of?

[CodysGameRoom | 2,008]

1 hour ago, Kguillemette said:

Bring your guns and help by acting like a militia?

Bingo. Members of the police commented on their Facebook event asking to create a line of communication, how many members they would have in attendance, etc. The kid was thanked by the police for "his efforts". Sickening. 

 

Edited September 3, 2020 by CodysGameRoom

[Kguillemette | 1,545]

31 minutes ago, Silent Hill said:

Rosenbaum threw something, but I haven't heard concrete evidence on what exactly it was. There's no evidence of Rittenhouse trying to place anyone (especially Rosenbaum) under citizen's arrest. The first video starts with Rosenbaum chasing Rittenhouse through that parking lot. Unless you're watching some footage that I'm not aware of?

It was grainy cell phone video on facebook footage I was watching, where you see someone lobbing a flaming something (at a building and chaos ensues from there. Everything else is hearsay. Im just speculating, really. It's the only conclusion that makes sense to me at this time. Why else would 3 people be attempting to disarm Rittenhouse unless he was showing some kind of aggression/defense? 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/27/us/kyle-rittenhouse-kenosha-shooting-video.html

And then here you have nice crystal clear footage of Rittenhouse murdering someone/defending himself depending on your viewpoint with no context added. The answer is definitely somewhere in the middle. 

[Kguillemette | 1,545]

30 minutes ago, CodysGameRoom said:

Bingo. Members of the police commented on their Facebook event asking to create a line of communication, how many members they would have in attendance, etc. The kid was thanked by the police for "his efforts". Sickening. 

 

If they are trying to be an organized militia, they could have at least looked like one. An outsider could have easily seen them as a bunch of nitwits with guns. The police accepting the help of untrained nitwits with guns is foolish and made a big mess bigger. 

We aren't fighting evil anymore! We are fighting foolishness.

[Silent Hill | 276]

52 minutes ago, Kguillemette said:

1 hour ago, Silent Hill said:

Rosenbaum threw something, but I haven't heard concrete evidence on what exactly it was. There's no evidence of Rittenhouse trying to place anyone (especially Rosenbaum) under citizen's arrest. The first video starts with Rosenbaum chasing Rittenhouse through that parking lot. Unless you're watching some footage that I'm not aware of?

It was grainy cell phone video on facebook footage I was watching, where you see someone lobbing a flaming something (at a building and chaos ensues from there. Everything else is hearsay. Im just speculating, really. It's the only conclusion that makes sense to me at this time. Why else would 3 people be attempting to disarm Rittenhouse unless he was showing some kind of aggression/defense? 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/27/us/kyle-rittenhouse-kenosha-shooting-video.html

And then here you have nice crystal clear footage of Rittenhouse murdering someone/defending himself depending on your viewpoint with no context added. The answer is definitely somewhere in the middle. 

I posted that article earlier which gives a pretty detailed review of all video evidence. Rosenbaum was chasing Rittenhouse to start because Rosenbaum was already aggressive and yelling "shoot me n****" to the group Kyle was around at the gas station in an earlier video. So in short, Rosenbaum was the aggressor, and chased Rittenhouse to the point that he was forced to defend himself. The rest of the group that chased after Rittenhouse after the first shooting were under the mob mentality of "stop the guy who just shot someone", not understanding that chasing someone who is armed and running towards police, isn't the logical thing to do. And that's why those who attacked Rittenhouse once they caught up to him, were shot. 

 

According to the "reporter" (McGinnis) who was filming and had been following Rittenhouse around prior:

"As they continued to walk, Rosenbaum tried to get closer to Rittenhouse, McGinnis told police. When Rosenbaum grew near, Rittenhouse did a "juke" move and started running, seemingly trying to evade a group of people who were moving toward him, McNeill wrote"

"According to the reporter, Rosenbaum was reaching for the barrel of Rittenhouse's gun, when the teenager pulled it away and raised the weapon."

 

[Silent Hill | 276]

1 hour ago, CodysGameRoom said:

2 hours ago, Kguillemette said:

Bring your guns and help by acting like a militia?

Bingo. Members of the police commented on their Facebook event asking to create a line of communication, how many members they would have in attendance, etc. The kid was thanked by the police for "his efforts". Sickening.

Not like they thanked him for shooting people. They thanked the group for helping deter criminal rioters and arsonists. If you're in that area, the right side of the law is defending property, not destroying it. 

