|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
Northern Ireland25771 Posts
On April 10 2019 09:27 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2019 08:27 Gorsameth wrote:Might wanne add some details and context to that before the mods see it. I enjoy “she distanced herself from those comments” conceptually. How much distance can you really put between yourself and a thing you said. You can apologize or retract, but can you really distance yourself from it? It feels like a Michael Scott utterance. “I distance myself from those actions”.
I mean all you have to do is watch her face throughout. Very much a ‘oh shit I said that how do I get out this?’ kind of look.
|
On April 10 2019 08:17 Wombat_NI wrote:mobile.twitter.comOh that was fun I don’t use Twitter at all, apparently thumbnail embedding failure on my part. Candace Owens got called out in Congress by an individual who just played back some of her own words re Hitler on a phone. As someone who feels Candace Owens basically entirely hides behind the ‘but I’m black so I can’t have x views’ defence I quite enjoyed this and thought others might. But yes as per the remit of the thread, failure on my part thanks for pointing it out
The fun didn't end there, Wombat_NI. She fired back with her context for the comments. She roasted Ted Lieu alive, according to my Republicans viewing her response. She basically said the Ted Lieu tactic is presuming people are too stupid to look up the context for her comments (Given Wombat's quoting of only one side of the roasting, maybe she has a point). Nationalism doesn't involve racial superiority and conquest. Etc.
First off, the committee chairman framed it foolishly + Show Spoiler [Wombat_NI[] +. He should let the accused speak after being accused of white supremacy etc. Second off, I think her point stands. You can get up on the House and make accusations, and people like Wombat will share the clip of only that side, and off to the next owning.
I don't even like her style or employer. Any even-handed treatment of what she's said and done will hurt her image. Why anyone would go through this path to that end is puzzling.
|
Bill Barr testified on Capitol Hill today for the first time since the end of the Mueller investigation. For the most part, he swatted away accusations of impropriety over his summary of the Mueller report that he delivered last month. However, he also showed that he was taking great personal interest in the propriety of the investigation into Trump's team:
Attorney General William Barr has assembled a team to review controversial counterintelligence decisions made by Justice Department and FBI officials, including actions taken during the probe of the Trump campaign in the summer of 2016, according to a person familiar with the matter.
This indicates that Barr is looking into allegations that Republican lawmakers have been pursuing for more than a year -- that the investigation into President Donald Trump and possible collusion with Russia was tainted at the start by anti-Trump bias in the FBI and Justice Department.
“I am reviewing the conduct of the investigation and trying to get my arms around all the aspects of the counterintelligence investigation that was conducted during the summer of 2016,” Barr told a House panel on Tuesday.
Barr’s inquiry is separate from a long-running investigation by the Justice Department’s inspector general, said the person, who asked not to be identified discussing sensitive matters. The FBI declined to comment. Barr said he expected the inspector general’s work to be completed by May or June.
The issue came up as Barr testified before a Democratic-controlled House Appropriations subcommittee. Most of the questioning concerned demands for Barr to give lawmakers Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s full report and the evidence behind it. But the issue is sure to get more attention when Barr appears Wednesday before the panel’s GOP-led Senate counterpart.
Source.
We'll see where this goes, but by all appearances, Barr seems ready to dig into this stuff, which is good. That Barr's investigation will run separately from the IG's and potentially embrace a wider range of issues is a particularly good sign. Maybe Barr will have more to say tomorrow when he testifies before Senator Graham's committee.
Also, it seems like the Mueller report will be coming out by Friday.
|
White nationalism does involve racial superiority, however. And you don’t really roast elected representative a useless grifter who’s only skill is appearing on TV and pandering to people who treat politics like a night watching the WWE.
And there is no context for making that clip ok. The only people who think there is context that make it ok lack the basic education to understand the mechanics of how Hitler came to power. How he gain control. How the Reichstag fire was 4 weeks after he was sworn in. That the process of him making Germany “great” destroyed their democracy and other political parties. That there is no way for him to gain power the power to do what he did without brutal, violent tactics the Nazis were known for. Her claiming the context makes it ok just makes her look dumb. And people who repeat that just look uninformed.
