|
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 |
On June 09 2018 10:09 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 10:08 zlefin wrote:On June 09 2018 10:03 Kyadytim wrote:On June 09 2018 09:59 Aquanim wrote:On June 09 2018 09:54 Sermokala wrote:
You made a post about how you are a jew.
... Who did? In what post? He was trying to reply to me. I don't even know what to do with this conversation anymore. I started with "hes a threat to you and people like you because more expensive coverage and less coverage leads to more deaths." He twisted my words. I corrected him, and added a comment about the irony of the fact that I've got Jewish ancestry and Danglars literally defends neonazis. He fixated on my admission of Jewish ancestry, and now I'm apparently posting what I'm posting because I'm Jewish.EDIT, because why not. I'm not doing it, but there are actual holocaust survivors saying about Trump what Sermakola accuses me of saying about Trump. http://www.newsweek.com/im-holocaust-survivor-trumps-america-feels-germany-nazis-took-over-876965 If you're not sure what to do; just report it and wait for the mods to deal with it. that's a good fallback position. I eventually did report that post he was trying to respond to. I'm not sure I did it right, though. It's the first time I've ever reported someone on teamliquid, and there were a lot more options for why I was reporting the post than I was expecting.
I'm sure it'll be good enough; if the mod has followup questions they can pm you. You can also post in website feedback about any issues you had with trying to report. (for a general question about th ereporting system, anywhere in website feedback is fine; there's a feedback thread for us pol issues specifically as well).
|
On June 09 2018 10:03 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 09:57 Sermokala wrote:On June 09 2018 09:48 Kyadytim wrote:On June 09 2018 09:31 Sermokala wrote:On June 09 2018 09:05 Kyadytim wrote:On June 09 2018 08:48 Sermokala wrote:On June 09 2018 08:24 misirlou wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On June 09 2018 08:06 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 07:29 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 07:12 Plansix wrote:Why would Dems in this thread condemn what Obama did when it is abundantly clear you don't hold your own politicians to the same standards? Why would they meet half way when it is clear you won't show up? As far as I am concerned, Sessions would have done this anyways, even without DOMA to use as an excuse. Just like holding up the Supreme Court nomination until after the election. It has never been a question of if they should, it is always can the Democrats stop them and will it cost them an election. On June 09 2018 07:08 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 07:00 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 06:44 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 06:25 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 06:18 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 06:12 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 05:09 Danglars wrote:
[quote]
The Obama administration with Holder as the Attorney General shredded the norms when they refused to defend DOMA in court. I thought it was an incredibly shitty thing to do, and keeping the norms in place would redound to everybody's satisfaction, but they didn't.
Behold, the logical consequence. Without norms, somebody you hate will take it to something you love. And they'll do it bigly. The chickens are really coming home to roost in that respect. So next time, defend section 3 of DOMA in court even if you disagree with it.
We're no longer willing to play nice with rules when you refuse to apply them to yourselves. In other words, sorry, but you did this to yourselves. The difference is that Obama and the DOJ wrote a letter to congress and announced it, they stood by it and took question. The Trump administration just filed a withdrawal and just hoped no one would notice on a Friday, like a coward. When Obama and Holder did it, they signed their name to the decision. And if this is the route the conservatives want to do, I'm all about it. Whine about it when the Democrats do it, throw a fit and then do the exact same thing once they are in power. Hypocrisy all around, but at least we are honest with ourselves. I feel good about the odds of how the 130 million Americans who will be impacted by this case will feel about the decision. There’s no constitutional exemption forcing you to defend laws, unless you send a nicely written letter to Congress displaying your intention. That is foolishness. The question is whether to hold your administration to a higher standard than Obama did with his, or show that the new rules will be used against your favorite things and not just your disfavored things and see how you like it. That’s one point in favor of upholding norms in the first place, for fear your political opponents turn it back in your face when you’re out of power. If Obama & his subordinate Holder reversed and had listened to conservative opinion pieces back in the day and (say) fought a losing battle in court, we could’ve avoided all this. What I am saying is that Jeff Sessions is a hypocrite, since he objected to the move back in 2011. I might be willing to say the Obama was wrong at the time too, but I'm not seeing a lot to gain from that. And gain is what this is all about. The key tactic for me it to be outraged now, claim the that this is an erosion of norms and the rule of law. Then break norms again to get what I want politically. Because its clear that its winner take all and none of these rules or norms matters. So time to get outraged and win an election. But I will encourage my representatives to sign a letter and announce the intent to erode the norms. Because I do think people should sign their names to their work, rather than doing it under the radar like cowards. You see what their objections go them. First, try to see if your objections will help the executive think better of their actions. If not, second, make sure they have reason to fear the consequences of breaking them. Not for straightforward realpolitik use of power, but that less may be broken in future. Men are not hanged for stealing horses, but that less horses might be stolen in the future. Their objections were like yours, hollow. Meaningless. The thing that you expressed outraged about in 2011 in now totally sweet revenge in 2018. The only thing I learned today was Obama made the right move in 2011 and it just got a little riskier for me and my wife to move out of MA. Same justification can be used for Trump. “Oh, does Plansix say Obama did the right thing choosing to let partisan motives fuel his justice department, even as Trump uses that principle back against his allies? Okay, fine. Trump did the right thing today and tomorrow, because the next Democratic administration will always show they’re unprincipled and they’re whining about what Trump does because they wish they were the ones in power doing it. Oh well.” I’m not with you. No, Danlgars. I've joined you. You were always here. I just been reminded that any bipartisan future for congress and politics is years away. Fire has to be fought with fire until everyone is so burned they don't want to do it any more. See, I’ll reverse the roles a little here, but end in almost the same place. I opposed Clinton on abuses, I opposed Bush on abuses, I opposed Obama on abused, and look just how far that got me. Liberals will still say I started it and they’re justified in this response. Turns out, I find little common ground when people that stood idly by when Obama did something suddenly react in outrage when Trump does it. So it’s tough to care. I don’t know who will lay down the gloves first, and if there’s an acceptable road back to make America great again. I know I have to see a little more respect for the rights of religious Americans, and much more respect for the division of powers in general. It’s tough to see that future, but I at least know an electoral majority in 2016 put their foot down in the face of a Clinton presidency. That was a incredibly good thing that I’m thankful for. At least now the left recognizes, albeit imperfectly, something about where we are as a country. Allow me to change the terms of the discussion. Or don't allow me, I'm doing it anyway. You talk about high minded points, or respect for people who are definitely not the least respected demographic in America. You cheer Trump refusing to defend the ACA as a way to chalk up petty points against Democrats. You who talk about religious freedom to discriminate against minorities, or freedom of Nazis to have platforms on college campuses. And you vote for Republicans who work to undermine the ACA most basic, unarguable elements, such as guaranteeing people with serious health issues can get medical coverage that actually covers those issues. You, and people like you, are a threat to my life. You are a threat to my life in the same way that Germans who voted for Nazis during the 1920s and early 1930s were a threat to the lives of Jews living in Germany. You have put my life and the lives of people like me on a scale and weighed them against the moral outrage of a subset of the population who did not want to see people of the same sex marry, and found those things to be of equal weight. You are a threat to my life, and you are a threat to the lives of countless people like me. We are not people to you, we are just statistics. But for us, you and people like you are attempting to pull the trigger to kill us on a regular basis, every time you walk into a polling station and vote for a Republican who has sworn to repeal the ACA. You may feel that America is not on a good path, but for me, every time you and people like you become less comfortable voicing your opinions, every time an idea that helps Republicans get elected has to crawl back into the darkness, I live with a little less fear that I will die a miserable death so that a bunch of people I have never met can celebrate something like "free markets," or "standing up to liberals." In case you didn't catch it, you're voting for people who would see me dead not because they actively hate me, but because promising to see people like me dead makes people like you happy, and actually managing to follow through with it would make people like you even happier. You, collectively, are exactly the Germans in the 1930s who voted for people blaming Jews for all of the nation's ills because whatever they do to Jews is fine with you as long as they do make your nation "great" again. great read. I'm very sorry that you and many thousands have to live with those fears lingering over you on top of what are already very heavy economic burdens due to illness/healthcare cost. It is not humane, it's not the foundation of a content and caring society. on the plus side, it lessens the inequality by getting rid of those bottom 10%, they can't fuck the statistics if they're dead /s Really? Boiling down his grievances to "you and people like you want to kill me"? He all but accuses republicans of being nazi sympathizers that are okay with the holocaust. If his post doesn't shock you with how them vs us it is you really need to read it again. I didn't say that he was a Nazi sympathizer who was okay with the holocaust. I said that he is like someone who was willing to completely ignore all of the harm of voting for the Nazis might bring about (and boy did it bring about harm) because he likes how voting for them might benefit him. The point is that historically, we know what happens when people do this. It leads to things like the holocaust. I did not say that he wanted to kill me. I said that his espousal of policies that if implemented would be good for him but also extremely bad for me makes his willingness to ignore the negative consequences to me of his votes for himself a threat to my life. There's a huge difference between what I said and the foul tasting words you shoved into my mouth to disguise what I said. EDIT: I'm also Jewish by decent if not in practice, so Danglars literally defends the rights of the ideological heirs of people who killed my ancestors to continue advocating for that ideology. Liberal hostility to white supremacists and how that infringes on their free speech is pretty much the only issue Danglars gets really passionate about in this thread. So anyway, he votes for people who will defend the neo-nazi's right to advocate nazi ideology and also have promised to remove as much of the changes to US law that ensure I can get health care as they possibly can. There's not a lot of ways to dress this up nicely. There's really not a lot of ways to dress this up nicely. You said he and people like him are a threat to your life. You compared him to people that supported the nazis. Your edit is even more explicit in connecting conservatives and nazis by calling conservatives the "ideological heirs to nazis". Danglers gets passionate about a lot of things you're the one thats trying to frame him specifically as a nazi. There is every way to dress up your disagreements with someone that isnt bearly thined appeals to the holocaust to support your stance. I compared him to people that supported the nazis prior to the holocaust. You were the person I was going to write something sarcastic about nuance to, because you seem to be missing a huge amount of nuance there. You're also continuing to put words in my mouths. I did not call conservatives ideological heirs to nazis. I called the neonazis, the ones who were marching around with the actual, literal nazi flag in Charlottesville, the ideological heirs to nazis. I didn't say Danglars was one of them, just that he was very enthusiastic about defending them. Again, you're shoving words in my mouth, metaphorically speaking, to completely change what I'm saying and then argue against that. Stop it. I'm sick of having to choose between leaving your attempts to deflect my statements by twisting them into attacks on my character alone and wasting my time pointing out how you twisted my words into something that you could use to attack my character. Im not making these metaphors for you you're the one who keeps bringing up nazis and the holocaust. Just say that hes a threat to you and people like you because more expensive coverage and less coverage leads to more deaths. Its a simplier and stronger metaphor that doesn't bring up nazis and the holocaust. Who made you the metaphor police? If you knew what he was saying, why did you accuse him of things he didn’t say?
