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.
which is how politics today works. And Trump is not the right person to deal with this.
How about you actually make that argument? Lots of conservatives are tried to make the "b-b-b-b-but Antifa/Alt-Left" argument stick. Why don't you actually pony up some real evidence of violence at Charlotesville that was Antifa induced. And then you need to make the critical second part of the argument: that antifa is linked to the broader Left/Dems.
We have the video from VICE. We have lots of news reports. Pony up the evidence that Antifa violence was anything comparable to the armed beatings that the racists were handing out in Virginia. Then pony up evidence linking Antifa back to the broader Left/Dems.
This wasn't explicitly about Charlotesville either.
If people calmed down for 3 seconds and just took the time to read
Tfw you post about the right's response to nazis being perceived as not enough right after a nazi terrorist attack and people don't have the reading comprehension not to assume you're talking about the attack.
With the exception of the president the right's response has been fine. A large exception. But even then we have a problem of lumping "alt-right" with everyone else, which is very intentional.
which is how politics today works. And Trump is not the right person to deal with this.
Except what's going on is this:
Violent, hateful rhetoric from Unite the Right protesters. Documented attacks and vile chants and statements from those protesters. A few scuffles between protesters and counter-protesters. A Unite the Right protester drives his car into a group of peaceful counter-protesters at high speed killing 1 and injuring 19.
Most people: "Nazis are bad!"
Trump and many on the far right: "Whoa, many sides are at fault for violence here!"
Most people: "wait, what? What about the Neo-nazis and white supremacists?"
Trump and many on the far right: "Stop trying to shut down free speech and the first amendment. The left is oppressive and wrong. A lot of those protesters were good people."
We already knew this, but it's unfortunate to see that fully reading and comprehending what was written is still a challenge here.
Ok, I'm not sure what you're talking about. Do you believe the tweet from Walsh is correct? Not only that conservatives feel this, but they *should* feel this way because it's true that's what's happening?
They should, because this is exactly what is happening.
Are you serious? That's *not* what's happening at all. No one is claiming 100% innocence without provocation. Not only that, but the right (including Trump and this tweet) aren't leading with "Nazis are bad". They're leading with "All sides have blame" and "Yeah, but what about the violent, hateful left" (btw very little proof of that, and nothing anywhere near the hateful, vile rhetoric and actions by the Unite the Right protesters). Oh and the few that may be saying that first line; it's usually "Nazis are bad, but look at how bad the protesters on the left is, they have such a huge problem." In fact I was discussing that with another poster on here earlier who used that argument.
On August 16 2017 09:42 farvacola wrote: And as frazzle brought up a number of pages ago, the conservative movement has a lot to hang its hat on all things considered, particularly in the courts and in state legislatures/governor's mansions. There's too much overt focus on the federal government and folks end up missing out on the bulk of what actually goes on here, Trump's tacit encouragement of white supremacists and overall awful job as president notwithstanding.
Which is really why I've gotten so disinterested in things in the past two years. conservatism had a genuine rise in power and influence gearing up for a second George bush to lead the faithful to victory for a generation. Then the reactionaries got exited for an asshole that was as racist and stupid as they were. Jeb hadn't bought his baseball team yet (he should have that down pretty soon thank you miami) Paul ryan grew a beard and there wasn't anyone serious on the bench to step up to the monster we got today. now its 2006 every year for the next 3-6 years and nothing can make you happy anymore.
If that's the narrative that you believe, you should just turn in your GOP/conservative credentials and go be a democrat.
Yeah but I don't want to because I disagree with democrats more then I do GOP/conservatives.
what are your top 3 disagreements with democrats?
Gun control, the drug war and how bad things are right now. I find almost every democrat I talk to talking like trump was going to be/is the end of the world or that the world is on the brink of collapse. I see 2007 and take faith in the stability and resiliency of the modern world. I think police have been bad but they've gotten better and have large challenges to fix on a structural level that goes beyond basic policy. I don't think fascists or the KKK are anything but an obvious and unavoidable feature of society. I don't think the world is going to collapse because no one wants it to collapse. I don't think Islamic terrorism is anywhere near as much of a threat as the soviet union was to the country.
what are your particular disagreements on gun control and how to handle the drug war? as to how bad things are righ tnow; that seems odd, cuz you hear the same kind of doomsaying (or worse) from many republicans, especially when obama was president. that's not really a feature of democrats that isn't equally present in republican/conservative circles. and I don't hear anyone talking about trump being the end of the world or brink of collapse or anything like that; just a lot of griping and mocking and sadness that people would fall for something that obvious, and some fear of the implications of that. islamic terrorism is indeed not a significant threat; which is a view closer to dems than reps; so I don't see hwy you brought it up in this context.
Reps like to talk about what to do with arabs a lot more then dems believe you me. I think there was a genuine fear of an unending electoral majority by democrats during obama's reign but that eroded as they realized he wasn't an experienced politician and wasn't sprouting the kinds of successors that Reagan did. I hear tons of things that trump wants to do and is going to do but I don't think hes capable of doing anything and I never did.