She didn’t roast anyone. She is a clown that is only there because some Republican rep wanted her there to “trigger the libs” in his own words. But the real reason she is there is to build her brand as a useless Fox News grifter.
|
On April 10 2019 10:27 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2019 08:17 Wombat_NI wrote:mobile.twitter.comOh that was fun I don’t use Twitter at all, apparently thumbnail embedding failure on my part. Candace Owens got called out in Congress by an individual who just played back some of her own words re Hitler on a phone. As someone who feels Candace Owens basically entirely hides behind the ‘but I’m black so I can’t have x views’ defence I quite enjoyed this and thought others might. But yes as per the remit of the thread, failure on my part thanks for pointing it out The fun didn't end there, Wombat_NI. She fired back with her context for the comments. She roasted Ted Lieu alive, according to my Republicans viewing her response. She basically said the Ted Lieu tactic is presuming people are too stupid to look up the context for her comments (Given Wombat's quoting of only one side of the roasting, maybe she has a point). Nationalism doesn't involve racial superiority and conquest. Etc. https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1115674485699616769First off, the committee chairman framed it foolishly + Show Spoiler [Wombat_NI[] +. He should let the accused speak after being accused of white supremacy etc. Second off, I think her point stands. You can get up on the House and make accusations, and people like Wombat will share the clip of only that side, and off to the next owning. I don't even like her style or employer. Any even-handed treatment of what she's said and done will hurt her image. Why anyone would go through this path to that end is puzzling.
Its ironic you would post this and then mischaracterizing Ted's argument just as she did. His question after the clip was about the fact that it is dangerous to legitimize Hitler at all, not that she is a Nazi supporter or anything like that.
This is before we even get to the absurdity that is her central point that Hitler wasnt a nationalist.
|
Bet she doesn’t know what the US Nazi party slogan was either. It is such an embarrassment that she was in congress today, taking up space and time.
|
Northern Ireland25771 Posts
Why be ‘even-handed’ if it’s Candace Owens? She hides behind her race and plausible deniability all the time, it’s pretty transparent. I’m not sure if it was recent or a repost but she said it was harder to come out as conservative thanks gay, which is just fucking ridiculous.
Her response immediately goes to ‘he thinks black people are stupid’, as far I’m aware despite their ultimate goals the Nazis didn’t have too many dealings with them either.
She does stuff for Prager U which is run by a Jew ergo... (Notwitgatanding Prager U being as terrible a source for actually learning things about the world as almost anything else)
So no, it’s a terrible response that is ‘I’m black and I have friends who are Jews’ come on.
|
Northern Ireland25771 Posts
On April 10 2019 11:16 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2019 10:27 Danglars wrote:On April 10 2019 08:17 Wombat_NI wrote:mobile.twitter.comOh that was fun I don’t use Twitter at all, apparently thumbnail embedding failure on my part. Candace Owens got called out in Congress by an individual who just played back some of her own words re Hitler on a phone. As someone who feels Candace Owens basically entirely hides behind the ‘but I’m black so I can’t have x views’ defence I quite enjoyed this and thought others might. But yes as per the remit of the thread, failure on my part thanks for pointing it out The fun didn't end there, Wombat_NI. She fired back with her context for the comments. She roasted Ted Lieu alive, according to my Republicans viewing her response. She basically said the Ted Lieu tactic is presuming people are too stupid to look up the context for her comments (Given Wombat's quoting of only one side of the roasting, maybe she has a point). Nationalism doesn't involve racial superiority and conquest. Etc. https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1115674485699616769First off, the committee chairman framed it foolishly + Show Spoiler [Wombat_NI[] +. He should let the accused speak after being accused of white supremacy etc. Second off, I think her point stands. You can get up on the House and make accusations, and people like Wombat will share the clip of only that side, and off to the next owning. I don't even like her style or employer. Any even-handed treatment of what she's said and done will hurt her image. Why anyone would go through this path to that end is puzzling. Its ironic you would post this and then mischaracterizing Ted's argument just as she did. His question after the clip was about the fact that it is dangerous to legitimize Hitler at all, not that she is a Nazi supporter or anything like that. This is before we even get to the absurdity that is her central point that Hitler wasnt a nationalist.
Look whenever the left point out that x place kinda wasn’t how socialism is meant to be done, that’s actually Accurate the ‘but that wasn’t real socialism’ is thrown out and people have a good laugh.
When it’s nationalism, that does operate on a curve the ‘it wasn’t real nationalism’ is obviously a good argument
|
I’m still waiting for “The Nazis were socialists” argument to rise up and haunt us all again.
|
On April 10 2019 11:38 Plansix wrote:
I’m still waiting for “The Nazis were socialists” argument to rise up and haunt us all again.
But they were!
Nationalsocialists.
See, it was just a pencil stroke to from Nazi to Socialism.
/s for safety.
|
Still feel the “If Hitler has just stopped at making germany great argument is stupider.
Like, in three weeks? Because on week four they burned the seat of government down and blamed it on the communists and opposition.
|
You misunderstand.
That's all in the pursuit of globalisation by Hitler. I mean he was a nationalist after all, to some degree, but not really, he was a homicidal maniac in pursuit of the opposite of what Nationalism is.
I mean, i don't know if she was nervous or something, but that gibberish in these two videos doesn't make an ounce of sense. She doesn't understand the difference between Patriotism and Nationalism.