For the Facebook event/thread of "police asking to create a line of communication", who is Paul Swick and what is the "TTPO"? Doesn't seem like an actual Police department/division.

[Rhino | 105]

8 hours ago, Silent Hill said:

9 hours ago, CodysGameRoom said:

20 hours ago, Rhino said:

I do think he will get charged with something. Just not murder.

He was already charged. With intentional murder. Twice. Among other charges.

Probably meant "convicted".

I did thanks

[Rhino | 105]

8 hours ago, Californication said:

You guys get along because you are almost always on the same side of every issue. 

@SilentHill said that, "

Which I think is laughable. I thinks it's a lot easier to see what side of issues your on. All we have to do is see what side of an issue blacks and minorities are on and almost every time you two will be on the other side. 

Let's take a look at the last 40 pages 

Pg. 163 Rhino explains why it's discrimination not to eat at Chiq Fil A if you don't like their political or religous stances.

Pg 165 - Rhino explains why brand like Aunt Jemima are not racist.

pg - 171 SH People are promoting racial divide by talking abouy systemic racism.

Pg 175 - SH doesn't believe systemic racism existed except prior to the civil war.

pg 175 affirmative action has uintended negative results "this is a privelige that white people don't have."

Pg 1 - Rhino explains why it was Michael Browns fault he was killed by police.

Pg. 9 - SH explains how link's data on racial profiling is probably because of other reasons then racial profiling.

Pg 9 SH explains how the cop that killed George Floyd tried to de-escalate the system (despite greeting Floyd with a knock on the window with a gun).

Pg 4 - SH explains why stop and frisk is not racist.

Pg 7 - Rhino explains why disproportionate arrest of minorities isn't racist.

 

 

(The old thread is on pg 4 of everything else)

 

What's your point?

[Rhino | 105]

7 hours ago, Kguillemette said:

After watching the videos, it is clear to me that this kid is not a hero. He is a wannabe vigilante that should have stayed home and stayed far away from trouble and danger. From my perspective, he chased a person who threw what appeared to be a Molotov cocktail at a building with his weapon. That's when others intervened, not knowing why he was chasing down a dude with a gun. The man with the skateboard began attacking him as Rittenhouse tried to escape his pursuers. Another man pulled a firearm.

Now consider the fear of the 17 year old kid who in his misguided head, thinking he is acting as police friendly vigilante only helping the small business that is having bombs thrown at it. Now 3 men are forcibly trying to take the gun from his hands. Any reasonable human being, never mind a 17 year old kid would absolutely fear for their life. Laying on the ground wounded from being bludgeoned with a skateboard, he also sees another man pointing a pistol at him. In his head he has seconds to react or he is going to die. So he opens fire on his attackers to save his own life. 

One thing we need to do is stop labeling all these people as protesters. As previously pointed out, the survivor is a felon with no business holding a pistol. One of the gentleman who died was a convicted child molester who served 10 years in prison. The dude with the skateboard by all accounts seemed to be a decent human being, but what was he doing trying to disarm Rittenhouse with a skateboard? Perhaps he did not see the context that Rittenhouse was pursuing someone? After all, it's not like Rittenhouse was uniformed. Maybe he didn't see what appeared to be a bomb lobbed at a building? So he went into a form of vigilantism himself. Only he clearly outgunned. So he very foolishly tried to disarm him and paid the ultimate price for this terrible lapse in judgement.

The bottom line is that I can't stand here after watching the video that this kid went out looking to kill someone. Being pro-cop and a Trump supporter doesn't make you a murderer. But if he really wanted to help the police, he should have just stayed home. It's enough that police have to deal with dudes throwing bombs at buildings(or at least things that strongly resemble them). Now they need to deal with 4 numbnuts playing with guns that had no business being out there in the first place, and the bomb thrower runs away into the night.

And if you want to protest, do so in an organized assembly. Just rolling up into bedlam does nothing for BLM and only stands to hurt the cause. And BLM is one the most important causes this century.

 

Finally someone looking at this case objectively and not politically. I agree, this kid is not a hero. To be clear for everyone, I don't think that's what either I or @Silent Hill are saying. We're saying this kid acted in self defense. Was he an idiot, should he have stayed home, could he have done numerous things differently, sure, but he didn't and here we are. 