The Illegal gun trade is a recognizable thing and something real criminals do to get the guns they want to commit crimes. I see space for actual "common sense gun control" but I know the loopholes and I know how easy it will always be to get guns in this country if someone wants a gun. Making nonsensical bans on different models of guns or arbitrary bans on the parts like magazines don't make sense especially in the growing age of 3d printing. A ban on the size of a plastic holder for the ammo is insulting and dumb to anything constructive to the legitimate goals of people wanting to lower gun violence.
I can agree some of the gun proposals made by some dems are unsound; which isn't to say there isn't room for some sound ones; there are some common sense ones I'd say. (though common sense is itself a fallacy, but that's a whole other complicated story). do you have disputes with how some of the republicans approach gun control, wherein it seems like they block even common sense proposals? basically, I'm looking at all this through the lens of your "closer to reps than dems" stance, and am looking specifically for issues that substantiate that; I get confused by other stuff off that topic, because it doesn't seem to support the thesis I was inquiring upon. perhaps I should've been clearer that was the statement I was focusing on.
what do you make of what happened in australia's gun control?
Hey who banned that Noidberg guy? After all that long, drawn out period of not having zeo around, it was fun to read some actual crazy without needing to get into a hazard suit to dive into T_D and stuff.
Man.
Making nonsensical bans on different models of guns or arbitrary bans on the parts like magazines don't make sense especially in the growing age of 3d printing. A ban on the size of a plastic holder for the ammo is insulting and dumb to anything constructive to the legitimate goals of people wanting to lower gun violence.
I feel like you miss something here. If drum mags or highcap mags get banned, it doesn't mean they disappear. It means you can print them, but if you get caught with them, you pay the price (literally). It's like saying that a ban on destructive devices is stupid because everyone can mix up some household items and make a makeshift bomb - so you certainly should be able to buy claymore mines and semtex in the supermarket.
I don't think it was a bad thing or a failure. There was a real rise in violent criminal organizations during the time and it posed a very real threat to national security.
The war on drugs wasn't about getting rid of violent criminal organizations as it was to punish the inner cities where minorities lived. The reason Compton, Bronx, Harlem, Chicago, Watts, etc are infested is because of the war on drugs swooped up all the low level distributors and left the big ones alone for a very long time. Hence the the disproportionate amount of black males in jails/prisons.
Jails were a failure as they didn't rehabilitate so much as punish and is the most visible result of the war. But It worked I believe foreign and domestically. Violent crime went down and criminal organizations were crippled coast to coast. I don't believe south america would have had not thrown off the cartels without us but I believe that they posted a much better chance with out support then against it. we did terrible things in South america but we did what we wanted to. They moved to Mexico and now I don't think they have anywhere else to go.
Going after the cartels became necessary once the government couldn't control them any longer, and the amount of money they were making had been cut in half. Once the Escobar showed that SA/CA could operate a successful cartel without US intervention, they became a threat. They had to be dealt with. Colombia would have been the best choice to hit and hit hard if you really want to cripple cartels. They produced so much coca they could stay in a civil war for 50 years. The FARC was the result of them protecting their business and the government there couldn't do much until recently.
Domestically I think a lot of changes can be made as the situation is completely different. Mass incarceration is bad but without a better alternative to fight criminal organizations like drug gangs and biker gangs I don't think its the wrong policy. A massive reorganization and reorientation of the jails system in the country is long past needed.
The CCA is the main handler of correction facilities in the US. It is more profitable to keep people in prison than it is to rehabilitate them. It was never meant to be a rehab center. It was meant to punish people. If you wanted to rehab them, locking them in a hole and treating them less than human isn't the way to go about it. If you want to reform the system, then you need to get rid of for profit prisons first.
Medical pot shouldn't be an argument with heroin as pain meds and meth as mental health drugs. Addictive substances are a threat to national security and thats the end that I'll hear of it.
This can be handled a variety of ways. Mostly get rid of the stigma that marijuana is a gateway drug and that doctors need to do more than prescribe meds to be rid of patients they don't want to deal with. There's more but my wrists are starting to ache. You're jumping all over the place in this wall of text. You went from drug war to mass incarceration to opiate abuse. Hopefully I answered in a concise and clear manner.
I don't know if the channel is known, "kurzgesagt - in a nutshell" (youtube channel) had a pretty good video on the drug war and came to a pretty damning conclusion.
Considering the people what worked in the Nixon administration said it was an excuse to go after blacks and hippies(democrats), there isn't much more debate that the war on drugs is stupid/racist.
I have absolutely no opinion on the removal of the stupid statue, really. And I also do not identify with the protestors in pretty much any way. But claiming that the counter protestors were peaceful is simply very untrue, that is all. They came with bats, some wearing combat gear. Of course the horrific terror attack overshadows everything. But still, claiming that Antifa and certain other groups were peaceful is frightenly dishonest. They came for violence.
You should have an opinion on removing said statue not for what it represents but censoring history is wrong. USA is suffering from heavy partisanship from the left as democrats in power that are guilty of their history want to censor it. If you remove history its bound to repeat itself, is that what you all want? Trumps winning of the election, the formation of the alt right are all because of this PC, partisanship nonsense and its all due to Obama sparking the division. Appeasement never works and thats all Obama ever did was appease terrorist orgs and people because it calmed their hurt feelings. I even heard he invited the man who dead cops from BLM(another terrorist org) into the white house. History is grotesque and we should never forget it, if you dont like it LEAVE THE USA. We arent china, we dont censor to appease the power and feelings of the capitalist communist collective. Get a grip on reality people. USA is a constitutional republic never forget it.