I had an objection to comparing someone to nazis and the people who supported the holocaust.
I knew what he was saying and everything I accused him of he did. When confronted he disputes that it was what he was doing and then at the ends of his posts confirmed what I accused him of.
His last post agreed with me saying what he was doing and then cited a source supporting that danglers opinion was just like nazis and the people who supported the holocaust.
These arnt opinions I'm simply stating what he's doing and instead of elaboration he gives confirmation. What do you want me to do?
|
meanwhile I still couldn't get an awnser to my original question. What are republican voters getting out of this decision and how does it benefit them?
|
On June 09 2018 10:27 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 10:03 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 09:57 Sermokala wrote:On June 09 2018 09:48 Kyadytim wrote:On June 09 2018 09:31 Sermokala wrote:On June 09 2018 09:05 Kyadytim wrote:On June 09 2018 08:48 Sermokala wrote:On June 09 2018 08:24 misirlou wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On June 09 2018 08:06 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 07:29 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 07:12 Plansix wrote:Why would Dems in this thread condemn what Obama did when it is abundantly clear you don't hold your own politicians to the same standards? Why would they meet half way when it is clear you won't show up? As far as I am concerned, Sessions would have done this anyways, even without DOMA to use as an excuse. Just like holding up the Supreme Court nomination until after the election. It has never been a question of if they should, it is always can the Democrats stop them and will it cost them an election. On June 09 2018 07:08 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 07:00 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 06:44 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 06:25 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 06:18 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 06:12 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 05:09 Danglars wrote:
[quote]
The Obama administration with Holder as the Attorney General shredded the norms when they refused to defend DOMA in court. I thought it was an incredibly shitty thing to do, and keeping the norms in place would redound to everybody's satisfaction, but they didn't.
Behold, the logical consequence. Without norms, somebody you hate will take it to something you love. And they'll do it bigly. The chickens are really coming home to roost in that respect. So next time, defend section 3 of DOMA in court even if you disagree with it.
We're no longer willing to play nice with rules when you refuse to apply them to yourselves. In other words, sorry, but you did this to yourselves. The difference is that Obama and the DOJ wrote a letter to congress and announced it, they stood by it and took question. The Trump administration just filed a withdrawal and just hoped no one would notice on a Friday, like a coward. When Obama and Holder did it, they signed their name to the decision. And if this is the route the conservatives want to do, I'm all about it. Whine about it when the Democrats do it, throw a fit and then do the exact same thing once they are in power. Hypocrisy all around, but at least we are honest with ourselves. I feel good about the odds of how the 130 million Americans who will be impacted by this case will feel about the decision. There’s no constitutional exemption forcing you to defend laws, unless you send a nicely written letter to Congress displaying your intention. That is foolishness. The question is whether to hold your administration to a higher standard than Obama did with his, or show that the new rules will be used against your favorite things and not just your disfavored things and see how you like it. That’s one point in favor of upholding norms in the first place, for fear your political opponents turn it back in your face when you’re out of power. If Obama & his subordinate Holder reversed and had listened to conservative opinion pieces back in the day and (say) fought a losing battle in court, we could’ve avoided all this. What I am saying is that Jeff Sessions is a hypocrite, since he objected to the move back in 2011. I might be willing to say the Obama was wrong at the time too, but I'm not seeing a lot to gain from that. And gain is what this is all about. The key tactic for me it to be outraged now, claim the that this is an erosion of norms and the rule of law. Then break norms again to get what I want politically. Because its clear that its winner take all and none of these rules or norms matters. So time to get outraged and win an election. But I will encourage my representatives to sign a letter and announce the intent to erode the norms. Because I do think people should sign their names to their work, rather than doing it under the radar like cowards. You see what their objections go them. First, try to see if your objections will help the executive think better of their actions. If not, second, make sure they have reason to fear the consequences of breaking them. Not for straightforward realpolitik use of power, but that less may be broken in future. Men are not hanged for stealing horses, but that less horses might be stolen in the future. Their objections were like yours, hollow. Meaningless. The thing that you expressed outraged about in 2011 in now totally sweet revenge in 2018. The only thing I learned today was Obama made the right move in 2011 and it just got a little riskier for me and my wife to move out of MA. Same justification can be used for Trump. “Oh, does Plansix say Obama did the right thing choosing to let partisan motives fuel his justice department, even as Trump uses that principle back against his allies? Okay, fine. Trump did the right thing today and tomorrow, because the next Democratic administration will always show they’re unprincipled and they’re whining about what Trump does because they wish they were the ones in power doing it. Oh well.” I’m not with you. No, Danlgars. I've joined you. You were always here. I just been reminded that any bipartisan future for congress and politics is years away. Fire has to be fought with fire until everyone is so burned they don't want to do it any more. See, I’ll reverse the roles a little here, but end in almost the same place. I opposed Clinton on abuses, I opposed Bush on abuses, I opposed Obama on abused, and look just how far that got me. Liberals will still say I started it and they’re justified in this response. Turns out, I find little common ground when people that stood idly by when Obama did something suddenly react in outrage when Trump does it. So it’s tough to care. I don’t know who will lay down the gloves first, and if there’s an acceptable road back to make America great again. I know I have to see a little more respect for the rights of religious Americans, and much more respect for the division of powers in general. It’s tough to see that future, but I at least know an electoral majority in 2016 put their foot down in the face of a Clinton presidency. That was a incredibly good thing that I’m thankful for. At least now the left recognizes, albeit imperfectly, something about where we are as a country. Allow me to change the terms of the discussion. Or don't allow me, I'm doing it anyway. You talk about high minded points, or respect for people who are definitely not the least respected demographic in America. You cheer Trump refusing to defend the ACA as a way to chalk up petty points against Democrats. You who talk about religious freedom to discriminate against minorities, or freedom of Nazis to have platforms on college campuses. And you vote for Republicans who work to undermine the ACA most basic, unarguable elements, such as guaranteeing people with serious health issues can get medical coverage that actually covers those issues. You, and people like you, are a threat to my life. You are a threat to my life in the same way that Germans who voted for Nazis during the 1920s and early 1930s were a threat to the lives of Jews living in Germany. You have put my life and the lives of people like me on a scale and weighed them against the moral outrage of a subset of the population who did not want to see people of the same sex marry, and found those things to be of equal weight. You are a threat to my life, and you are a threat to the lives of countless people like me. We are not people to you, we are just statistics. But for us, you and people like you are attempting to pull the trigger to kill us on a regular basis, every time you walk into a polling station and vote for a Republican who has sworn to repeal the ACA. You may feel that America is not on a good path, but for me, every time you and people like you become less comfortable voicing your opinions, every time an idea that helps Republicans get elected has to crawl back into the darkness, I live with a little less fear that I will die a miserable death so that a bunch of people I have never met can celebrate something like "free markets," or "standing up to liberals." In case you didn't catch it, you're voting for people who would see me dead not because they actively hate me, but because promising to see people like me dead makes people like you happy, and actually managing to follow through with it would make people like you even happier. You, collectively, are exactly the Germans in the 1930s who voted for people blaming Jews for all of the nation's ills because whatever they do to Jews is fine with you as long as they do make your nation "great" again. great read. I'm very sorry that you and many thousands have to live with those fears lingering over you on top of what are already very heavy economic burdens due to illness/healthcare cost. It is not humane, it's not the foundation of a content and caring society. on the plus side, it lessens the inequality by getting rid of those bottom 10%, they can't fuck the statistics if they're dead /s Really? Boiling down his grievances to "you and people like you want to kill me"? He all but accuses republicans of being nazi sympathizers that are okay with the holocaust. If his post doesn't shock you with how them vs us it is you really need to read it again. I didn't say that he was a Nazi sympathizer who was okay with the holocaust. I said that he is like someone who was willing to completely ignore all of the harm of voting for the Nazis might bring about (and boy did it bring about harm) because he likes how voting for them might benefit him. The point is that historically, we know what happens when people do this. It leads to things like the holocaust. I did not say that he wanted to kill me. I said that his espousal of policies that if implemented would be good for him but also extremely bad for me makes his willingness to ignore the negative consequences to me of his votes for himself a threat to my life. There's a huge difference between what I said and the foul tasting words you shoved into my mouth to disguise what I said. EDIT: I'm also Jewish by decent if not in practice, so Danglars literally defends the rights of the ideological heirs of people who killed my ancestors to continue advocating for that ideology. Liberal hostility to white supremacists and how that infringes on their free speech is pretty much the only issue Danglars gets really passionate about in this thread. So anyway, he votes for people who will defend the neo-nazi's right to advocate nazi ideology and also have promised to remove as much of the changes to US law that ensure I can get health care as they possibly can. There's not a lot of ways to dress this up nicely. There's really not a lot of ways to dress this up nicely. You said he and people like him are a threat to your life. You compared him to people that supported the nazis. Your edit is even more explicit in connecting conservatives and nazis by calling conservatives the "ideological heirs to nazis". Danglers gets passionate about a lot of things you're the one thats trying to frame him specifically as a nazi. There is every way to dress up your disagreements with someone that isnt bearly thined appeals to the holocaust to support your stance. I compared him to people that supported the nazis prior to the holocaust. You were the person I was going to write something sarcastic about nuance to, because you seem to be missing a huge amount of nuance there. You're also continuing to put words in my mouths. I did not call conservatives ideological heirs to nazis. I called the neonazis, the ones who were marching around with the actual, literal nazi flag in Charlottesville, the ideological heirs to nazis. I didn't say Danglars was one of them, just that he was very enthusiastic about defending them. Again, you're shoving words in my mouth, metaphorically speaking, to completely change what I'm saying and then argue against that. Stop it. I'm sick of having to choose between leaving your attempts to deflect my statements by twisting them into attacks on my character alone and wasting my time pointing out how you twisted my words into something that you could use to attack my character. Im not making these metaphors for you you're the one who keeps bringing up nazis and the holocaust. Just say that hes a threat to you and people like you because more expensive coverage and less coverage leads to more deaths. Its a simplier and stronger metaphor that doesn't bring up nazis and the holocaust. Who made you the metaphor police? If you knew what he was saying, why did you accuse him of things he didn’t say? I had an objection to comparing someone to nazis and the people who supported the holocaust. I knew what he was saying and everything I accused him of he did. When confronted he disputes that it was what he was doing and then at the ends of his posts confirmed what I accused him of. His last post agreed with me saying what he was doing and then cited a source supporting that danglers opinion was just like nazis and the people who supported the holocaust. These arnt opinions I'm simply stating what he's doing and instead of elaboration he gives confirmation. What do you want me to do?
