|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On June 15 2017 05:39 Plansix wrote:
The two captains of the congressional baseball team just gave a press conference and discussed the climate in the House. How they don’t travel together any more, they barely interact with the other party. If anyone can find a link of C-SPAN, a couple reporters are saying it is worth watching(getting this all from twitter). Also a lot of congress members brought their kids to the game.
I watched it, that's what prompted my comment about sobering them up. It's clear none of them realize how many lives have been utterly destroyed as a result of both of their choices.
It's an interesting dynamic. We saw a much less severe version when landlord-tenant relations came up with rent control/affordable housing.
It's actually really easy to not be cognizant of how other people experience life. Congresspeople must feel pretty damn insulated (before today) and I presume they are also genuinely oblivious to how destructive some of their policies have actually been for people's lives.
Like Ezra Klein talking about how much of a blessing it is to live in a country where "politics rarely leads to violence". There are people literally living in different worlds. That statement from Klein only makes sense if you're oblivious or self-centered af.
|
On June 15 2017 05:44 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2017 01:34 xDaunt wrote:On June 15 2017 01:13 Danglars wrote:On June 15 2017 00:19 xDaunt wrote:On June 15 2017 00:04 Plansix wrote:
I’m straight up nervous about how Trump’s crew will spin this. They could really ratchet up the tension if they say “look it was a democrat”. Funny you mention that: The gunman who opened fire this morning on Republican congressmen and staffers recently declared in a Facebook post that, “It’s Time to Destroy Trump & Co.”
The accused shooter, James T. Hodgkinson, 66, posted a link to a Change.org petition in late March that included the notation that, “Trump is a Traitor. Trump Has Destroyed Our Democracy. It's Time to Destroy Trump & Co.”
Hodgkinson’s Facebook page includes numerous photos of Senator Bernie Sanders, whom Hodgkinson appears to have supported during the 2016 Democratic presidential primary. In posts last August, Hodgkinson wrote, “I want Bernie to Win the White House” and “Bernie is a Progressive, while Hillary is Republican Lite.”
Hodgkinson, a Belleville, Illinois resident, has worked as a home inspector. Source. I can't really say that I am surprised given what the media has been pumping into the American public since Trump's election. I'm sure that a disturbingly large number of Americans actually believe that Trump is a traitor despite having zero basis to believe so. His motivations will forever remain a mystery. Sick and disturbing. Also reported that the shooter asked if the people practicing were Republicans or Democrats. Gone are the days I might have thought the same crowd on the record that Trump encourages violence would apply the same standards to assassination porn, traitor talk, and all the rest. I'm not exactly sure what people thought would happen when the media has been openly fomenting quasi-revolutionary sentiment against Trump. Fake news has a cost, which I have been arguing all along. My only surprise is that it took this long for some lunatic to act on it. And the whataboutism appeal to liken this to birtherism is pathetic, both intellectually and in practicality. Birtherism never had the scope and size of this Russia collusion nonsense. It didn't have nearly the same permeation into public and cultural consciousness. Not even close. There was never the equivalent of a late night TV show host calling the president Putin's cock holster. It's very easy to see the cost this time. You call Trump & allies Nazis for long enough, and some looney will get the idea he's he's the 101st airborne. Will it stop? Definitely not. HuffPo last week was all about it with " A violent response to Trump is as logical as any. You might even catch the odd writer saying the problem wasn't the violence, but the poor organization. Rewind to Gianforte. That time you could say Trump’s words were behind physical attacks on journalists. Rewind to blaming Palin for the Giffords shooting. Right-wingers are easier targets in double-standard land: NYT editorials proclaimed "But it is legitimate to hold Republicans and particularly their most virulent supporters in the media responsible for the gale of anger that has produced the vast majority of these threats, setting the nation on edge." Krugman added in his Climate of Hate that "Something about the current state of America has been causing more people than before to act out their illness by engaging in violence." and "That doesn’t mean his act should be treated as an isolated event, having nothing to do with the national climate." Those were the standards of the left, but these standards shift to political considerations, the latest confirmation that the only two acceptable stories are "A right-winger did this" and "we must not rush to politicize this story." I really wish I could say post-Trump will cool things down, everybody mends fences and meets their neighbors again. But people will remember the visceral hate incited by Dems not getting their woman made President, and remember all standards were abandoned to quell the political backlash they initially generated.