I taught US history. They can remove that statue, we won't forget Lee. He also isn't really worth all the celebration compared to other US historical figures. Plus, that statue was put up in the Jim Crow era, when the south was super nice to blacks, so it can be removed and given proper context in a museum.
Then lets have proper discourse and not allow protests to turn violent. You have to admit partisan politicians are guilty of this whether right or left. Theres no excuse to order the police to stand down and cause people to die to make political statement. Also the next day a statue remembering the dead confederate soldiers was torn, yes torn down and again the police did nothing.
When will when the law crack down on these thugs? People want a civil war?
The proper discourse was happening. The problem was that the remove side was winning. So the out of town nazi/kkk group showed up to do what Nazi skin heads and the KKK have always done. They don't like it when democracy doesn't go their way. That is why the civil war happened. The anti slavery party took power.
And the people who took down that statue were arrested.
Yeah but its their right to do so. And the left says worse in media outlets and does worse with their hired radical goon squads. And im aware if the right was in power it would be opposite land. As for the civil war i can say with absolute certainty the cause of the war was not about slavery. All wars are bankers wars and it was about the north taxing the south which infringes upon their states rights. The untied states itself would never revolted if not for such a high tax on the colonies. So I know slavery is a subject that makes people feel horrible but there is a bigger picture here.
The civil war was 110% about slavery. The people involved all said so at the time.
People can say and believe what they want but all wars are bankers wars.
We've been needing this perspective to balance GH's (and more recently Wulfey's) for a while now. Our thread American right of the aisle representation has been lacking the equivalent flavor of crazy.
Lmao Danglars are you serious?
Kwark and Plansix argue with GH on a regular basis. The fact that they're "on the same side" doesn't stop the left-leaning posters from critically challenging GH's viewpoint when they disagree.
Your "he's crazy, but he's OUR crazy so I'm just going to let it slide" attitude is bullshit.
Umm I'm talking crazy like white fragility, anti law and order, and all the rest that's out of left field.
Not that he goes unchallenged (Did Noidberg go unchallenged?) if you haven't been following, it's apparently fine to call conservative Republicans only one step removed from white supremacists, nazis, and the alt right. The left wing is surprisingly content with extreme opinions of their opposition across the aisle, which is a function of not seeing straight.
On August 16 2017 11:52 Plansix wrote: Considering the people what worked in the Nixon administration said it was an excuse to go after blacks and hippies(democrats), there isn't much more debate that the war on drugs is stupid/racist.
Well yeah, but the video also gives a perspective on how other countries handled similar problems (i think it was switzerland that was drawn in comparison), and results of their approach. It's quite enlightening and also gets a bit into the psychological side of things for the addicts. At least i thought it was interesting.
edit: of course, it's "in a nutshell", so there's no huge in depth analysis.
On August 16 2017 07:11 Noidberg wrote: [quote] You should have an opinion on removing said statue not for what it represents but censoring history is wrong. USA is suffering from heavy partisanship from the left as democrats in power that are guilty of their history want to censor it. If you remove history its bound to repeat itself, is that what you all want? Trumps winning of the election, the formation of the alt right are all because of this PC, partisanship nonsense and its all due to Obama sparking the division. Appeasement never works and thats all Obama ever did was appease terrorist orgs and people because it calmed their hurt feelings. I even heard he invited the man who dead cops from BLM(another terrorist org) into the white house. History is grotesque and we should never forget it, if you dont like it LEAVE THE USA. We arent china, we dont censor to appease the power and feelings of the capitalist communist collective. Get a grip on reality people. USA is a constitutional republic never forget it.
I taught US history. They can remove that statue, we won't forget Lee. He also isn't really worth all the celebration compared to other US historical figures. Plus, that statue was put up in the Jim Crow era, when the south was super nice to blacks, so it can be removed and given proper context in a museum.
Then lets have proper discourse and not allow protests to turn violent. You have to admit partisan politicians are guilty of this whether right or left. Theres no excuse to order the police to stand down and cause people to die to make political statement. Also the next day a statue remembering the dead confederate soldiers was torn, yes torn down and again the police did nothing.
When will when the law crack down on these thugs? People want a civil war?
The proper discourse was happening. The problem was that the remove side was winning. So the out of town nazi/kkk group showed up to do what Nazi skin heads and the KKK have always done. They don't like it when democracy doesn't go their way. That is why the civil war happened. The anti slavery party took power.
And the people who took down that statue were arrested.
Yeah but its their right to do so. And the left says worse in media outlets and does worse with their hired radical goon squads. And im aware if the right was in power it would be opposite land. As for the civil war i can say with absolute certainty the cause of the war was not about slavery. All wars are bankers wars and it was about the north taxing the south which infringes upon their states rights. The untied states itself would never revolted if not for such a high tax on the colonies. So I know slavery is a subject that makes people feel horrible but there is a bigger picture here.
The civil war was 110% about slavery. The people involved all said so at the time.
People can say and believe what they want but all wars are bankers wars.