Nationalists don't kill their own people? I mean.. Russia? China? Fucking Africa?
Come on. There's nothing to argue here apart from maybe somebody did her wrong by saying she called someone stupid, which indeed she didn't afaict. The entire rest of both tweets, the "meat", is just bullshit from start to finish.
If you don't understand or know the difference between "globalising" and "conquering", i mean.. What else is there to say.
|
On April 10 2019 12:26 m4ini wrote:
You misunderstand.
That's all in the pursuit of globalisation by Hitler. I mean he was a nationalist after all, to some degree, but not really, he was a homicidal maniac in pursuit of the opposite of what Nationalism is.
I mean, i don't know if she was nervous or something, but that gibberish in these two videos doesn't make an ounce of sense. She doesn't understand the difference between Patriotism and Nationalism.
Nationalists don't kill their own people? I mean.. Russia? China? Fucking Africa?
Come on. There's nothing to argue here apart from maybe somebody did her wrong by saying she called someone stupid, which indeed she didn't afaict. The entire rest of both tweets, the "meat", is just bullshit from start to finish.
If you don't understand or know the difference between "globalising" and "conquering", i mean.. What else is there to say.
"Just Germany, I swear. Don't look at the plans to make everywhere Germany!" /s
|
On April 10 2019 11:22 Wombat_NI wrote:
Why be ‘even-handed’ if it’s Candace Owens?
If she even breaks your consciousness to inspire you to write a post, it's worthwhile to do it for showing your character, not hers. We already saw what can happen if you clip a video that is damaging to a person, but don't clip the question the spotted it. I say this because equally passionate right-wing people did EXACTLY the same thing. They showed Candace Owens responding angrily at how stupid Ted Lieu thought black people were, and insinuated the SAME attack. Wombat shares the total ownage of Candace Owens, Wombat's cousin shares the total ownage of Ted Lieu. (one example)
She hides behind her race and plausible deniability all the time, it’s pretty transparent. I’m not sure if it was recent or a repost but she said it was harder to come out as conservative thanks gay, which is just fucking ridiculous.
Her response immediately goes to ‘he thinks black people are stupid’, as far I’m aware despite their ultimate goals the Nazis didn’t have too many dealings with them either.
She does stuff for Prager U which is run by a Jew ergo... (Notwitgatanding Prager U being as terrible a source for actually learning things about the world as almost anything else)
So no, it’s a terrible response that is ‘I’m black and I have friends who are Jews’ come on.
Yes, and I have zero problems when you accuse her of hiding behind race or whatever else you can demonstrate. I've seen enough to draw the same conclusion about her pattern of behavior.
She wants to use Hitler to make a point about nationalism, which is a pretty stupid subject for the idea. Ted Lieu's comment about that legitimizing Hitler is equally idiotic. Hell, the "full context" doesn't even include the question (Did it reference Hitler as giving the bad name to nationalism? Or did it just comment on the bad reputation nationalism might have to frame an anti-globalist sentiment?) so far as I'm able to find online.
Do you see anything problematic about not posting the response because you didn't like the response? Like, if we condone the pattern of that behavior, will we end up with a better debate?
|
United States43004 Posts
And it’s not like any of the people in the camps were Germans. Not real Germans anyway. If they’d stayed in Germany and just made it great for real Germans then that would have been fine.
|
On April 10 2019 12:34 KwarK wrote:
And it’s not like any of the people in the camps were Germans. Not real Germans anyway. If they’d stayed in Germany and just made it great for real Germans then that would have been fine.
This is a really bad rabbit hole with some really dark jokes, and dark jokes aren't for everyone (or, realistically, pretty much no one but a few exceptions on TL).
Lets just all agree that she indeed didn't have a clue about what she was talking about.
|
On April 10 2019 10:27 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2019 08:17 Wombat_NI wrote:mobile.twitter.comOh that was fun I don’t use Twitter at all, apparently thumbnail embedding failure on my part. Candace Owens got called out in Congress by an individual who just played back some of her own words re Hitler on a phone. As someone who feels Candace Owens basically entirely hides behind the ‘but I’m black so I can’t have x views’ defence I quite enjoyed this and thought others might. But yes as per the remit of the thread, failure on my part thanks for pointing it out The fun didn't end there, Wombat_NI. She fired back with her context for the comments. She roasted Ted Lieu alive, according to my Republicans viewing her response. She basically said the Ted Lieu tactic is presuming people are too stupid to look up the context for her comments (Given Wombat's quoting of only one side of the roasting, maybe she has a point). Nationalism doesn't involve racial superiority and conquest. Etc. https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1115674485699616769First off, the committee chairman framed it foolishly + Show Spoiler [Wombat_NI[] +. He should let the accused speak after being accused of white supremacy etc. Second off, I think her point stands. You can get up on the House and make accusations, and people like Wombat will share the clip of only that side, and off to the next owning. I don't even like her style or employer. Any even-handed treatment of what she's said and done will hurt her image. Why anyone would go through this path to that end is puzzling.