And where was this sentiment during 8 years of Obama? where the hate was certainly not less from the other side.
Where was it when Trump casually mentioned that "only second amendment people" could stop Hillary when she was elected?
Well guess what, a "second amendment person" decided he was the only way to stop Republicans.
You can claim that it has gone to far, you can make an appeal for sanity but by god your not going to be able to claim the moral high ground on this.
|
No one is condoning people take the law into their own hands.
Oh, wait...
You want to publicly spread fantasy about 2nd Amendment patriots fighting their own government, then don't act too indignant when someone decides that you are the government that needs fighting.
|
On June 15 2017 05:55 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2017 05:39 Plansix wrote:
The two captains of the congressional baseball team just gave a press conference and discussed the climate in the House. How they don’t travel together any more, they barely interact with the other party. If anyone can find a link of C-SPAN, a couple reporters are saying it is worth watching(getting this all from twitter). Also a lot of congress members brought their kids to the game. I watched it, that's what prompted my comment about sobering them up. It's clear none of them realize how many lives have been utterly destroyed as a result of both of their choices. It's an interesting dynamic. We saw a much less severe version when landlord-tenant relations came up with rent control/affordable housing. It's actually really easy to not be cognizant of how other people experience life. Congresspeople must feel pretty damn insulated (before today) and I presume they are also genuinely oblivious to how destructive some of their policies have actually been for people's lives. Like Ezra Klein talking about how much of a blessing it is to live in a country where "politics rarely leads to violence". There are people literally living in different worlds. That statement from Klein only makes sense if you're oblivious or self-centered af.
That job is so weird now. Even senior members of the House sleep in their offices on cots. They fly home almost every weekend and are in the office three days a week. People talk about recess like it is time off, but that is when they have to do all their fund raising for the election is 24 months, and deal with people who voted for them directly. If you are House member from the west coast, that is two plane trips every week, three hour flights and the time change. They got elected and that is the job, but they should look at the culture and if it is healthy for anyone involved.
Leporello – Yeah, that Rand Paul quote is real bad. Congress should have rules for how members and their staff are allowed to behalf on twitter.
|
United States42008 Posts
There aren't many issues left in which the two sides could possibly reach across the aisle but for what it's worth I'd like to see if we can get a discussion about Social Security reform because that might possibly be one.
Brief background, the Social Security Trust Fund is funded by payroll deductions, a flat tax of 12.4/107.65ths on the first $118,500 you earn.
All income after that isn't impacted by payroll taxes making it one of the few truly regressive taxes in the US tax code. It's regressive for a reason, Social Security benefits are capped, paying in on incomes above that would yield no benefit to the payee and so the income eligible for the tax is also capped.
The idea is that current workers pay for those currently retired and future workers pay for those currently working when they retire.
The problem is that generations vary in size and lifespan which means the benefits available and the burden involved in providing those benefits is continually changing. If the number of workers changes but the amount taxed from each individual worker stays the same then pretty soon money in no longer equals money out. The idea was that benefits and burden would routinely be recalculated to ensure that they stayed tuned to the demographics but that hasn't happened in a while, is overdue and, if it doesn't ever happen, will cause reduced payouts as the plan enters a partial default. It can't go bankrupt because it still has vast amounts of money coming in but it could hypothetically be forced to pay out 80 cents on the dollar in a worst case scenario.
Democratic current plan is to change nothing and hope for the best. After all, you paid in all those years, your Social Security gold is yours and no Washington fatcat is going to steal it from the vault.
Republican current plan is to privatize Social Security and audit the Fed. If the payroll deductions are abolished then people will naturally save for themselves in tax advantaged savings accounts. Also they want to keep Social Security for anyone currently old and voting Republican while simultaneously privatizing it for anyone young and reading Atlas Shrugged.