We've been needing this perspective to balance GH's (and more recently Wulfey's) for a while now. Our thread American right of the aisle representation has been lacking the equivalent flavor of crazy.
Lmao Danglars are you serious?
Kwark and Plansix argue with GH on a regular basis. The fact that they're "on the same side" doesn't stop the left-leaning posters from critically challenging GH's viewpoint when they disagree.
Your "he's crazy, but he's OUR crazy so I'm just going to let it slide" attitude is bullshit.
Umm I'm talking crazy like white fragility, anti law and order, and all the rest that's out of left field.
Not that he goes unchallenged (Did Noidberg go unchallenged?) if you haven't been following, it's apparently fine to call conservative Republicans only one step removed from white supremacists, nazis, and the alt right. The left wing is surprisingly content with extreme opinions of their opposition across the aisle, which is a function of not seeing straight.
you have a lousy sense of reality if you think those things you mention are as crazy as the stuff noidberg said. they're at least 1 standard deviation less crazy than noidberg's stuff; possibly 2 or 3. you shoudln't complain about people not seeing straight when you've been proven time and again to have terrible perceptions yourself. (though that kind of projection would explain alot)
On August 16 2017 07:11 Noidberg wrote: [quote] You should have an opinion on removing said statue not for what it represents but censoring history is wrong. USA is suffering from heavy partisanship from the left as democrats in power that are guilty of their history want to censor it. If you remove history its bound to repeat itself, is that what you all want? Trumps winning of the election, the formation of the alt right are all because of this PC, partisanship nonsense and its all due to Obama sparking the division. Appeasement never works and thats all Obama ever did was appease terrorist orgs and people because it calmed their hurt feelings. I even heard he invited the man who dead cops from BLM(another terrorist org) into the white house. History is grotesque and we should never forget it, if you dont like it LEAVE THE USA. We arent china, we dont censor to appease the power and feelings of the capitalist communist collective. Get a grip on reality people. USA is a constitutional republic never forget it.
I taught US history. They can remove that statue, we won't forget Lee. He also isn't really worth all the celebration compared to other US historical figures. Plus, that statue was put up in the Jim Crow era, when the south was super nice to blacks, so it can be removed and given proper context in a museum.
Then lets have proper discourse and not allow protests to turn violent. You have to admit partisan politicians are guilty of this whether right or left. Theres no excuse to order the police to stand down and cause people to die to make political statement. Also the next day a statue remembering the dead confederate soldiers was torn, yes torn down and again the police did nothing.
When will when the law crack down on these thugs? People want a civil war?
The proper discourse was happening. The problem was that the remove side was winning. So the out of town nazi/kkk group showed up to do what Nazi skin heads and the KKK have always done. They don't like it when democracy doesn't go their way. That is why the civil war happened. The anti slavery party took power.
And the people who took down that statue were arrested.
Yeah but its their right to do so. And the left says worse in media outlets and does worse with their hired radical goon squads. And im aware if the right was in power it would be opposite land. As for the civil war i can say with absolute certainty the cause of the war was not about slavery. All wars are bankers wars and it was about the north taxing the south which infringes upon their states rights. The untied states itself would never revolted if not for such a high tax on the colonies. So I know slavery is a subject that makes people feel horrible but there is a bigger picture here.
The civil war was 110% about slavery. The people involved all said so at the time.
People can say and believe what they want but all wars are bankers wars.
We've been needing this perspective to balance GH's (and more recently Wulfey's) for a while now. Our thread American right of the aisle representation has been lacking the equivalent flavor of crazy.
Lmao Danglars are you serious?
Kwark and Plansix argue with GH on a regular basis. The fact that they're "on the same side" doesn't stop the left-leaning posters from critically challenging GH's viewpoint when they disagree.
Your "he's crazy, but he's OUR crazy so I'm just going to let it slide" attitude is bullshit.
Umm I'm talking crazy like white fragility, anti law and order, and all the rest that's out of left field.
Not that he goes unchallenged (Did Noidberg go unchallenged?) if you haven't been following, it's apparently fine to call conservative Republicans only one step removed from white supremacists, nazis, and the alt right. The left wing is surprisingly content with extreme opinions of their opposition across the aisle, which is a function of not seeing straight.
The Democratic party seems pretty good at keeping radicals in check because complaints about the "Clinton wing" are alive and well from pretty much all sides it seems?
whether the Democrats are too moderate or too left-wing seems to depend solely on the mood of the critic
which is how politics today works. And Trump is not the right person to deal with this.
Basically, Trump is a poor spokesman that excuses some of the backlash. If it's a 6 on stupid for him, media figures and the thread takes it to 11, and stays in histerics until the right gets tired of talking them back from the ledge. It ignores public opinion, and shows that it can't take criticism of the violent left.
On August 16 2017 07:11 Noidberg wrote: [quote] You should have an opinion on removing said statue not for what it represents but censoring history is wrong. USA is suffering from heavy partisanship from the left as democrats in power that are guilty of their history want to censor it. If you remove history its bound to repeat itself, is that what you all want? Trumps winning of the election, the formation of the alt right are all because of this PC, partisanship nonsense and its all due to Obama sparking the division. Appeasement never works and thats all Obama ever did was appease terrorist orgs and people because it calmed their hurt feelings. I even heard he invited the man who dead cops from BLM(another terrorist org) into the white house. History is grotesque and we should never forget it, if you dont like it LEAVE THE USA. We arent china, we dont censor to appease the power and feelings of the capitalist communist collective. Get a grip on reality people. USA is a constitutional republic never forget it.
