US Politics Mega-thread - Page 8497

On August 20 2017 02:15 Plansix wrote:


Boston has this on lock. The "free speech" is going exactly how I expected it to.

On August 20 2017 02:15 Plansix wrote:
https://twitter.com/Mikel_Jollett/status/898944831673704449

Boston has this on lock. The "free speech" is going exactly how I expected it to.

On August 20 2017 02:18 LegalLord wrote:

Do you also agree that that applies in reverse? That we should respect the due process of how the office of the presidency is supposed to operate, even when the president is a dangerously incompetent nincompoop? That, for example, being willing to throw out non-stop classified information just to make life worse for the hated president is a bad thing?

I ask because you are pretty closely aligned with the political affiliation of the folk who see the merit of institutions when they're meant to limit Trump, but not when they're meant to allow him to do his job. Though I know that that doesn't mean that you necessarily agree with all of them on everything, including perhaps, perhaps not, on this issue.

On August 20 2017 02:36 Toadesstern wrote:


genuinely curious question and nothing else, but who decides on who gets those permits to hold a rally and on what basis? I mean just looking at that makes me wonder how much the city has to spend to make sure nothing happens with all the police there and whatever else.
At what point does it become unreasonable? Do people get refused based on such conditions? Does the city have to "accommodate" for those events after, let's say, a first come first serves principle or whatever decides who gets to have a rally? (the last one is more a question for what you guys)

Not trying to imply that it is unreasonable and that they should have not been allowed to gather at all, just wondering. That being said, this probably isn't your every day rally either with the recent happenings so perhaps it's just that rare that it's really insignificant?

On August 20 2017 03:24 Mohdoo wrote:
Are you there too, plansix? Iirc you're like 45 min out of Boston? Or 45 min out of somewhere near Boston? I forget

Violence[edit]
There were a number of protest incidents that turned severely violent, even resulting in deaths. In one case, attorney Theodore Landsmark was attacked and bloodied by a group of white teenagers as he exited Boston City Hall.[9] One of the youths, Joseph Rakes, attacked Landsmark with an American flag.[10] According to Landsmark, Rakes was swinging the flag and trying to hit him, not trying to spear him as it appears in the photo, and he narrowly missed.[11] A photograph of the attack on Landsmark, The Soiling of Old Glory taken by Stanley Forman for the Boston Herald American, won the Pulitzer Prize for Spot News Photography (now the Pulitzer Prize for Breaking News Photography) in 1977.[12][13] In a retaliatory incident about two weeks later, black teenagers in Roxbury threw rocks at auto mechanic Richard Poleet's car and caused him to crash. The youths dragged him out and crushed his skull with nearby paving stones. When police arrived, the man was surrounded by a crowd of 100 chanting "Let him die" while lying in a coma from which he never recovered.[5]
In another instance, a white teenager was stabbed nearly to death by a black teenager at South Boston High School. The community's white residents mobbed the school, trapping the black students inside.[14] There were dozens of other racial incidents at South Boston High that year, predominantly of racial taunting of the black students. The school was forced to close for a month after the stabbing. When it opened again, it was one of the first high schools to install metal detectors; with 400 students attending, it was guarded by 500 police officers every day. In December 1975, Judge Garrity turned out the principal of South Boston High and took control himself.[5]
Judge Garrity increased the plan down to first grade for the following school year. In October 1975, 6,000 marched against the busing in South Boston.[5]

Ousted White House strategist Steve Bannon has declared the Donald Trump presidency "over", following his departure from the billionaire's administration.

Mr Bannon, a right-wing ideologue who co-founded the Breitbart News website, pronounced himself "free" and said he now had "my hands back on my weapons" at the outlet.

He and Mr Trump's new chief of staff, John Kelly, agreed he would leave the White House on Friday. Mr Bannon said he had given his resignation earlier in the month, though it was also reported that Mr Trump had decided to let him go.

He told the Weekly Standard, a conservative opinion magazine: "The Trump presidency that we fought for, and won, is over.

"We still have a huge movement, and we will make something of this Trump presidency. But that presidency is over. It’ll be something else. And there’ll be all kinds of fights, and there’ll be good days and bad days, but that presidency is over."

On August 20 2017 04:03 m4ini wrote:
Isn't Boston one of the most liberal/progressive parts of the US? I'm not entirely sure if i recall correctly.

On August 20 2017 04:04 LegalLord wrote:

Yeah. It's also another tech hub very much akin to Silicon Valley (or perhaps more accurately, an important part of one).

On August 20 2017 04:07 m4ini wrote:
So why exactly would they start a ruckus there, rather than for example in, the fuck do i know? Like Mississippi, Alabama, those (afaik rather racist) corners?

I don't get these people. As in, two or even threefold. Why adore an ideology that you factual know pretty much nothing about? Why go in the most liberal parts of the country to show it off?

Why be an idiot?