Fine people of Team Liquid from across the political spectrum. The impending Social Security crisis is a bipartisan issue and one that does actually require cooperation and compromise to solve. Neither side can get what they want here and waiting isn't a viable solution forever. Propose solutions.
|
My first question would be: What other nations solved this problem and how did they do it? I hear the EU has old people and they don't kill them to make the economy roaring.
|
On June 15 2017 05:59 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2017 05:44 Danglars wrote:On June 15 2017 01:34 xDaunt wrote:On June 15 2017 01:13 Danglars wrote:On June 15 2017 00:19 xDaunt wrote:On June 15 2017 00:04 Plansix wrote:
I’m straight up nervous about how Trump’s crew will spin this. They could really ratchet up the tension if they say “look it was a democrat”. Funny you mention that: The gunman who opened fire this morning on Republican congressmen and staffers recently declared in a Facebook post that, “It’s Time to Destroy Trump & Co.”
The accused shooter, James T. Hodgkinson, 66, posted a link to a Change.org petition in late March that included the notation that, “Trump is a Traitor. Trump Has Destroyed Our Democracy. It's Time to Destroy Trump & Co.”
Hodgkinson’s Facebook page includes numerous photos of Senator Bernie Sanders, whom Hodgkinson appears to have supported during the 2016 Democratic presidential primary. In posts last August, Hodgkinson wrote, “I want Bernie to Win the White House” and “Bernie is a Progressive, while Hillary is Republican Lite.”
Hodgkinson, a Belleville, Illinois resident, has worked as a home inspector. Source. I can't really say that I am surprised given what the media has been pumping into the American public since Trump's election. I'm sure that a disturbingly large number of Americans actually believe that Trump is a traitor despite having zero basis to believe so. His motivations will forever remain a mystery. Sick and disturbing. Also reported that the shooter asked if the people practicing were Republicans or Democrats. https://twitter.com/BigMeanInternet/status/874972869150859265Gone are the days I might have thought the same crowd on the record that Trump encourages violence would apply the same standards to assassination porn, traitor talk, and all the rest. https://twitter.com/bdomenech/status/875007676291444736 I'm not exactly sure what people thought would happen when the media has been openly fomenting quasi-revolutionary sentiment against Trump. Fake news has a cost, which I have been arguing all along. My only surprise is that it took this long for some lunatic to act on it. And the whataboutism appeal to liken this to birtherism is pathetic, both intellectually and in practicality. Birtherism never had the scope and size of this Russia collusion nonsense. It didn't have nearly the same permeation into public and cultural consciousness. Not even close. There was never the equivalent of a late night TV show host calling the president Putin's cock holster. It's very easy to see the cost this time. You call Trump & allies Nazis for long enough, and some looney will get the idea he's he's the 101st airborne. Will it stop? Definitely not. HuffPo last week was all about it with " A violent response to Trump is as logical as any. You might even catch the odd writer saying the problem wasn't the violence, but the poor organization. https://twitter.com/jessebenn/status/875049629167079425Rewind to Gianforte. That time you could say Trump’s words were behind physical attacks on journalists. Rewind to blaming Palin for the Giffords shooting. Right-wingers are easier targets in double-standard land: NYT editorials proclaimed "But it is legitimate to hold Republicans and particularly their most virulent supporters in the media responsible for the gale of anger that has produced the vast majority of these threats, setting the nation on edge." Krugman added in his Climate of Hate that "Something about the current state of America has been causing more people than before to act out their illness by engaging in violence." and "That doesn’t mean his act should be treated as an isolated event, having nothing to do with the national climate." Those were the standards of the left, but these standards shift to political considerations, the latest confirmation that the only two acceptable stories are "A right-winger did this" and "we must not rush to politicize this story." I really wish I could say post-Trump will cool things down, everybody mends fences and meets their neighbors again. But people will remember the visceral hate incited by Dems not getting their woman made President, and remember all standards were abandoned to quell the political backlash they initially generated. And where was this sentiment during 8 years of Obama? where the hate was certainly not less from the other side. Where was it when Trump casually mentioned that "only second amendment people" could stop Hillary when she was elected? Well guess what, a "second amendment person" decided he was the only way to stop Republicans. You can claim that it has gone to far, you can make an appeal for sanity but by god your not going to be able to claim the moral high ground on this.