I taught US history. They can remove that statue, we won't forget Lee. He also isn't really worth all the celebration compared to other US historical figures. Plus, that statue was put up in the Jim Crow era, when the south was super nice to blacks, so it can be removed and given proper context in a museum.
Then lets have proper discourse and not allow protests to turn violent. You have to admit partisan politicians are guilty of this whether right or left. Theres no excuse to order the police to stand down and cause people to die to make political statement. Also the next day a statue remembering the dead confederate soldiers was torn, yes torn down and again the police did nothing.
When will when the law crack down on these thugs? People want a civil war?
The proper discourse was happening. The problem was that the remove side was winning. So the out of town nazi/kkk group showed up to do what Nazi skin heads and the KKK have always done. They don't like it when democracy doesn't go their way. That is why the civil war happened. The anti slavery party took power.
And the people who took down that statue were arrested.
Yeah but its their right to do so. And the left says worse in media outlets and does worse with their hired radical goon squads. And im aware if the right was in power it would be opposite land. As for the civil war i can say with absolute certainty the cause of the war was not about slavery. All wars are bankers wars and it was about the north taxing the south which infringes upon their states rights. The untied states itself would never revolted if not for such a high tax on the colonies. So I know slavery is a subject that makes people feel horrible but there is a bigger picture here.
The civil war was 110% about slavery. The people involved all said so at the time.
People can say and believe what they want but all wars are bankers wars.
We've been needing this perspective to balance GH's (and more recently Wulfey's) for a while now. Our thread American right of the aisle representation has been lacking the equivalent flavor of crazy.
Lmao Danglars are you serious?
Kwark and Plansix argue with GH on a regular basis. The fact that they're "on the same side" doesn't stop the left-leaning posters from critically challenging GH's viewpoint when they disagree.
Your "he's crazy, but he's OUR crazy so I'm just going to let it slide" attitude is bullshit.
Umm I'm talking crazy like white fragility, anti law and order, and all the rest that's out of left field.
Not that he goes unchallenged (Did Noidberg go unchallenged?) if you haven't been following, it's apparently fine to call conservative Republicans only one step removed from white supremacists, nazis, and the alt right. The left wing is surprisingly content with extreme opinions of their opposition across the aisle, which is a function of not seeing straight.
The only fragility is coming from you. You take every single criticism of conservatives as a personal attack while heaping derision and petty scorn onto anyone who disagrees with you. And you are so desperate for affirmation of your views, you leap to defend someone like Noidberg, who was one step away from saying all wars were planned by the Jews.
On August 16 2017 07:18 Plansix wrote: [quote] I taught US history. They can remove that statue, we won't forget Lee. He also isn't really worth all the celebration compared to other US historical figures. Plus, that statue was put up in the Jim Crow era, when the south was super nice to blacks, so it can be removed and given proper context in a museum.
Then lets have proper discourse and not allow protests to turn violent. You have to admit partisan politicians are guilty of this whether right or left. Theres no excuse to order the police to stand down and cause people to die to make political statement. Also the next day a statue remembering the dead confederate soldiers was torn, yes torn down and again the police did nothing.
When will when the law crack down on these thugs? People want a civil war?
The proper discourse was happening. The problem was that the remove side was winning. So the out of town nazi/kkk group showed up to do what Nazi skin heads and the KKK have always done. They don't like it when democracy doesn't go their way. That is why the civil war happened. The anti slavery party took power.
And the people who took down that statue were arrested.
Yeah but its their right to do so. And the left says worse in media outlets and does worse with their hired radical goon squads. And im aware if the right was in power it would be opposite land. As for the civil war i can say with absolute certainty the cause of the war was not about slavery. All wars are bankers wars and it was about the north taxing the south which infringes upon their states rights. The untied states itself would never revolted if not for such a high tax on the colonies. So I know slavery is a subject that makes people feel horrible but there is a bigger picture here.
The civil war was 110% about slavery. The people involved all said so at the time.
People can say and believe what they want but all wars are bankers wars.
We've been needing this perspective to balance GH's (and more recently Wulfey's) for a while now. Our thread American right of the aisle representation has been lacking the equivalent flavor of crazy.
Lmao Danglars are you serious?
Kwark and Plansix argue with GH on a regular basis. The fact that they're "on the same side" doesn't stop the left-leaning posters from critically challenging GH's viewpoint when they disagree.
Your "he's crazy, but he's OUR crazy so I'm just going to let it slide" attitude is bullshit.
Umm I'm talking crazy like white fragility, anti law and order, and all the rest that's out of left field.
Not that he goes unchallenged (Did Noidberg go unchallenged?) if you haven't been following, it's apparently fine to call conservative Republicans only one step removed from white supremacists, nazis, and the alt right. The left wing is surprisingly content with extreme opinions of their opposition across the aisle, which is a function of not seeing straight.