Are you high or drunk? Legit question. You have misrepresented what people wrote, or have not cared to read it, or you cannot read it. He has not said any thing of the sort that you are accusing him off in this very post. I already did an explanation on a couple of his sentences and how to read them in a foreign language to me. I'm done explaining your native language to you. Go to a fucking school. Try not to get shot while doing English 1.
I read this freaking thread almost daily but I don't post very often and this is exactly why. I wanted an honest opinion different from my own to educate myself. I ask for it politely and I get 3 pages of personal bashing, because we can't do anything else when people fail to read and get offended by insults that weren't thrown.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On June 09 2018 10:12 IgnE wrote:
should we call lawyers "Legal Justice Warriors?"
Doesn't work when lawyers represent people they know are guilty. There's only justice there if their opening statement is "Your honor, my client is a guilty shitbag. I rest my case."
|
On June 09 2018 11:13 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 10:12 IgnE wrote:
should we call lawyers "Legal Justice Warriors?" Doesn't work when lawyers represent people they know are guilty. There's only justice there if their opening statement is "Your honor, my client is a guilty shitbag. I rest my case."
And then you instantly lose your license to practice law.
|
On June 09 2018 11:13 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 10:12 IgnE wrote:
should we call lawyers "Legal Justice Warriors?" Doesn't work when lawyers represent people they know are guilty. There's only justice there if their opening statement is "Your honor, my client is a guilty shitbag. I rest my case."
false. the law demands that the state prove guilt. check the hallowed fifth amendment. this is Legal Justice
|
On June 09 2018 11:36 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 11:13 Gahlo wrote:On June 09 2018 10:12 IgnE wrote:
should we call lawyers "Legal Justice Warriors?" Doesn't work when lawyers represent people they know are guilty. There's only justice there if their opening statement is "Your honor, my client is a guilty shitbag. I rest my case." false. the law demands that the state prove guilt. check the hallowed fifth amendment. this is Legal Justice
You asked for a parallel for SJW and lawyers. In that universe, lawyers wouldn't represent people they know are guilty.
|
On June 09 2018 09:54 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 09:34 misirlou wrote:On June 09 2018 08:48 Sermokala wrote:On June 09 2018 08:24 misirlou wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On June 09 2018 08:06 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 07:29 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 07:12 Plansix wrote:Why would Dems in this thread condemn what Obama did when it is abundantly clear you don't hold your own politicians to the same standards? Why would they meet half way when it is clear you won't show up? As far as I am concerned, Sessions would have done this anyways, even without DOMA to use as an excuse. Just like holding up the Supreme Court nomination until after the election. It has never been a question of if they should, it is always can the Democrats stop them and will it cost them an election. On June 09 2018 07:08 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 07:00 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 06:44 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 06:25 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 06:18 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 06:12 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 05:09 Danglars wrote:
[quote]
The Obama administration with Holder as the Attorney General shredded the norms when they refused to defend DOMA in court. I thought it was an incredibly shitty thing to do, and keeping the norms in place would redound to everybody's satisfaction, but they didn't.
Behold, the logical consequence. Without norms, somebody you hate will take it to something you love. And they'll do it bigly. The chickens are really coming home to roost in that respect. So next time, defend section 3 of DOMA in court even if you disagree with it.
We're no longer willing to play nice with rules when you refuse to apply them to yourselves. In other words, sorry, but you did this to yourselves. The difference is that Obama and the DOJ wrote a letter to congress and announced it, they stood by it and took question. The Trump administration just filed a withdrawal and just hoped no one would notice on a Friday, like a coward. When Obama and Holder did it, they signed their name to the decision. And if this is the route the conservatives want to do, I'm all about it. Whine about it when the Democrats do it, throw a fit and then do the exact same thing once they are in power. Hypocrisy all around, but at least we are honest with ourselves. I feel good about the odds of how the 130 million Americans who will be impacted by this case will feel about the decision. There’s no constitutional exemption forcing you to defend laws, unless you send a nicely written letter to Congress displaying your intention. That is foolishness. The question is whether to hold your administration to a higher standard than Obama did with his, or show that the new rules will be used against your favorite things and not just your disfavored things and see how you like it. That’s one point in favor of upholding norms in the first place, for fear your political opponents turn it back in your face when you’re out of power. If Obama & his subordinate Holder reversed and had listened to conservative opinion pieces back in the day and (say) fought a losing battle in court, we could’ve avoided all this. What I am saying is that Jeff Sessions is a hypocrite, since he objected to the move back in 2011. I might be willing to say the Obama was wrong at the time too, but I'm not seeing a lot to gain from that. And gain is what this is all about. The key tactic for me it to be outraged now, claim the that this is an erosion of norms and the rule of law. Then break norms again to get what I want politically. Because its clear that its winner take all and none of these rules or norms matters. So time to get outraged and win an election. But I will encourage my representatives to sign a letter and announce the intent to erode the norms. Because I do think people should sign their names to their work, rather than doing it under the radar like cowards. You see what their objections go them. First, try to see if your objections will help the executive think better of their actions. If not, second, make sure they have reason to fear the consequences of breaking them. Not for straightforward realpolitik use of power, but that less may be broken in future. Men are not hanged for stealing horses, but that less horses might be stolen in the future. Their objections were like yours, hollow. Meaningless. The thing that you expressed outraged about in 2011 in now totally sweet revenge in 2018. The only thing I learned today was Obama made the right move in 2011 and it just got a little riskier for me and my wife to move out of MA. Same justification can be used for Trump. “Oh, does Plansix say Obama did the right thing choosing to let partisan motives fuel his justice department, even as Trump uses that principle back against his allies? Okay, fine. Trump did the right thing today and tomorrow, because the next Democratic administration will always show they’re unprincipled and they’re whining about what Trump does because they wish they were the ones in power doing it. Oh well.” I’m not with you. No, Danlgars. I've joined you. You were always here. I just been reminded that any bipartisan future for congress and politics is years away. Fire has to be fought with fire until everyone is so burned they don't want to do it any more. See, I’ll reverse the roles a little here, but end in almost the same place. I opposed Clinton on abuses, I opposed Bush on abuses, I opposed Obama on abused, and look just how far that got me. Liberals will still say I started it and they’re justified in this response. Turns out, I find little common ground when people that stood idly by when Obama did something suddenly react in outrage when Trump does it. So it’s tough to care. I don’t know who will lay down the gloves first, and if there’s an acceptable road back to make America great again. I know I have to see a little more respect for the rights of religious Americans, and much more respect for the division of powers in general. It’s tough to see that future, but I at least know an electoral majority in 2016 put their foot down in the face of a Clinton presidency. That was a incredibly good thing that I’m thankful for. At least now the left recognizes, albeit imperfectly, something about where we are as a country. Allow me to change the terms of the discussion. Or don't allow me, I'm doing it anyway. You talk about high minded points, or respect for people who are definitely not the least respected demographic in America. You cheer Trump refusing to defend the ACA as a way to chalk up petty points against Democrats. You who talk about religious freedom to discriminate against minorities, or freedom of Nazis to have platforms on college campuses. And you vote for Republicans who work to undermine the ACA most basic, unarguable elements, such as guaranteeing people with serious health issues can get medical coverage that actually covers those issues. You, and people like you, are a threat to my life. You are a threat to my life in the same way that Germans who voted for Nazis during the 1920s and early 1930s were a threat to the lives of Jews living in Germany. You have put my life and the lives of people like me on a scale and weighed them against the moral outrage of a subset of the population who did not want to see people of the same sex marry, and found those things to be of equal weight. You are a threat to my life, and you are a threat to the lives of countless people like me. We are not people to you, we are just statistics. But for us, you and people like you are attempting to pull the trigger to kill us on a regular basis, every time you walk into a polling station and vote for a Republican who has sworn to repeal the ACA. You may feel that America is not on a good path, but for me, every time you and people like you become less comfortable voicing your opinions, every time an idea that helps Republicans get elected has to crawl back into the darkness, I live with a little less fear that I will die a miserable death so that a bunch of people I have never met can celebrate something like "free markets," or "standing up to liberals." In case you didn't catch it, you're voting for people who would see me dead not because they actively hate me, but because promising to see people like me dead makes people like you happy, and actually managing to follow through with it would make people like you even happier. You, collectively, are exactly the Germans in the 1930s who voted for people blaming Jews for all of the nation's ills because whatever they do to Jews is fine with you as long as they do make your nation "great" again. great read. I'm very sorry that you and many thousands have to live with those fears lingering over you on top of what are already very heavy economic burdens due to illness/healthcare cost. It is not humane, it's not the foundation of a content and caring society. on the plus side, it lessens the inequality by getting rid of those bottom 10%, they can't fuck the statistics if they're dead /s Really? Boiling down his grievances to "you and people like you want to kill me"? He all but accuses republicans of being nazi sympathizers that are okay with the holocaust. If his post doesn't shock you with how them vs us it is you really need to read it again. First off, I meant to edit the post I did before that to add the quote, it was meant to be an addition to my point of view, because I cannot provide a first hand experience. I make my assumptions based on what I read, and trying to imagine how different my life would be. Second, he did not accuse reps of being nazi sympathizers. Like, NOT EVEN CLOSE He made a comparison. A comparison of how destructive to other social groups the actions of the republican party are, and how the republican voters enable it, to how people in germany were led to believe that nazism was great, the jews were the problem, and how they enabled one of the biggest atrocities in history. He did not even say all of these germans were ok with the holocaust, I believe they probably weren't but they had no idea what they were actually voting for. Which brings me back to my first post and a point I made there. Society has evolved. Hopefully, in the past 70 years our society has evolved and our problems have become different. I am worried that we are blinded/not seeing the bigger picture/missing something in the peripheral vision. Imagine this: after trump leaves office, we find that thousands of illegal women, children and men were sexually abused while in these detention centers, that some hundreds were sold off by corrupt emigration agents to trafficking rings. Nobody (well, almost nobody) wanted this when they wanted to stop illegal crossings and voted for a man that promised them that. People weren't gassed like the jews were, it doesn't make it any less atrocious. The voters did enable it and they have their share of the blame. You made a post about how you are a jew. As in that gives you authority on what nazis are and how ideology leads to the holocaust. The comparison was about how republicans are a threat to you and that supporting them is the same.behaviour that led to the holocaust. You chose to use nazis and the holocause to describe danglers and people like him. That you are a jew and you believe that hes a threat to your life. Even if its not your intent its what you are doing. This isnt about trump this is about you comparing people to nazis and warning people that supporting trump is the same as people who supported the nazis before the holocaust. Doubling down and explaining how your are right about this and explicitly explaining how you think a holocaust similar event would happen doesnt help your case.