I'm wondering why it changed for Trump/changed for violent left-wingers. I cited what NYT and WaPo and HuffPo think when it isn't a Bernie bro that goes to Occupy Wall St and thinks Trumo is a traitor. If you want sympathy, use one standard and not two or shifting standards.
|
On June 15 2017 03:52 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2017 03:19 Mohdoo wrote:On June 15 2017 03:10 Plansix wrote:On June 15 2017 02:55 Mohdoo wrote:On June 15 2017 02:50 KwarK wrote:
Long time no see DEB. I think that's fair, although part of the problem is the "choose your own news" nature of media these days. What began with partisan radio and became cable news has now reached what we can hope is its final form in the monster of exclusive and self perpetuating facebook news groups. Both sides now have their own independent realities which present the opposing side as being wholly incompatible. This is where big data analytics bullshit has really hurt us as a species. Analytics help people find and see stuff that appeals to them rather than letting the market of ideas do its job. People need to be exposed to offensive, philosophically troubling, extremely "wrong" stuff. We need to always have a mixing of ideas. Ideas get stale and shitty when they are just circle jerking. On June 15 2017 02:54 Plansix wrote:On June 15 2017 02:50 Mohdoo wrote:
I don't really see the difference between this and pizzagate. This is why stuff like Kathy Griffin's bullshit is really bad. Lesser humans are vulnerable to these kinds of thoughts and they are easily radicalized. This guy is a perfect example of what happens when weak, deficient people are exposed to empowering philosophy. They latch onto it and find meaning/power. The people doing this kind of thing are rarely well paid, confident, successful people. Some are, but most of them are runts of a litter. I would argue that saying “lesser humans are vulnerable to these kinds of thoughts” is incorrect. And the belief that people who perform these violent acts are “weak” only contributes to the misunderstanding of these problems. We are all vulnerable to this give the right circumstances. Well, I don't necessarily think weakness needs to be taboo or negative or whatever. Mental illness is a form of weakness in all the same ways as a troublesome bladder or thyroid or some shit is. But mental weakness brings down the whole a lot more strongly than someone who has a limp. I think its definitely correct to say that people struggling in a variety of mental/emotional ways are vulnerable to this. But I do admit I didn't do a good job at saying that. Regardless, there is a definite trend of runts of a litter being the types to do stuff like this. This is why people need to be seeing mental health professionals at least annually. The fact that we let people just go years and years without having a mental checkup is complete madness. I understand what you are saying and your reasoning has merit. But I think it can be harmful to claim that mentally ills as a “weakness”. Not all mental illness are permanent. Many of them are caused by things that are out of the person’s control. I’ve seen these both personally and professionally. Mental illness is like flu. It is not anyone’s fault and sometimes people can just power through it. Other times is develops into phenomena and you die from it. Point well taken and I agree. I suppose I see what you described as externally induced weakness. It is not to say the person is flawed (but I also argue the idea of people being flawed should be a much more accepted reality because everyone is deeply flawed in many ways) as a specimen, but more so performing below accepted/healthy behavior. When someone grows up with an abusive family, they become flawed in a lot of different ways. Those flaws grow and propagate and eventually you end up with a mess like this shooter. I would certainly not say these flaws are the "fault" of the person being abused, but the reality of how these flaws impact society doesn't become any less real. They still need help and we don't do ourselves any good by overly protecting these people. I would argue a more honest perspective on human deficiency is helpful for society as a whole. Rather than always telling ourselves we are all great or equal down inside, we should recognize that humans are deeply complex and will have a long list of strengths and weaknesses. We should be able to say "Wow, my self image is totally fucked and it needs to get fixed" in the same way we would say the same thing about a gimped leg. I agree and do also wish people had a greater capacity for introspection and self review. Sadly mental illness directly hinders the tools people would use to be critical of themselves. But as people who want to help and discuss dealing with mental illness, we first need be critical of the language we use. Because communication is the most valuable tool to address the problem, so we have to refine it. Even in this thread, because other people read it.