The only fragility is coming from you. You take every single criticism of conservatives as a personal attack while heaping derision and petty scorn onto anyone who disagrees with you. And you are so desperate for affirmation of your views, you leap to defend someone like Noidberg, who was one step away from saying all wars were planned by the Jews bankers.
On August 16 2017 07:18 Plansix wrote: [quote] I taught US history. They can remove that statue, we won't forget Lee. He also isn't really worth all the celebration compared to other US historical figures. Plus, that statue was put up in the Jim Crow era, when the south was super nice to blacks, so it can be removed and given proper context in a museum.
Then lets have proper discourse and not allow protests to turn violent. You have to admit partisan politicians are guilty of this whether right or left. Theres no excuse to order the police to stand down and cause people to die to make political statement. Also the next day a statue remembering the dead confederate soldiers was torn, yes torn down and again the police did nothing.
When will when the law crack down on these thugs? People want a civil war?
The proper discourse was happening. The problem was that the remove side was winning. So the out of town nazi/kkk group showed up to do what Nazi skin heads and the KKK have always done. They don't like it when democracy doesn't go their way. That is why the civil war happened. The anti slavery party took power.
And the people who took down that statue were arrested.
Yeah but its their right to do so. And the left says worse in media outlets and does worse with their hired radical goon squads. And im aware if the right was in power it would be opposite land. As for the civil war i can say with absolute certainty the cause of the war was not about slavery. All wars are bankers wars and it was about the north taxing the south which infringes upon their states rights. The untied states itself would never revolted if not for such a high tax on the colonies. So I know slavery is a subject that makes people feel horrible but there is a bigger picture here.
The civil war was 110% about slavery. The people involved all said so at the time.
People can say and believe what they want but all wars are bankers wars.
We've been needing this perspective to balance GH's (and more recently Wulfey's) for a while now. Our thread American right of the aisle representation has been lacking the equivalent flavor of crazy.
Lmao Danglars are you serious?
Kwark and Plansix argue with GH on a regular basis. The fact that they're "on the same side" doesn't stop the left-leaning posters from critically challenging GH's viewpoint when they disagree.
Your "he's crazy, but he's OUR crazy so I'm just going to let it slide" attitude is bullshit.
Umm I'm talking crazy like white fragility, anti law and order, and all the rest that's out of left field.
Not that he goes unchallenged (Did Noidberg go unchallenged?) if you haven't been following, it's apparently fine to call conservative Republicans only one step removed from white supremacists, nazis, and the alt right. The left wing is surprisingly content with extreme opinions of their opposition across the aisle, which is a function of not seeing straight.
The Democratic party seems pretty good at keeping radicals in check because complaints about the "Clinton wing" are alive and well from pretty much all sides it seems?
whether the Democrats are too moderate or too left-wing seems to depend solely on the mood of the critic
Fairly standard left wing and excusers of violence on their side. They hope people forget the coverage of post-Trump-election rioting and BLM whitewashing. It's kind of the norm in America.
And, yes, it's a judge of your partisanship if Republicans are just another group trying to do what's best for America, or dangerous Nazi sympathizers.
On August 16 2017 11:09 Plansix wrote: And the drug war?
I don't think it was a bad thing or a failure. There was a real rise in violent criminal organizations during the time and it posed a very real threat to national security. Jails were a failure as they didn't rehabilitate so much as punish and is the most visable result of the war. But It worked I belive foreign and domestically. Violent crime went down and criminal organizations were crippled coast to coast. I don't belive south america would have had not thrown off the cartels without us but I belive that they posted a much better chance with out support then against it. we did terrible things in South america but we did what we wanted to. They moved to Mexico and now I don't think they have anywhere else to go. Domestically I think a lot of changes can be made as the situation is completely different. Mass incarceration is bad but without a better alternative to fight criminal organizations like drug gangs and biker gangs I don't think its the wrong policy. A massive reorganization and reorientation of the jails system in the country is long past needed. Medical pot shouldn't be an argument with heroin as pain meds and meth as mental health drugs. Addictive substances are a threat to national security and thats the end that I'll hear of it.
there's plenty of violent criminal organizations now. there's quite a few violent orgs in the US still. Violent crime in general going down, on what basis do you believe that was a result of the drug war, rather than of many other potential causes, as well as natural fluctuations over time? who says there's no better alternative than mass incarceration? on what do you base that conclusion? fixing the jails is indeed needed. iirc a lot of republicans have also been calling the wra on drugs a failure, not as many as dems, but still quite a lot; iirc there was some notable bipartisanship recently on trying to fix some of the issues.
RICO only works if one member of the organization commits a felony and drug possession with intent to distribute became a felony to do so. RICO was coopted to this. there are a few violent orgs in the US still but not to the degree of the 1970's or so. The same that I believe the suppression of these violent orgs led to the lowering of violent crime to sustain these violent orgs. I don't think mass incarceration per say is preferable (as I believe jails should be rehabilitating instead of punishing as they are today) but the threat of incarceration implied with mass incarceration is preferable to fight criminal organizations. I think some conservative politicians have been trying to court libertarians with their light stance on the failures of the drug war. I think at the least we can agree on the recent failures of the drug war. Its not 1970 anymore there's no reason to make the nation believe that we're at war with drugs anymore.