I also agree with your points about labeling these people as protestors. I feel like a lot of people at these protests are just there to stir sh!t up, or for the fun of it, or to be a part of history or whatever. They're not actually there to protest. Most legitimate protests are peaceful. 

I think everything is even more heated now since it's an election year and the polls are getting narrower and narrower. 

[Rhino | 105]

8 hours ago, CodysGameRoom said:

Who's on the other side of the "aisle"?

The NRA? They don't want to stop this.

The GOP/RNC? They want poor people dead so they can't vote and the GOP can stay in power. 

I get your point but it's just not going to happen. You have to look at things more realistically. It's nice to think about how things should be but America should be focused on how things are and how to solve them.

 

Man you say some funny stuff. You really think the GOP wants poor people dead so they can stay in power? I'm trying to wrap my head around how this would even work if this truly was their master plan. 

[Strange | 1,700]

2 hours ago, Rhino said:

Most legitimate protests are peaceful.

That’s just objectively incorrect

[Californication | 1,477]

 

This was interesting. It's a bit long but it did a good job of refuting several of the points of misinformation being spread. Some of the highlights:

a. He didn't try to administer aid

b. There isn't proof that the person he shot that had a gun was a felon or a pedophile. 

c. he was a trump supporter because he went to several rally's

d. He posted a picture Jacob Blake, the man shot in the back, and the reason people were protesting, with the caption LOL.

e. There is video footage of Rittenhouse asking a protestor if he needed free medical care and the protestor started yellingg at him before telling his friend that rittenhouse was pointing a gun at him earlier in the day and giving them orders.

f. There is video footage of the first person he killed yelling at militia people telling them to stop pointing their guns at him along with several other protestors.

Edited September 4, 2020 by Californication

[Link | 2,714]

14 hours ago, spacepup said:

I'd hope that instead of endless bickering with each other, we could try to work together to help us with *some* level of unity and compromise to prevent future incidents.

Does anyone want to listen?  Does anyone want to help heal?  Does anyone want to reach their hand across the aisle just a teensy bit, to help us stop this nonsense? 

We are in a new era of what I believe will go down in history as another civil rights movement. There’s a side to that that, yes, I’m going align with.

The tea party people and a lot of Republican-leaning citizens said a crap-ton of veiled and coded stuff in the public sphere in 2008 despite John McCain’s pleas to not do so. It’s been festering ever since; the current president amplifies it; and the Republican party at best does nothing to dispute it—at worse, contributes more. Yes, I can hang with people I politically don’t always agree with. But no, I’m not interested in breaking bread with anyone who participates in that. 

I have wondered if we wouldn’t be better off if McCain had won. All this rabble would have stayed quiet. On the other hand, effectively saying the black man shouldn’t be president because other people don’t like it on that basis is a problem. 

[Californication | 1,477]

@kguillette, I know it's confusing with all the different videos and the way stuff is repeated, but you should watch the video I posted. You are factually wrong on almost every poiny you made.

1. Rittenhouse was running before anything was thrown.

2. Rosenbaum, the first man killed, didn't have a gun.

3.. There was no molotive cocktail thrown. A bag with a soda was thrown and it was behind Rittenhouse, he never saw it.

4. Rittenhouse wasn't bludgeoned eith a skateboard. He was pushed with a skateboard. The person using the skateboard didn't put force behind it. Also, if he was hit hard you would see a mark on his face and there isn't one.

5. Rittenhouse wasn't persuing anyone. He was running from the scene of having just killed Rosenbaum when tgebother men came after him.

6..There is no proof that the medic who tried to stop Rittenhouse was a felon and was not allowed to carry a gun. But Rittenhousr was breaking the law by having a gun. Theblaw doen't allow open carry in the state under 18 without an exception (potentially for hunting)

Edited September 4, 2020 by Californication

[CodysGameRoom | 2,008]

14 hours ago, Rhino said:

You really think the GOP wants poor people dead so they can stay in power? I'm trying to wrap my head around how this would even work if this truly was their master plan. 

Really? How would it work? Destroy the Affordable Healthcare Act... Destroy programs that help poor/disabled people like welfare, etc...

They want poor and disabled people to die so they can save their money, because they only care about themselves. It's pretty obvious. It's all about money. Why help the poor/disabled/marginalized? They instead can keep their money. They are selfish. They would rather those people die and they keep their money.