You're totally right and I would be well served by being less obnoxious with my wording.
|
The only reason social security has its own tax and a trust fund was to make it more politically palatable in the 30s and 40s. It could be run as a welfare program completely independent of its tax just as well. Consider two states:
(1) Social Security taxes raise more money than Social Security pays out
(2) Social Security taxes aren't enough and FEDGOV uses general funds money through bonds to pay the difference
Why is (2) so bad? Is (2) so bad that we need to change eligibility? Who cares if a program and its tax aren't equal.
|
I think the solutions to social security are known already. I'm pretty sure there's been plenty of panels and commissions which have figured out what needs to be done. The problem is it's politically painful to do so, so neither side wants to do it. and in a very real sense, the voters in aggregate do not want to do it either; and will punish anyone who tries.
The only true fix is to fix the fundamental problems that prevent the government from doing unpopular but necessary things.
but that's very hard to do.
other than that; I dunno, maybe find a politically palatable lie that both sides can agree on?
|
United States42008 Posts
On June 15 2017 06:29 Plansix wrote:
My first question would be: What other nations solved this problem and how did they do it? I hear the EU has old people and they don't kill them to make the economy roaring.
In the UK we have a tax called National Insurance which is a flat payroll tax which covers unemployment, disability and pensions. If you're working and paying into it then you earn qualifying years. The more qualifying years you've earned the more your payout when you retire is. You need at least 10 to get anything (assuming you're able bodied and can work) and it's capped at 35, if you have 35+ qualifying years you get no additional benefit once you hit pension age.
Everyone gets the same amount per qualifying year, regardless of how much they paid in. A banker and a labourer's qualifying year has the same value. Pensions currently aren't very much though, about $200/week. Pensioners get some other cost saving benefits too but basically if you haven't saved privately then you're kinda fucked as a pensioner in the UK. Free healthcare is about the only thing they have going for them, healthcare in the UK is actually pretty good. We are not a model for anyone to copy, although we can at least continue to pay for our plan.
|
On June 15 2017 06:29 Plansix wrote:
My first question would be: What other nations solved this problem and how did they do it? I hear the EU has old people and they don't kill them to make the economy roaring.
It is a huge economic problem which aren't solved by most nations. According to the latest report from WEF (World Economic Forum), nations/saving funds will by 2050 be missing 400 000 billion dollars globally, for them to meet their obligations .That is 5 times the current global economy.
This is a HUGE problem. If it isn't fixed it will affect most of the people on this forum directly, and that is without taking account for the extreme global financial crash it will trigger.
Edit: gramer
|
United States42008 Posts
On June 15 2017 07:01 Neneu wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2017 06:29 Plansix wrote:
My first question would be: What other nations solved this problem and how did they do it? I hear the EU has old people and they don't kill them to make the economy roaring. It is a huge economic problem which aren't solved by most nations. According to the latest report from WEF (World Economic Forum), nations/saving funds will by 2050 be missing 400 000 billion dollars globally, for them to meet their obligations .That is 5 times the current global economy. This is a HUGE problem. If it isn't fixed it will affect most of the people on this forum directly, and that is without taking account for the extreme global financial crash it will trigger. Edit: gramer
Your country is currently sitting on $873,000,000,000 in its pension fund with a population of 5,000,000. And unlike the US which invests in low yield treasury bonds, Norway's pension fund is invested in equities. I think you've got it sorted.
|
|
|
They should all be extradited and sent to prison. Anything less is an enormous disrespect to our country.
|
On June 15 2017 07:06 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2017 07:01 Neneu wrote:On June 15 2017 06:29 Plansix wrote:
My first question would be: What other nations solved this problem and how did they do it? I hear the EU has old people and they don't kill them to make the economy roaring. It is a huge economic problem which aren't solved by most nations. According to the latest report from WEF (World Economic Forum), nations/saving funds will by 2050 be missing 400 000 billion dollars globally, for them to meet their obligations .That is 5 times the current global economy. This is a HUGE problem. If it isn't fixed it will affect most of the people on this forum directly, and that is without taking account for the extreme global financial crash it will trigger. Edit: gramer Your country is currently sitting on $873,000,000,000 in its pension fund with a population of 5,000,000. And unlike the US which invests in low yield treasury bonds, Norway's pension fund is invested in equities. I think you've got it sorted.