I'm not Jewish by any definition commonly used today. I would be considered Jewish by white supremacists the same way white supremacists determined who was black for the purposes of anti-miscegenation laws. One eighth.
So there is some real irony that you decided to treat me as Jewish and view everything I wrote view the lens of "This guy is Jewish," when I'm only Jewish if you're using white supremacist framework. I specifically mentioned when I made an edit to a single post about the irony of having Jewish heritage and the situation I found myself in that it was just heritage.
tl;dr try addressing what I'm actually saying, not what you want me to be saying so you can feel righteous about me apparently being some Jewish stereotype.
|
On June 09 2018 13:20 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 09:54 Sermokala wrote:On June 09 2018 09:34 misirlou wrote:On June 09 2018 08:48 Sermokala wrote:On June 09 2018 08:24 misirlou wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On June 09 2018 08:06 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 07:29 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 07:12 Plansix wrote:Why would Dems in this thread condemn what Obama did when it is abundantly clear you don't hold your own politicians to the same standards? Why would they meet half way when it is clear you won't show up? As far as I am concerned, Sessions would have done this anyways, even without DOMA to use as an excuse. Just like holding up the Supreme Court nomination until after the election. It has never been a question of if they should, it is always can the Democrats stop them and will it cost them an election. On June 09 2018 07:08 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 07:00 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 06:44 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 06:25 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 06:18 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 06:12 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 05:09 Danglars wrote:
[quote]
The Obama administration with Holder as the Attorney General shredded the norms when they refused to defend DOMA in court. I thought it was an incredibly shitty thing to do, and keeping the norms in place would redound to everybody's satisfaction, but they didn't.
Behold, the logical consequence. Without norms, somebody you hate will take it to something you love. And they'll do it bigly. The chickens are really coming home to roost in that respect. So next time, defend section 3 of DOMA in court even if you disagree with it.
We're no longer willing to play nice with rules when you refuse to apply them to yourselves. In other words, sorry, but you did this to yourselves. The difference is that Obama and the DOJ wrote a letter to congress and announced it, they stood by it and took question. The Trump administration just filed a withdrawal and just hoped no one would notice on a Friday, like a coward. When Obama and Holder did it, they signed their name to the decision. And if this is the route the conservatives want to do, I'm all about it. Whine about it when the Democrats do it, throw a fit and then do the exact same thing once they are in power. Hypocrisy all around, but at least we are honest with ourselves. I feel good about the odds of how the 130 million Americans who will be impacted by this case will feel about the decision. There’s no constitutional exemption forcing you to defend laws, unless you send a nicely written letter to Congress displaying your intention. That is foolishness. The question is whether to hold your administration to a higher standard than Obama did with his, or show that the new rules will be used against your favorite things and not just your disfavored things and see how you like it. That’s one point in favor of upholding norms in the first place, for fear your political opponents turn it back in your face when you’re out of power. If Obama & his subordinate Holder reversed and had listened to conservative opinion pieces back in the day and (say) fought a losing battle in court, we could’ve avoided all this. What I am saying is that Jeff Sessions is a hypocrite, since he objected to the move back in 2011. I might be willing to say the Obama was wrong at the time too, but I'm not seeing a lot to gain from that. And gain is what this is all about. The key tactic for me it to be outraged now, claim the that this is an erosion of norms and the rule of law. Then break norms again to get what I want politically. Because its clear that its winner take all and none of these rules or norms matters. So time to get outraged and win an election. But I will encourage my representatives to sign a letter and announce the intent to erode the norms. Because I do think people should sign their names to their work, rather than doing it under the radar like cowards. You see what their objections go them. First, try to see if your objections will help the executive think better of their actions. If not, second, make sure they have reason to fear the consequences of breaking them. Not for straightforward realpolitik use of power, but that less may be broken in future. Men are not hanged for stealing horses, but that less horses might be stolen in the future. Their objections were like yours, hollow. Meaningless. The thing that you expressed outraged about in 2011 in now totally sweet revenge in 2018. The only thing I learned today was Obama made the right move in 2011 and it just got a little riskier for me and my wife to move out of MA. Same justification can be used for Trump. “Oh, does Plansix say Obama did the right thing choosing to let partisan motives fuel his justice department, even as Trump uses that principle back against his allies? Okay, fine. Trump did the right thing today and tomorrow, because the next Democratic administration will always show they’re unprincipled and they’re whining about what Trump does because they wish they were the ones in power doing it. Oh well.” I’m not with you. No, Danlgars. I've joined you. You were always here. I just been reminded that any bipartisan future for congress and politics is years away. Fire has to be fought with fire until everyone is so burned they don't want to do it any more. See, I’ll reverse the roles a little here, but end in almost the same place. I opposed Clinton on abuses, I opposed Bush on abuses, I opposed Obama on abused, and look just how far that got me. Liberals will still say I started it and they’re justified in this response. Turns out, I find little common ground when people that stood idly by when Obama did something suddenly react in outrage when Trump does it. So it’s tough to care. I don’t know who will lay down the gloves first, and if there’s an acceptable road back to make America great again. I know I have to see a little more respect for the rights of religious Americans, and much more respect for the division of powers in general. It’s tough to see that future, but I at least know an electoral majority in 2016 put their foot down in the face of a Clinton presidency. That was a incredibly good thing that I’m thankful for. At least now the left recognizes, albeit imperfectly, something about where we are as a country. Allow me to change the terms of the discussion. Or don't allow me, I'm doing it anyway. You talk about high minded points, or respect for people who are definitely not the least respected demographic in America. You cheer Trump refusing to defend the ACA as a way to chalk up petty points against Democrats. You who talk about religious freedom to discriminate against minorities, or freedom of Nazis to have platforms on college campuses. And you vote for Republicans who work to undermine the ACA most basic, unarguable elements, such as guaranteeing people with serious health issues can get medical coverage that actually covers those issues. You, and people like you, are a threat to my life. You are a threat to my life in the same way that Germans who voted for Nazis during the 1920s and early 1930s were a threat to the lives of Jews living in Germany. You have put my life and the lives of people like me on a scale and weighed them against the moral outrage of a subset of the population who did not want to see people of the same sex marry, and found those things to be of equal weight. You are a threat to my life, and you are a threat to the lives of countless people like me. We are not people to you, we are just statistics. But for us, you and people like you are attempting to pull the trigger to kill us on a regular basis, every time you walk into a polling station and vote for a Republican who has sworn to repeal the ACA. You may feel that America is not on a good path, but for me, every time you and people like you become less comfortable voicing your opinions, every time an idea that helps Republicans get elected has to crawl back into the darkness, I live with a little less fear that I will die a miserable death so that a bunch of people I have never met can celebrate something like "free markets," or "standing up to liberals." In case you didn't catch it, you're voting for people who would see me dead not because they actively hate me, but because promising to see people like me dead makes people like you happy, and actually managing to follow through with it would make people like you even happier. You, collectively, are exactly the Germans in the 1930s who voted for people blaming Jews for all of the nation's ills because whatever they do to Jews is fine with you as long as they do make your nation "great" again. great read. I'm very sorry that you and many thousands have to live with those fears lingering over you on top of what are already very heavy economic burdens due to illness/healthcare cost. It is not humane, it's not the foundation of a content and caring society. on the plus side, it lessens the inequality by getting rid of those bottom 10%, they can't fuck the statistics if they're dead /s Really? Boiling down his grievances to "you and people like you want to kill me"? He all but accuses republicans of being nazi sympathizers that are okay with the holocaust. If his post doesn't shock you with how them vs us it is you really need to read it again. First off, I meant to edit the post I did before that to add the quote, it was meant to be an addition to my point of view, because I cannot provide a first hand experience. I make my assumptions based on what I read, and trying to imagine how different my life would be. Second, he did not accuse reps of being nazi sympathizers. Like, NOT EVEN CLOSE He made a comparison. A comparison of how destructive to other social groups the actions of the republican party are, and how the republican voters enable it, to how people in germany were led to believe that nazism was great, the jews were the problem, and how they enabled one of the biggest atrocities in history. He did not even say all of these germans were ok with the holocaust, I believe they probably weren't but they had no idea what they were actually voting for. Which brings me back to my first post and a point I made there. Society has evolved. Hopefully, in the past 70 years our society has evolved and our problems have become different. I am worried that we are blinded/not seeing the bigger picture/missing something in the peripheral vision. Imagine this: after trump leaves office, we find that thousands of illegal women, children and men were sexually abused while in these detention centers, that some hundreds were sold off by corrupt emigration agents to trafficking rings. Nobody (well, almost nobody) wanted this when they wanted to stop illegal crossings and voted for a man that promised them that. People weren't gassed like the jews were, it doesn't make it any less atrocious. The voters did enable it and they have their share of the blame. You made a post about how you are a jew. As in that gives you authority on what nazis are and how ideology leads to the holocaust. The comparison was about how republicans are a threat to you and that supporting them is the same.behaviour that led to the holocaust. You chose to use nazis and the holocause to describe danglers and people like him. That you are a jew and you believe that hes a threat to your life. Even if its not your intent its what you are doing. This isnt about trump this is about you comparing people to nazis and warning people that supporting trump is the same as people who supported the nazis before the holocaust. Doubling down and explaining how your are right about this and explicitly explaining how you think a holocaust similar event would happen doesnt help your case. I'm not Jewish by any definition commonly used today. I would be considered Jewish by white supremacists the same way white supremacists determined who was black for the purposes of anti-miscegenation laws. One eighth. So there is some real irony that you decided to treat me as Jewish and view everything I wrote view the lens of "This guy is Jewish," when I'm only Jewish if you're using white supremacist framework. I specifically mentioned when I made an edit to a single post about the irony of having Jewish heritage and the situation I found myself in that it was just heritage. tl;dr try addressing what I'm actually saying, not what you want me to be saying so you can feel righteous about me apparently being some Jewish stereotype.