Mass incarcerations have nothing to do with criminal organisations. Literally nothing. It doesn't solve anything apart from financial problems for whoever is running the jail. The people going to jail are the consumers, rarely the suppliers.
Time is a flat circle, everyone. Remember the MLK was a terrorist who instigated riots and his marches were attacks against American values.
I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection. Martin Luther King Jr. Letter from a Birmingham Jail
We have changed very little in our tactics over the years.
which is how politics today works. And Trump is not the right person to deal with this.
How about you actually make that argument? Lots of conservatives are tried to make the "b-b-b-b-but Antifa/Alt-Left" argument stick. Why don't you actually pony up some real evidence of violence at Charlotesville that was Antifa induced. And then you need to make the critical second part of the argument: that antifa is linked to the broader Left/Dems.
We have the video from VICE. We have lots of news reports. Pony up the evidence that Antifa violence was anything comparable to the armed beatings that the racists were handing out in Virginia. Then pony up evidence linking Antifa back to the broader Left/Dems.
This wasn't explicitly about Charlotesville either.
If people calmed down for 3 seconds and just took the time to read.
And we have lots of evidence that antifa is violent, as has been documented.
So you are going to just stick to your talking points and not bother with evidence? Do you concede you can't show any Antifa violence in Charlotesville? The VICE video is pretty decisive in what it shows: the racist side was there to beat people with sticks and did beat people with sticks.
So you are just going to stick with your talking points and not read what I wrote? There were reports of confrontation between both sides there, but that's not what the post or the tweet is about entirely.
which is how politics today works. And Trump is not the right person to deal with this.
Except what's going on is this:
Violent, hateful rhetoric from Unite the Right protesters. Documented attacks and vile chants and statements from those protesters. A few scuffles between protesters and counter-protesters. A Unite the Right protester drives his car into a group of peaceful counter-protesters at high speed killing 1 and injuring 19.
Most people: "Nazis are bad!"
Trump and many on the far right: "Whoa, many sides are at fault for violence here!"
Most people: "wait, what? What about the Neo-nazis and white supremacists?"
Trump and many on the far right: "Stop trying to shut down free speech and the first amendment. The left is oppressive and wrong. A lot of those protesters were good people."
We already knew this, but it's unfortunate to see that fully reading and comprehending what was written is still a challenge here.
which is how politics today works. And Trump is not the right person to deal with this.
How about you actually make that argument? Lots of conservatives are tried to make the "b-b-b-b-but Antifa/Alt-Left" argument stick. Why don't you actually pony up some real evidence of violence at Charlotesville that was Antifa induced. And then you need to make the critical second part of the argument: that antifa is linked to the broader Left/Dems.
We have the video from VICE. We have lots of news reports. Pony up the evidence that Antifa violence was anything comparable to the armed beatings that the racists were handing out in Virginia. Then pony up evidence linking Antifa back to the broader Left/Dems.
This wasn't explicitly about Charlotesville either.
If people calmed down for 3 seconds and just took the time to read.
And we have lots of evidence that antifa is violent, as has been documented.
Here is something to read. When fascists came to Berkeley, Antifa caused some property damage. You keep getting to say that Antifa is violent for free. Pony up something beyond vandalism.
We've already had this discussion in this thread recently, but you are again confirming why you are one of the great ignored posters.
I'm not excusing anyone here for anything.
Honestly though, parroting talking points and never addressing opposing argumentation ("I refuse to actually read and understand what you wrote, so I'm just going to continue berating you for your wrongthink and bigotry") shouldn't necessarily be the default. But that's where we're at. Every week, I'm caught between whether Trump's the one gone wildly overboard, or whether the Dems, media allies, and most of this thread are more insane.
On August 16 2017 09:42 farvacola wrote: And as frazzle brought up a number of pages ago, the conservative movement has a lot to hang its hat on all things considered, particularly in the courts and in state legislatures/governor's mansions. There's too much overt focus on the federal government and folks end up missing out on the bulk of what actually goes on here, Trump's tacit encouragement of white supremacists and overall awful job as president notwithstanding.
Which is really why I've gotten so disinterested in things in the past two years. conservatism had a genuine rise in power and influence gearing up for a second George bush to lead the faithful to victory for a generation. Then the reactionaries got exited for an asshole that was as racist and stupid as they were. Jeb hadn't bought his baseball team yet (he should have that down pretty soon thank you miami) Paul ryan grew a beard and there wasn't anyone serious on the bench to step up to the monster we got today. now its 2006 every year for the next 3-6 years and nothing can make you happy anymore.
If that's the narrative that you believe, you should just turn in your GOP/conservative credentials and go be a democrat.
Yeah but I don't want to because I disagree with democrats more then I do GOP/conservatives.
what are your top 3 disagreements with democrats?