Yes, but still with today's rate it will be empty by 2043
|
On June 15 2017 07:19 Neneu wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2017 07:06 KwarK wrote:On June 15 2017 07:01 Neneu wrote:On June 15 2017 06:29 Plansix wrote:
My first question would be: What other nations solved this problem and how did they do it? I hear the EU has old people and they don't kill them to make the economy roaring. It is a huge economic problem which aren't solved by most nations. According to the latest report from WEF (World Economic Forum), nations/saving funds will by 2050 be missing 400 000 billion dollars globally, for them to meet their obligations .That is 5 times the current global economy. This is a HUGE problem. If it isn't fixed it will affect most of the people on this forum directly, and that is without taking account for the extreme global financial crash it will trigger. Edit: gramer Your country is currently sitting on $873,000,000,000 in its pension fund with a population of 5,000,000. And unlike the US which invests in low yield treasury bonds, Norway's pension fund is invested in equities. I think you've got it sorted. Yes, but still with today's rate it will be empty by 2043
Compare our world to 26 years ago. A shit load can change between now and then.
|
United States42008 Posts
On June 15 2017 07:19 Neneu wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2017 07:06 KwarK wrote:On June 15 2017 07:01 Neneu wrote:On June 15 2017 06:29 Plansix wrote:
My first question would be: What other nations solved this problem and how did they do it? I hear the EU has old people and they don't kill them to make the economy roaring. It is a huge economic problem which aren't solved by most nations. According to the latest report from WEF (World Economic Forum), nations/saving funds will by 2050 be missing 400 000 billion dollars globally, for them to meet their obligations .That is 5 times the current global economy. This is a HUGE problem. If it isn't fixed it will affect most of the people on this forum directly, and that is without taking account for the extreme global financial crash it will trigger. Edit: gramer Your country is currently sitting on $873,000,000,000 in its pension fund with a population of 5,000,000. And unlike the US which invests in low yield treasury bonds, Norway's pension fund is invested in equities. I think you've got it sorted. Yes, but still with today's rate it will be empty by 2043
That doesn't sound possible. Any evidence to support that? English language source would be appreciated but if you find a Norwegian source and tell me it says I'm wrong I'll believe you. But with a 5% yield and 20% of the Norwegian population retired then the fund ought to passively produce $43,650 per retiree without any reduction of the principal. And that's assuming that there are no contributions into the fund at all from any source and that it has to exist purely off of the money already in the fund, forever. We're talking nearly a million dollars of invested money per retiree, that's a lot.
I'd find it quite difficult to create a contrived situation in which the fund could run out of money while still receiving revenue from the Norwegian oil fields and retirement contributions from the population. There is just too much money per Norwegian. At this rate in a few more decades Norway will be able to retire and live off of the interest earned by the principal while an underclass of non citizen serfs do all the work.
|
So what if it goes empty? The government can just pay the difference out of the general fund.
|
On June 15 2017 06:30 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2017 05:59 Gorsameth wrote:On June 15 2017 05:44 Danglars wrote:On June 15 2017 01:34 xDaunt wrote:On June 15 2017 01:13 Danglars wrote:On June 15 2017 00:19 xDaunt wrote:On June 15 2017 00:04 Plansix wrote:
I’m straight up nervous about how Trump’s crew will spin this. They could really ratchet up the tension if they say “look it was a democrat”. Funny you mention that: The gunman who opened fire this morning on Republican congressmen and staffers recently declared in a Facebook post that, “It’s Time to Destroy Trump & Co.”