Honestly, what are you trying to say here? So...you're Jewish. Okay...
Analogues of the "white supremacist philosophies" is what lets your people kill anyone of Palestinian descent and be justified.
The whole racism argument, at least in the context of black vs. white in the USA, is not comparable at all to the situation in Israel/Palestine. Even if it were, Israelis take the role of the whites in this conflict.
I agree with you wholeheartedly that the USA Republican party is pretty sad, but I'm not sure we're at Nazi levels yet.
|
On June 09 2018 13:20 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 09:54 Sermokala wrote:On June 09 2018 09:34 misirlou wrote:On June 09 2018 08:48 Sermokala wrote:On June 09 2018 08:24 misirlou wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On June 09 2018 08:06 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 07:29 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 07:12 Plansix wrote:Why would Dems in this thread condemn what Obama did when it is abundantly clear you don't hold your own politicians to the same standards? Why would they meet half way when it is clear you won't show up? As far as I am concerned, Sessions would have done this anyways, even without DOMA to use as an excuse. Just like holding up the Supreme Court nomination until after the election. It has never been a question of if they should, it is always can the Democrats stop them and will it cost them an election. On June 09 2018 07:08 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 07:00 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 06:44 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 06:25 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 06:18 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 06:12 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 05:09 Danglars wrote:
[quote]
The Obama administration with Holder as the Attorney General shredded the norms when they refused to defend DOMA in court. I thought it was an incredibly shitty thing to do, and keeping the norms in place would redound to everybody's satisfaction, but they didn't.
Behold, the logical consequence. Without norms, somebody you hate will take it to something you love. And they'll do it bigly. The chickens are really coming home to roost in that respect. So next time, defend section 3 of DOMA in court even if you disagree with it.
We're no longer willing to play nice with rules when you refuse to apply them to yourselves. In other words, sorry, but you did this to yourselves. The difference is that Obama and the DOJ wrote a letter to congress and announced it, they stood by it and took question. The Trump administration just filed a withdrawal and just hoped no one would notice on a Friday, like a coward. When Obama and Holder did it, they signed their name to the decision. And if this is the route the conservatives want to do, I'm all about it. Whine about it when the Democrats do it, throw a fit and then do the exact same thing once they are in power. Hypocrisy all around, but at least we are honest with ourselves. I feel good about the odds of how the 130 million Americans who will be impacted by this case will feel about the decision. There’s no constitutional exemption forcing you to defend laws, unless you send a nicely written letter to Congress displaying your intention. That is foolishness. The question is whether to hold your administration to a higher standard than Obama did with his, or show that the new rules will be used against your favorite things and not just your disfavored things and see how you like it. That’s one point in favor of upholding norms in the first place, for fear your political opponents turn it back in your face when you’re out of power. If Obama & his subordinate Holder reversed and had listened to conservative opinion pieces back in the day and (say) fought a losing battle in court, we could’ve avoided all this. What I am saying is that Jeff Sessions is a hypocrite, since he objected to the move back in 2011. I might be willing to say the Obama was wrong at the time too, but I'm not seeing a lot to gain from that. And gain is what this is all about. The key tactic for me it to be outraged now, claim the that this is an erosion of norms and the rule of law. Then break norms again to get what I want politically. Because its clear that its winner take all and none of these rules or norms matters. So time to get outraged and win an election. But I will encourage my representatives to sign a letter and announce the intent to erode the norms. Because I do think people should sign their names to their work, rather than doing it under the radar like cowards. You see what their objections go them. First, try to see if your objections will help the executive think better of their actions. If not, second, make sure they have reason to fear the consequences of breaking them. Not for straightforward realpolitik use of power, but that less may be broken in future. Men are not hanged for stealing horses, but that less horses might be stolen in the future. Their objections were like yours, hollow. Meaningless. The thing that you expressed outraged about in 2011 in now totally sweet revenge in 2018. The only thing I learned today was Obama made the right move in 2011 and it just got a little riskier for me and my wife to move out of MA. Same justification can be used for Trump. “Oh, does Plansix say Obama did the right thing choosing to let partisan motives fuel his justice department, even as Trump uses that principle back against his allies? Okay, fine. Trump did the right thing today and tomorrow, because the next Democratic administration will always show they’re unprincipled and they’re whining about what Trump does because they wish they were the ones in power doing it. Oh well.” I’m not with you. No, Danlgars. I've joined you. You were always here. I just been reminded that any bipartisan future for congress and politics is years away. Fire has to be fought with fire until everyone is so burned they don't want to do it any more. See, I’ll reverse the roles a little here, but end in almost the same place. I opposed Clinton on abuses, I opposed Bush on abuses, I opposed Obama on abused, and look just how far that got me. Liberals will still say I started it and they’re justified in this response. Turns out, I find little common ground when people that stood idly by when Obama did something suddenly react in outrage when Trump does it. So it’s tough to care. I don’t know who will lay down the gloves first, and if there’s an acceptable road back to make America great again. I know I have to see a little more respect for the rights of religious Americans, and much more respect for the division of powers in general. It’s tough to see that future, but I at least know an electoral majority in 2016 put their foot down in the face of a Clinton presidency. That was a incredibly good thing that I’m thankful for. At least now the left recognizes, albeit imperfectly, something about where we are as a country. Allow me to change the terms of the discussion. Or don't allow me, I'm doing it anyway. You talk about high minded points, or respect for people who are definitely not the least respected demographic in America. You cheer Trump refusing to defend the ACA as a way to chalk up petty points against Democrats. You who talk about religious freedom to discriminate against minorities, or freedom of Nazis to have platforms on college campuses. And you vote for Republicans who work to undermine the ACA most basic, unarguable elements, such as guaranteeing people with serious health issues can get medical coverage that actually covers those issues. You, and people like you, are a threat to my life. You are a threat to my life in the same way that Germans who voted for Nazis during the 1920s and early 1930s were a threat to the lives of Jews living in Germany. You have put my life and the lives of people like me on a scale and weighed them against the moral outrage of a subset of the population who did not want to see people of the same sex marry, and found those things to be of equal weight. You are a threat to my life, and you are a threat to the lives of countless people like me. We are not people to you, we are just statistics. But for us, you and people like you are attempting to pull the trigger to kill us on a regular basis, every time you walk into a polling station and vote for a Republican who has sworn to repeal the ACA. You may feel that America is not on a good path, but for me, every time you and people like you become less comfortable voicing your opinions, every time an idea that helps Republicans get elected has to crawl back into the darkness, I live with a little less fear that I will die a miserable death so that a bunch of people I have never met can celebrate something like "free markets," or "standing up to liberals." In case you didn't catch it, you're voting for people who would see me dead not because they actively hate me, but because promising to see people like me dead makes people like you happy, and actually managing to follow through with it would make people like you even happier. You, collectively, are exactly the Germans in the 1930s who voted for people blaming Jews for all of the nation's ills because whatever they do to Jews is fine with you as long as they do make your nation "great" again. great read. I'm very sorry that you and many thousands have to live with those fears lingering over you on top of what are already very heavy economic burdens due to illness/healthcare cost. It is not humane, it's not the foundation of a content and caring society. on the plus side, it lessens the inequality by getting rid of those bottom 10%, they can't fuck the statistics if they're dead /s Really? Boiling down his grievances to "you and people like you want to kill me"? He all but accuses republicans of being nazi sympathizers that are okay with the holocaust. If his post doesn't shock you with how them vs us it is you really need to read it again. First off, I meant to edit the post I did before that to add the quote, it was meant to be an addition to my point of view, because I cannot provide a first hand experience. I make my assumptions based on what I read, and trying to imagine how different my life would be. Second, he did not accuse reps of being nazi sympathizers. Like, NOT EVEN CLOSE He made a comparison. A comparison of how destructive to other social groups the actions of the republican party are, and how the republican voters enable it, to how people in germany were led to believe that nazism was great, the jews were the problem, and how they enabled one of the biggest atrocities in history. He did not even say all of these germans were ok with the holocaust, I believe they probably weren't but they had no idea what they were actually voting for. Which brings me back to my first post and a point I made there. Society has evolved. Hopefully, in the past 70 years our society has evolved and our problems have become different. I am worried that we are blinded/not seeing the bigger picture/missing something in the peripheral vision. Imagine this: after trump leaves office, we find that thousands of illegal women, children and men were sexually abused while in these detention centers, that some hundreds were sold off by corrupt emigration agents to trafficking rings. Nobody (well, almost nobody) wanted this when they wanted to stop illegal crossings and voted for a man that promised them that. People weren't gassed like the jews were, it doesn't make it any less atrocious. The voters did enable it and they have their share of the blame. You made a post about how you are a jew. As in that gives you authority on what nazis are and how ideology leads to the holocaust. The comparison was about how republicans are a threat to you and that supporting them is the same.behaviour that led to the holocaust. You chose to use nazis and the holocause to describe danglers and people like him. That you are a jew and you believe that hes a threat to your life. Even if its not your intent its what you are doing. This isnt about trump this is about you comparing people to nazis and warning people that supporting trump is the same as people who supported the nazis before the holocaust. Doubling down and explaining how your are right about this and explicitly explaining how you think a holocaust similar event would happen doesnt help your case. I'm not Jewish by any definition commonly used today. I would be considered Jewish by white supremacists the same way white supremacists determined who was black for the purposes of anti-miscegenation laws. One eighth. So there is some real irony that you decided to treat me as Jewish and view everything I wrote view the lens of "This guy is Jewish," when I'm only Jewish if you're using white supremacist framework. I specifically mentioned when I made an edit to a single post about the irony of having Jewish heritage and the situation I found myself in that it was just heritage. tl;dr try addressing what I'm actually saying, not what you want me to be saying so you can feel righteous about me apparently being some Jewish stereotype.