Gun control, the drug war and how bad things are right now. I find almost every democrat I talk to talking like trump was going to be/is the end of the world or that the world is on the brink of collapse. I see 2007 and take faith in the stability and resiliency of the modern world. I think police have been bad but they've gotten better and have large challenges to fix on a structural level that goes beyond basic policy. I don't think fascists or the KKK are anything but an obvious and unavoidable feature of society. I don't think the world is going to collapse because no one wants it to collapse. I don't think Islamic terrorism is anywhere near as much of a threat as the soviet union was to the country.
what are your particular disagreements on gun control and how to handle the drug war? as to how bad things are righ tnow; that seems odd, cuz you hear the same kind of doomsaying (or worse) from many republicans, especially when obama was president. that's not really a feature of democrats that isn't equally present in republican/conservative circles. and I don't hear anyone talking about trump being the end of the world or brink of collapse or anything like that; just a lot of griping and mocking and sadness that people would fall for something that obvious, and some fear of the implications of that. islamic terrorism is indeed not a significant threat; which is a view closer to dems than reps; so I don't see hwy you brought it up in this context.
Reps like to talk about what to do with arabs a lot more then dems believe you me. I think there was a genuine fear of an unending electoral majority by democrats during obama's reign but that eroded as they realized he wasn't an experienced politician and wasn't sprouting the kinds of successors that Reagan did. I hear tons of things that trump wants to do and is going to do but I don't think hes capable of doing anything and I never did.
The Illegal gun trade is a recognizable thing and something real criminals do to get the guns they want to commit crimes. I see space for actual "common sense gun control" but I know the loopholes and I know how easy it will always be to get guns in this country if someone wants a gun. Making nonsensical bans on different models of guns or arbitrary bans on the parts like magazines don't make sense especially in the growing age of 3d printing. A ban on the size of a plastic holder for the ammo is insulting and dumb to anything constructive to the legitimate goals of people wanting to lower gun violence.
I can agree some of the gun proposals made by some dems are unsound; which isn't to say there isn't room for some sound ones; there are some common sense ones I'd say. (though common sense is itself a fallacy, but that's a whole other complicated story). do you have disputes with how some of the republicans approach gun control, wherein it seems like they block even common sense proposals? basically, I'm looking at all this through the lens of your "closer to reps than dems" stance, and am looking specifically for issues that substantiate that; I get confused by other stuff off that topic, because it doesn't seem to support the thesis I was inquiring upon. perhaps I should've been clearer that was the statement I was focusing on.
what do you make of what happened in australia's gun control?
I think the NRA has gotten too successful for its own good and is trying to run up the score when it can.
Australia is a white elephant of gun control. The majority of guns that people had didn't get turned in and you can still relatively easily get a new gun. gun buy backs have been a thing and I don't think really do much. I believe that it had the same symbolic effect that Kentucky's "every household must have a gun law" that lowered robbers by so much.
On August 16 2017 07:18 Plansix wrote: [quote] I taught US history. They can remove that statue, we won't forget Lee. He also isn't really worth all the celebration compared to other US historical figures. Plus, that statue was put up in the Jim Crow era, when the south was super nice to blacks, so it can be removed and given proper context in a museum.
Then lets have proper discourse and not allow protests to turn violent. You have to admit partisan politicians are guilty of this whether right or left. Theres no excuse to order the police to stand down and cause people to die to make political statement. Also the next day a statue remembering the dead confederate soldiers was torn, yes torn down and again the police did nothing.
When will when the law crack down on these thugs? People want a civil war?
The proper discourse was happening. The problem was that the remove side was winning. So the out of town nazi/kkk group showed up to do what Nazi skin heads and the KKK have always done. They don't like it when democracy doesn't go their way. That is why the civil war happened. The anti slavery party took power.
And the people who took down that statue were arrested.
Yeah but its their right to do so. And the left says worse in media outlets and does worse with their hired radical goon squads. And im aware if the right was in power it would be opposite land. As for the civil war i can say with absolute certainty the cause of the war was not about slavery. All wars are bankers wars and it was about the north taxing the south which infringes upon their states rights. The untied states itself would never revolted if not for such a high tax on the colonies. So I know slavery is a subject that makes people feel horrible but there is a bigger picture here.
The civil war was 110% about slavery. The people involved all said so at the time.
People can say and believe what they want but all wars are bankers wars.
We've been needing this perspective to balance GH's (and more recently Wulfey's) for a while now. Our thread American right of the aisle representation has been lacking the equivalent flavor of crazy.
Lmao Danglars are you serious?
Kwark and Plansix argue with GH on a regular basis. The fact that they're "on the same side" doesn't stop the left-leaning posters from critically challenging GH's viewpoint when they disagree.
Your "he's crazy, but he's OUR crazy so I'm just going to let it slide" attitude is bullshit.
Umm I'm talking crazy like white fragility, anti law and order, and all the rest that's out of left field.
Not that he goes unchallenged (Did Noidberg go unchallenged?) if you haven't been following, it's apparently fine to call conservative Republicans only one step removed from white supremacists, nazis, and the alt right. The left wing is surprisingly content with extreme opinions of their opposition across the aisle, which is a function of not seeing straight.
you have a lousy sense of reality if you think those things you mention are as crazy as the stuff noidberg said. they're at least 1 standard deviation less crazy than noidberg's stuff; possibly 2 or 3. you shoudln't complain about people not seeing straight when you've been proven time and again to have terrible perceptions yourself. (though that kind of projection would explain alot)
Trust me, I have a similar opinion on your grasp of reality. GH never went quite as far on conspiracy theories, if that's the standout difference in your mind.
EPT