Care to share what context you believe redeems the quote Lieu shared? Because it sure seems like he presented a claim (“Candace Owens is not fit to give testimony at a hearing on white supremacy”) and then presented his evidence (Candace Owens giving some very dumb analysis of Nazism, including saying Hitler would have been fine if he weren’t a globalist). Clear, concise, the claim was probably obvious already and if it wasn’t already obvious to someone, his evidence seems pretty strong.
Her response that “he must think black people are stupid” was pretty plainly dumb, and “you have to listen to the whole 2 hour clip” isn’t an argument, and if anything justifies Lieu cutting the clip down. She says her real point was “Hitler wasn’t a nationalist,” which is bad analysis in its own right, but more importantly fails to justify the both dumb and offensive “Hitler would have been fine if he just focused on making Germany great instead of expansionism” framing from the clip. Why anyone would start a “Hitler would have been fine if” list in the first place is beyond me, but since we’re here, starting that list with anything other than “not murdering millions of Jews” is a pretty clear mistake in my book.
In other words, Lieu’s clip appears to offer good evidence that she shouldn’t be consulted as an authority on this issue, and she wasn’t able to offer more refutation than “look up the 2 hour clip, and I totally don’t sound cool with Nazism if you listen to the whole 2 hour clip.” I don’t have the time or patience to look up and listen to this clip, but if you think there’s something exonerating in there, I’d sure appreciate if you shared with the class.
|
United States43004 Posts
Honestly it’d probably just be for the best if American politicians avoided attempts to excuse or mitigate the political stances of Adolf Hitler.
|
Northern Ireland25771 Posts
On April 10 2019 12:32 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2019 11:22 Wombat_NI wrote:
Why be ‘even-handed’ if it’s Candace Owens? If she even breaks your consciousness to inspire you to write a post, it's worthwhile to do it for showing your character, not hers. We already saw what can happen if you clip a video that is damaging to a person, but don't clip the question the spotted it. I say this because equally passionate right-wing people did EXACTLY the same thing. They showed Candace Owens responding angrily at how stupid Ted Lieu thought black people were, and insinuated the SAME attack. Wombat shares the total ownage of Candace Owens, Wombat's cousin shares the total ownage of Ted Lieu. ( one example)Show nested quote +She hides behind her race and plausible deniability all the time, it’s pretty transparent. I’m not sure if it was recent or a repost but she said it was harder to come out as conservative thanks gay, which is just fucking ridiculous.
Her response immediately goes to ‘he thinks black people are stupid’, as far I’m aware despite their ultimate goals the Nazis didn’t have too many dealings with them either.
She does stuff for Prager U which is run by a Jew ergo... (Notwitgatanding Prager U being as terrible a source for actually learning things about the world as almost anything else)
So no, it’s a terrible response that is ‘I’m black and I have friends who are Jews’ come on.
Yes, and I have zero problems when you accuse her of hiding behind race or whatever else you can demonstrate. I've seen enough to draw the same conclusion about her pattern of behavior. She wants to use Hitler to make a point about nationalism, which is a pretty stupid subject for the idea. Ted Lieu's comment about that legitimizing Hitler is equally idiotic. Hell, the "full context" doesn't even include the question (Did it reference Hitler as giving the bad name to nationalism? Or did it just comment on the bad reputation nationalism might have to frame an anti-globalist sentiment?) so far as I'm able to find online. Do you see anything problematic about not posting the response because you didn't like the response? Like, if we condone the pattern of that behavior, will we end up with a better debate?
Tbh that’s fair.
On the other hand it’s Candace Owens squirming for a bit, a person whose crap I’m pretty familiar with beyond the ‘listen to this two hour clip’
And in context, was actively invited to something surrounding white nationalism and has said such things in the past. Her stance on those is dangerous naive, namely that you can court such forces and they’ll stop at the ‘acceptable’ level you want them to.
If you’re going to get some talking head with name recognition in to talk about issues pertaining to white nationalism, hell get in Ben Shapiro. At least he both actively condemns it but more critically actually isn’t doing so hypothetically but thinks,
To some degree it’s actually a phenomenon that is there and a threat of some kind.
Or if you’re not doing a big name, someone who might have a real particular knowledge and expertise on the subject at hand.
|
You guys probably missed it but in the last racial draft we traded Candace Owens and Charles Blow for Billy Ray Cyrus.
She's your guys' problem now.
But I can't wrap my mind around how even if Hitler never left Germany how he wouldn't have still been a horrific person?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