Lets adress what you actualy said then in its entirety.
EDIT: I'm also Jewish by decent if not in practice, so Danglars literally defends the rights of the ideological heirs of people who killed my ancestors to continue advocating for that ideology. Liberal hostility to white supremacists and how that infringes on their free speech is pretty much the only issue Danglars gets really passionate about in this thread.
So anyway, he votes for people who will defend the neo-nazi's right to advocate nazi ideology and also have promised to remove as much of the changes to US law that ensure I can get health care as they possibly can.
There's not a lot of ways to dress this up nicely. There's really not a lot of ways to dress this up nicely.
Like I said the statement "Instead of elaboration I got confirmation" I was talking about this. You used the fact you were jewish as a reference to disparage Danglers for supporting the first amendment. I can understand you don't want that amendment and want to censor people but you can't retcon your posts like what you're trying to do here. You didn't elaborate on how jewish you were or the irony of it being a point only if you respect white supremacists views on race. You simply said you were jewish and disparaged Danglers for supporting free speech that would be offensive to you if you were jewish.
Edit/tldr: Don't tell people you're Jewish if you don't consider that you are jewish. Or at least actually add in that line that you think you're Jewish to Danglers because hes a white supremacist.
|
On June 09 2018 13:40 mierin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 13:20 Kyadytim wrote:On June 09 2018 09:54 Sermokala wrote:On June 09 2018 09:34 misirlou wrote:On June 09 2018 08:48 Sermokala wrote:On June 09 2018 08:24 misirlou wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On June 09 2018 08:06 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 07:29 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 07:12 Plansix wrote:Why would Dems in this thread condemn what Obama did when it is abundantly clear you don't hold your own politicians to the same standards? Why would they meet half way when it is clear you won't show up? As far as I am concerned, Sessions would have done this anyways, even without DOMA to use as an excuse. Just like holding up the Supreme Court nomination until after the election. It has never been a question of if they should, it is always can the Democrats stop them and will it cost them an election. On June 09 2018 07:08 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 07:00 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 06:44 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 06:25 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 06:18 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 06:12 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 05:09 Danglars wrote:
[quote]
The Obama administration with Holder as the Attorney General shredded the norms when they refused to defend DOMA in court. I thought it was an incredibly shitty thing to do, and keeping the norms in place would redound to everybody's satisfaction, but they didn't.
Behold, the logical consequence. Without norms, somebody you hate will take it to something you love. And they'll do it bigly. The chickens are really coming home to roost in that respect. So next time, defend section 3 of DOMA in court even if you disagree with it.
We're no longer willing to play nice with rules when you refuse to apply them to yourselves. In other words, sorry, but you did this to yourselves. The difference is that Obama and the DOJ wrote a letter to congress and announced it, they stood by it and took question. The Trump administration just filed a withdrawal and just hoped no one would notice on a Friday, like a coward. When Obama and Holder did it, they signed their name to the decision. And if this is the route the conservatives want to do, I'm all about it. Whine about it when the Democrats do it, throw a fit and then do the exact same thing once they are in power. Hypocrisy all around, but at least we are honest with ourselves. I feel good about the odds of how the 130 million Americans who will be impacted by this case will feel about the decision. There’s no constitutional exemption forcing you to defend laws, unless you send a nicely written letter to Congress displaying your intention. That is foolishness. The question is whether to hold your administration to a higher standard than Obama did with his, or show that the new rules will be used against your favorite things and not just your disfavored things and see how you like it. That’s one point in favor of upholding norms in the first place, for fear your political opponents turn it back in your face when you’re out of power. If Obama & his subordinate Holder reversed and had listened to conservative opinion pieces back in the day and (say) fought a losing battle in court, we could’ve avoided all this. What I am saying is that Jeff Sessions is a hypocrite, since he objected to the move back in 2011. I might be willing to say the Obama was wrong at the time too, but I'm not seeing a lot to gain from that. And gain is what this is all about. The key tactic for me it to be outraged now, claim the that this is an erosion of norms and the rule of law. Then break norms again to get what I want politically. Because its clear that its winner take all and none of these rules or norms matters. So time to get outraged and win an election. But I will encourage my representatives to sign a letter and announce the intent to erode the norms. Because I do think people should sign their names to their work, rather than doing it under the radar like cowards. You see what their objections go them. First, try to see if your objections will help the executive think better of their actions. If not, second, make sure they have reason to fear the consequences of breaking them. Not for straightforward realpolitik use of power, but that less may be broken in future. Men are not hanged for stealing horses, but that less horses might be stolen in the future. Their objections were like yours, hollow. Meaningless. The thing that you expressed outraged about in 2011 in now totally sweet revenge in 2018. The only thing I learned today was Obama made the right move in 2011 and it just got a little riskier for me and my wife to move out of MA. Same justification can be used for Trump. “Oh, does Plansix say Obama did the right thing choosing to let partisan motives fuel his justice department, even as Trump uses that principle back against his allies? Okay, fine. Trump did the right thing today and tomorrow, because the next Democratic administration will always show they’re unprincipled and they’re whining about what Trump does because they wish they were the ones in power doing it. Oh well.” I’m not with you. No, Danlgars. I've joined you. You were always here. I just been reminded that any bipartisan future for congress and politics is years away. Fire has to be fought with fire until everyone is so burned they don't want to do it any more. See, I’ll reverse the roles a little here, but end in almost the same place. I opposed Clinton on abuses, I opposed Bush on abuses, I opposed Obama on abused, and look just how far that got me. Liberals will still say I started it and they’re justified in this response. Turns out, I find little common ground when people that stood idly by when Obama did something suddenly react in outrage when Trump does it. So it’s tough to care. I don’t know who will lay down the gloves first, and if there’s an acceptable road back to make America great again. I know I have to see a little more respect for the rights of religious Americans, and much more respect for the division of powers in general. It’s tough to see that future, but I at least know an electoral majority in 2016 put their foot down in the face of a Clinton presidency. That was a incredibly good thing that I’m thankful for. At least now the left recognizes, albeit imperfectly, something about where we are as a country. Allow me to change the terms of the discussion. Or don't allow me, I'm doing it anyway. You talk about high minded points, or respect for people who are definitely not the least respected demographic in America. You cheer Trump refusing to defend the ACA as a way to chalk up petty points against Democrats. You who talk about religious freedom to discriminate against minorities, or freedom of Nazis to have platforms on college campuses. And you vote for Republicans who work to undermine the ACA most basic, unarguable elements, such as guaranteeing people with serious health issues can get medical coverage that actually covers those issues. You, and people like you, are a threat to my life. You are a threat to my life in the same way that Germans who voted for Nazis during the 1920s and early 1930s were a threat to the lives of Jews living in Germany. You have put my life and the lives of people like me on a scale and weighed them against the moral outrage of a subset of the population who did not want to see people of the same sex marry, and found those things to be of equal weight. You are a threat to my life, and you are a threat to the lives of countless people like me. We are not people to you, we are just statistics. But for us, you and people like you are attempting to pull the trigger to kill us on a regular basis, every time you walk into a polling station and vote for a Republican who has sworn to repeal the ACA. You may feel that America is not on a good path, but for me, every time you and people like you become less comfortable voicing your opinions, every time an idea that helps Republicans get elected has to crawl back into the darkness, I live with a little less fear that I will die a miserable death so that a bunch of people I have never met can celebrate something like "free markets," or "standing up to liberals." In case you didn't catch it, you're voting for people who would see me dead not because they actively hate me, but because promising to see people like me dead makes people like you happy, and actually managing to follow through with it would make people like you even happier. You, collectively, are exactly the Germans in the 1930s who voted for people blaming Jews for all of the nation's ills because whatever they do to Jews is fine with you as long as they do make your nation "great" again. great read. I'm very sorry that you and many thousands have to live with those fears lingering over you on top of what are already very heavy economic burdens due to illness/healthcare cost. It is not humane, it's not the foundation of a content and caring society. on the plus side, it lessens the inequality by getting rid of those bottom 10%, they can't fuck the statistics if they're dead /s Really? Boiling down his grievances to "you and people like you want to kill me"? He all but accuses republicans of being nazi sympathizers that are okay with the holocaust. If his post doesn't shock you with how them vs us it is you really need to read it again. First off, I meant to edit the post I did before that to add the quote, it was meant to be an addition to my point of view, because I cannot provide a first hand experience. I make my assumptions based on what I read, and trying to imagine how different my life would be. Second, he did not accuse reps of being nazi sympathizers. Like, NOT EVEN CLOSE He made a comparison. A comparison of how destructive to other social groups the actions of the republican party are, and how the republican voters enable it, to how people in germany were led to believe that nazism was great, the jews were the problem, and how they enabled one of the biggest atrocities in history. He did not even say all of these germans were ok with the holocaust, I believe they probably weren't but they had no idea what they were actually voting for. Which brings me back to my first post and a point I made there. Society has evolved. Hopefully, in the past 70 years our society has evolved and our problems have become different. I am worried that we are blinded/not seeing the bigger picture/missing something in the peripheral vision. Imagine this: after trump leaves office, we find that thousands of illegal women, children and men were sexually abused while in these detention centers, that some hundreds were sold off by corrupt emigration agents to trafficking rings. Nobody (well, almost nobody) wanted this when they wanted to stop illegal crossings and voted for a man that promised them that. People weren't gassed like the jews were, it doesn't make it any less atrocious. The voters did enable it and they have their share of the blame. You made a post about how you are a jew. As in that gives you authority on what nazis are and how ideology leads to the holocaust. The comparison was about how republicans are a threat to you and that supporting them is the same.behaviour that led to the holocaust. You chose to use nazis and the holocause to describe danglers and people like him. That you are a jew and you believe that hes a threat to your life. Even if its not your intent its what you are doing. This isnt about trump this is about you comparing people to nazis and warning people that supporting trump is the same as people who supported the nazis before the holocaust. Doubling down and explaining how your are right about this and explicitly explaining how you think a holocaust similar event would happen doesnt help your case. I'm not Jewish by any definition commonly used today. I would be considered Jewish by white supremacists the same way white supremacists determined who was black for the purposes of anti-miscegenation laws. One eighth. So there is some real irony that you decided to treat me as Jewish and view everything I wrote view the lens of "This guy is Jewish," when I'm only Jewish if you're using white supremacist framework. I specifically mentioned when I made an edit to a single post about the irony of having Jewish heritage and the situation I found myself in that it was just heritage. tl;dr try addressing what I'm actually saying, not what you want me to be saying so you can feel righteous about me apparently being some Jewish stereotype. Honestly, what are you trying to say here? So...you're Jewish. Okay... Analogues of the "white supremacist philosophies" is what lets your people kill anyone of Palestinian descent and be justified. The whole racism argument, at least in the context of black vs. white in the USA, is not comparable at all to the situation in Israel/Palestine. Even if it were, Israelis take the role of the whites in this conflict. I agree with you wholeheartedly that the USA Republican party is pretty sad, but I'm not sure we're at Nazi levels yet.