The accused shooter, James T. Hodgkinson, 66, posted a link to a Change.org petition in late March that included the notation that, “Trump is a Traitor. Trump Has Destroyed Our Democracy. It's Time to Destroy Trump & Co.”
Hodgkinson’s Facebook page includes numerous photos of Senator Bernie Sanders, whom Hodgkinson appears to have supported during the 2016 Democratic presidential primary. In posts last August, Hodgkinson wrote, “I want Bernie to Win the White House” and “Bernie is a Progressive, while Hillary is Republican Lite.”
Hodgkinson, a Belleville, Illinois resident, has worked as a home inspector. Source. I can't really say that I am surprised given what the media has been pumping into the American public since Trump's election. I'm sure that a disturbingly large number of Americans actually believe that Trump is a traitor despite having zero basis to believe so. His motivations will forever remain a mystery. Sick and disturbing. Also reported that the shooter asked if the people practicing were Republicans or Democrats. https://twitter.com/BigMeanInternet/status/874972869150859265Gone are the days I might have thought the same crowd on the record that Trump encourages violence would apply the same standards to assassination porn, traitor talk, and all the rest. https://twitter.com/bdomenech/status/875007676291444736 I'm not exactly sure what people thought would happen when the media has been openly fomenting quasi-revolutionary sentiment against Trump. Fake news has a cost, which I have been arguing all along. My only surprise is that it took this long for some lunatic to act on it. And the whataboutism appeal to liken this to birtherism is pathetic, both intellectually and in practicality. Birtherism never had the scope and size of this Russia collusion nonsense. It didn't have nearly the same permeation into public and cultural consciousness. Not even close. There was never the equivalent of a late night TV show host calling the president Putin's cock holster. It's very easy to see the cost this time. You call Trump & allies Nazis for long enough, and some looney will get the idea he's he's the 101st airborne. Will it stop? Definitely not. HuffPo last week was all about it with " A violent response to Trump is as logical as any. You might even catch the odd writer saying the problem wasn't the violence, but the poor organization. https://twitter.com/jessebenn/status/875049629167079425Rewind to Gianforte. That time you could say Trump’s words were behind physical attacks on journalists. Rewind to blaming Palin for the Giffords shooting. Right-wingers are easier targets in double-standard land: NYT editorials proclaimed "But it is legitimate to hold Republicans and particularly their most virulent supporters in the media responsible for the gale of anger that has produced the vast majority of these threats, setting the nation on edge." Krugman added in his Climate of Hate that "Something about the current state of America has been causing more people than before to act out their illness by engaging in violence." and "That doesn’t mean his act should be treated as an isolated event, having nothing to do with the national climate." Those were the standards of the left, but these standards shift to political considerations, the latest confirmation that the only two acceptable stories are "A right-winger did this" and "we must not rush to politicize this story." I really wish I could say post-Trump will cool things down, everybody mends fences and meets their neighbors again. But people will remember the visceral hate incited by Dems not getting their woman made President, and remember all standards were abandoned to quell the political backlash they initially generated. And where was this sentiment during 8 years of Obama? where the hate was certainly not less from the other side. Where was it when Trump casually mentioned that "only second amendment people" could stop Hillary when she was elected? Well guess what, a "second amendment person" decided he was the only way to stop Republicans. You can claim that it has gone to far, you can make an appeal for sanity but by god your not going to be able to claim the moral high ground on this. I'm wondering why it changed for Trump/changed for violent left-wingers. I cited what NYT and WaPo and HuffPo think when it isn't a Bernie bro that goes to Occupy Wall St and thinks Trumo is a traitor. If you want sympathy, use one standard and not two or shifting standards.
I dont approve of anyone calling or condoning violence. Be them left, right or whatever.
Yes your examples show problematic behaviour (to say the least) but my problem is with Republicans going "look at these bad liberals for sowing hate" without a shred of irony or self-reflection on what they did the previous 8 years and how it set a precedent.
I dont want sympathy. I want self reflection.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