You've got it backwards. I was trying to say that I'm not Jewish, except by a really loose definition of "being" a race. I was being sarcastic towards Sermakola because he was shoving words in my mouth, and he just fixated on the idea that I'm Jewish.
I'm not sure how you saw anything about the Israel/Palestine conflict in my last post.
Unless you were trying to troll me or something, which if you are, please stop.
|
On June 09 2018 13:53 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 13:40 mierin wrote:On June 09 2018 13:20 Kyadytim wrote:On June 09 2018 09:54 Sermokala wrote:On June 09 2018 09:34 misirlou wrote:On June 09 2018 08:48 Sermokala wrote:On June 09 2018 08:24 misirlou wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On June 09 2018 08:06 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 07:29 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 07:12 Plansix wrote:Why would Dems in this thread condemn what Obama did when it is abundantly clear you don't hold your own politicians to the same standards? Why would they meet half way when it is clear you won't show up? As far as I am concerned, Sessions would have done this anyways, even without DOMA to use as an excuse. Just like holding up the Supreme Court nomination until after the election. It has never been a question of if they should, it is always can the Democrats stop them and will it cost them an election. On June 09 2018 07:08 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 07:00 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 06:44 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 06:25 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 06:18 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 06:12 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 05:09 Danglars wrote:
[quote]
The Obama administration with Holder as the Attorney General shredded the norms when they refused to defend DOMA in court. I thought it was an incredibly shitty thing to do, and keeping the norms in place would redound to everybody's satisfaction, but they didn't.
Behold, the logical consequence. Without norms, somebody you hate will take it to something you love. And they'll do it bigly. The chickens are really coming home to roost in that respect. So next time, defend section 3 of DOMA in court even if you disagree with it.
We're no longer willing to play nice with rules when you refuse to apply them to yourselves. In other words, sorry, but you did this to yourselves. The difference is that Obama and the DOJ wrote a letter to congress and announced it, they stood by it and took question. The Trump administration just filed a withdrawal and just hoped no one would notice on a Friday, like a coward. When Obama and Holder did it, they signed their name to the decision. And if this is the route the conservatives want to do, I'm all about it. Whine about it when the Democrats do it, throw a fit and then do the exact same thing once they are in power. Hypocrisy all around, but at least we are honest with ourselves. I feel good about the odds of how the 130 million Americans who will be impacted by this case will feel about the decision. There’s no constitutional exemption forcing you to defend laws, unless you send a nicely written letter to Congress displaying your intention. That is foolishness. The question is whether to hold your administration to a higher standard than Obama did with his, or show that the new rules will be used against your favorite things and not just your disfavored things and see how you like it. That’s one point in favor of upholding norms in the first place, for fear your political opponents turn it back in your face when you’re out of power. If Obama & his subordinate Holder reversed and had listened to conservative opinion pieces back in the day and (say) fought a losing battle in court, we could’ve avoided all this. What I am saying is that Jeff Sessions is a hypocrite, since he objected to the move back in 2011. I might be willing to say the Obama was wrong at the time too, but I'm not seeing a lot to gain from that. And gain is what this is all about. The key tactic for me it to be outraged now, claim the that this is an erosion of norms and the rule of law. Then break norms again to get what I want politically. Because its clear that its winner take all and none of these rules or norms matters. So time to get outraged and win an election. But I will encourage my representatives to sign a letter and announce the intent to erode the norms. Because I do think people should sign their names to their work, rather than doing it under the radar like cowards. You see what their objections go them. First, try to see if your objections will help the executive think better of their actions. If not, second, make sure they have reason to fear the consequences of breaking them. Not for straightforward realpolitik use of power, but that less may be broken in future. Men are not hanged for stealing horses, but that less horses might be stolen in the future. Their objections were like yours, hollow. Meaningless. The thing that you expressed outraged about in 2011 in now totally sweet revenge in 2018. The only thing I learned today was Obama made the right move in 2011 and it just got a little riskier for me and my wife to move out of MA. Same justification can be used for Trump. “Oh, does Plansix say Obama did the right thing choosing to let partisan motives fuel his justice department, even as Trump uses that principle back against his allies? Okay, fine. Trump did the right thing today and tomorrow, because the next Democratic administration will always show they’re unprincipled and they’re whining about what Trump does because they wish they were the ones in power doing it. Oh well.” I’m not with you. No, Danlgars. I've joined you. You were always here. I just been reminded that any bipartisan future for congress and politics is years away. Fire has to be fought with fire until everyone is so burned they don't want to do it any more. See, I’ll reverse the roles a little here, but end in almost the same place. I opposed Clinton on abuses, I opposed Bush on abuses, I opposed Obama on abused, and look just how far that got me. Liberals will still say I started it and they’re justified in this response. Turns out, I find little common ground when people that stood idly by when Obama did something suddenly react in outrage when Trump does it. So it’s tough to care. I don’t know who will lay down the gloves first, and if there’s an acceptable road back to make America great again. I know I have to see a little more respect for the rights of religious Americans, and much more respect for the division of powers in general. It’s tough to see that future, but I at least know an electoral majority in 2016 put their foot down in the face of a Clinton presidency. That was a incredibly good thing that I’m thankful for. At least now the left recognizes, albeit imperfectly, something about where we are as a country. Allow me to change the terms of the discussion. Or don't allow me, I'm doing it anyway. You talk about high minded points, or respect for people who are definitely not the least respected demographic in America. You cheer Trump refusing to defend the ACA as a way to chalk up petty points against Democrats. You who talk about religious freedom to discriminate against minorities, or freedom of Nazis to have platforms on college campuses. And you vote for Republicans who work to undermine the ACA most basic, unarguable elements, such as guaranteeing people with serious health issues can get medical coverage that actually covers those issues. You, and people like you, are a threat to my life. You are a threat to my life in the same way that Germans who voted for Nazis during the 1920s and early 1930s were a threat to the lives of Jews living in Germany. You have put my life and the lives of people like me on a scale and weighed them against the moral outrage of a subset of the population who did not want to see people of the same sex marry, and found those things to be of equal weight. You are a threat to my life, and you are a threat to the lives of countless people like me. We are not people to you, we are just statistics. But for us, you and people like you are attempting to pull the trigger to kill us on a regular basis, every time you walk into a polling station and vote for a Republican who has sworn to repeal the ACA. You may feel that America is not on a good path, but for me, every time you and people like you become less comfortable voicing your opinions, every time an idea that helps Republicans get elected has to crawl back into the darkness, I live with a little less fear that I will die a miserable death so that a bunch of people I have never met can celebrate something like "free markets," or "standing up to liberals." In case you didn't catch it, you're voting for people who would see me dead not because they actively hate me, but because promising to see people like me dead makes people like you happy, and actually managing to follow through with it would make people like you even happier. You, collectively, are exactly the Germans in the 1930s who voted for people blaming Jews for all of the nation's ills because whatever they do to Jews is fine with you as long as they do make your nation "great" again. great read. I'm very sorry that you and many thousands have to live with those fears lingering over you on top of what are already very heavy economic burdens due to illness/healthcare cost. It is not humane, it's not the foundation of a content and caring society. on the plus side, it lessens the inequality by getting rid of those bottom 10%, they can't fuck the statistics if they're dead /s Really? Boiling down his grievances to "you and people like you want to kill me"? He all but accuses republicans of being nazi sympathizers that are okay with the holocaust. If his post doesn't shock you with how them vs us it is you really need to read it again. First off, I meant to edit the post I did before that to add the quote, it was meant to be an addition to my point of view, because I cannot provide a first hand experience. I make my assumptions based on what I read, and trying to imagine how different my life would be. Second, he did not accuse reps of being nazi sympathizers. Like, NOT EVEN CLOSE He made a comparison. A comparison of how destructive to other social groups the actions of the republican party are, and how the republican voters enable it, to how people in germany were led to believe that nazism was great, the jews were the problem, and how they enabled one of the biggest atrocities in history. He did not even say all of these germans were ok with the holocaust, I believe they probably weren't but they had no idea what they were actually voting for. Which brings me back to my first post and a point I made there. Society has evolved. Hopefully, in the past 70 years our society has evolved and our problems have become different. I am worried that we are blinded/not seeing the bigger picture/missing something in the peripheral vision. Imagine this: after trump leaves office, we find that thousands of illegal women, children and men were sexually abused while in these detention centers, that some hundreds were sold off by corrupt emigration agents to trafficking rings. Nobody (well, almost nobody) wanted this when they wanted to stop illegal crossings and voted for a man that promised them that. People weren't gassed like the jews were, it doesn't make it any less atrocious. The voters did enable it and they have their share of the blame. You made a post about how you are a jew. As in that gives you authority on what nazis are and how ideology leads to the holocaust. The comparison was about how republicans are a threat to you and that supporting them is the same.behaviour that led to the holocaust. You chose to use nazis and the holocause to describe danglers and people like him. That you are a jew and you believe that hes a threat to your life. Even if its not your intent its what you are doing. This isnt about trump this is about you comparing people to nazis and warning people that supporting trump is the same as people who supported the nazis before the holocaust. Doubling down and explaining how your are right about this and explicitly explaining how you think a holocaust similar event would happen doesnt help your case. I'm not Jewish by any definition commonly used today. I would be considered Jewish by white supremacists the same way white supremacists determined who was black for the purposes of anti-miscegenation laws. One eighth. So there is some real irony that you decided to treat me as Jewish and view everything I wrote view the lens of "This guy is Jewish," when I'm only Jewish if you're using white supremacist framework. I specifically mentioned when I made an edit to a single post about the irony of having Jewish heritage and the situation I found myself in that it was just heritage. tl;dr try addressing what I'm actually saying, not what you want me to be saying so you can feel righteous about me apparently being some Jewish stereotype. Honestly, what are you trying to say here? So...you're Jewish. Okay... Analogues of the "white supremacist philosophies" is what lets your people kill anyone of Palestinian descent and be justified. The whole racism argument, at least in the context of black vs. white in the USA, is not comparable at all to the situation in Israel/Palestine. Even if it were, Israelis take the role of the whites in this conflict. I agree with you wholeheartedly that the USA Republican party is pretty sad, but I'm not sure we're at Nazi levels yet. You've got it backwards. I was trying to say that I'm not Jewish, except by a really loose definition of "being" a race. I was being sarcastic towards Sermakola because he was shoving words in my mouth, and he just fixated on the idea that I'm Jewish. I'm not sure how you saw anything about the Israel/Palestine conflict in my last post. Unless you were trying to troll me or something, which if you are, please stop.
Please stop trolling Danglars then when you bring up your Jewish heritage.
|
On June 09 2018 13:52 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 13:20 Kyadytim wrote:On June 09 2018 09:54 Sermokala wrote:On June 09 2018 09:34 misirlou wrote:On June 09 2018 08:48 Sermokala wrote:On June 09 2018 08:24 misirlou wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On June 09 2018 08:06 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 07:29 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 07:12 Plansix wrote:Why would Dems in this thread condemn what Obama did when it is abundantly clear you don't hold your own politicians to the same standards? Why would they meet half way when it is clear you won't show up? As far as I am concerned, Sessions would have done this anyways, even without DOMA to use as an excuse. Just like holding up the Supreme Court nomination until after the election. It has never been a question of if they should, it is always can the Democrats stop them and will it cost them an election. On June 09 2018 07:08 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 07:00 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 06:44 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 06:25 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 06:18 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 06:12 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 05:09 Danglars wrote:
[quote]
The Obama administration with Holder as the Attorney General shredded the norms when they refused to defend DOMA in court. I thought it was an incredibly shitty thing to do, and keeping the norms in place would redound to everybody's satisfaction, but they didn't.
Behold, the logical consequence. Without norms, somebody you hate will take it to something you love. And they'll do it bigly. The chickens are really coming home to roost in that respect. So next time, defend section 3 of DOMA in court even if you disagree with it.
We're no longer willing to play nice with rules when you refuse to apply them to yourselves. In other words, sorry, but you did this to yourselves. The difference is that Obama and the DOJ wrote a letter to congress and announced it, they stood by it and took question. The Trump administration just filed a withdrawal and just hoped no one would notice on a Friday, like a coward. When Obama and Holder did it, they signed their name to the decision. And if this is the route the conservatives want to do, I'm all about it. Whine about it when the Democrats do it, throw a fit and then do the exact same thing once they are in power. Hypocrisy all around, but at least we are honest with ourselves. I feel good about the odds of how the 130 million Americans who will be impacted by this case will feel about the decision. There’s no constitutional exemption forcing you to defend laws, unless you send a nicely written letter to Congress displaying your intention. That is foolishness. The question is whether to hold your administration to a higher standard than Obama did with his, or show that the new rules will be used against your favorite things and not just your disfavored things and see how you like it. That’s one point in favor of upholding norms in the first place, for fear your political opponents turn it back in your face when you’re out of power. If Obama & his subordinate Holder reversed and had listened to conservative opinion pieces back in the day and (say) fought a losing battle in court, we could’ve avoided all this. What I am saying is that Jeff Sessions is a hypocrite, since he objected to the move back in 2011. I might be willing to say the Obama was wrong at the time too, but I'm not seeing a lot to gain from that. And gain is what this is all about. The key tactic for me it to be outraged now, claim the that this is an erosion of norms and the rule of law. Then break norms again to get what I want politically. Because its clear that its winner take all and none of these rules or norms matters. So time to get outraged and win an election. But I will encourage my representatives to sign a letter and announce the intent to erode the norms. Because I do think people should sign their names to their work, rather than doing it under the radar like cowards. You see what their objections go them. First, try to see if your objections will help the executive think better of their actions. If not, second, make sure they have reason to fear the consequences of breaking them. Not for straightforward realpolitik use of power, but that less may be broken in future. Men are not hanged for stealing horses, but that less horses might be stolen in the future. Their objections were like yours, hollow. Meaningless. The thing that you expressed outraged about in 2011 in now totally sweet revenge in 2018. The only thing I learned today was Obama made the right move in 2011 and it just got a little riskier for me and my wife to move out of MA. Same justification can be used for Trump. “Oh, does Plansix say Obama did the right thing choosing to let partisan motives fuel his justice department, even as Trump uses that principle back against his allies? Okay, fine. Trump did the right thing today and tomorrow, because the next Democratic administration will always show they’re unprincipled and they’re whining about what Trump does because they wish they were the ones in power doing it. Oh well.” I’m not with you. No, Danlgars. I've joined you. You were always here. I just been reminded that any bipartisan future for congress and politics is years away. Fire has to be fought with fire until everyone is so burned they don't want to do it any more. See, I’ll reverse the roles a little here, but end in almost the same place. I opposed Clinton on abuses, I opposed Bush on abuses, I opposed Obama on abused, and look just how far that got me. Liberals will still say I started it and they’re justified in this response. Turns out, I find little common ground when people that stood idly by when Obama did something suddenly react in outrage when Trump does it. So it’s tough to care. I don’t know who will lay down the gloves first, and if there’s an acceptable road back to make America great again. I know I have to see a little more respect for the rights of religious Americans, and much more respect for the division of powers in general. It’s tough to see that future, but I at least know an electoral majority in 2016 put their foot down in the face of a Clinton presidency. That was a incredibly good thing that I’m thankful for. At least now the left recognizes, albeit imperfectly, something about where we are as a country. Allow me to change the terms of the discussion. Or don't allow me, I'm doing it anyway. You talk about high minded points, or respect for people who are definitely not the least respected demographic in America. You cheer Trump refusing to defend the ACA as a way to chalk up petty points against Democrats. You who talk about religious freedom to discriminate against minorities, or freedom of Nazis to have platforms on college campuses. And you vote for Republicans who work to undermine the ACA most basic, unarguable elements, such as guaranteeing people with serious health issues can get medical coverage that actually covers those issues. You, and people like you, are a threat to my life. You are a threat to my life in the same way that Germans who voted for Nazis during the 1920s and early 1930s were a threat to the lives of Jews living in Germany. You have put my life and the lives of people like me on a scale and weighed them against the moral outrage of a subset of the population who did not want to see people of the same sex marry, and found those things to be of equal weight. You are a threat to my life, and you are a threat to the lives of countless people like me. We are not people to you, we are just statistics. But for us, you and people like you are attempting to pull the trigger to kill us on a regular basis, every time you walk into a polling station and vote for a Republican who has sworn to repeal the ACA. You may feel that America is not on a good path, but for me, every time you and people like you become less comfortable voicing your opinions, every time an idea that helps Republicans get elected has to crawl back into the darkness, I live with a little less fear that I will die a miserable death so that a bunch of people I have never met can celebrate something like "free markets," or "standing up to liberals." In case you didn't catch it, you're voting for people who would see me dead not because they actively hate me, but because promising to see people like me dead makes people like you happy, and actually managing to follow through with it would make people like you even happier. You, collectively, are exactly the Germans in the 1930s who voted for people blaming Jews for all of the nation's ills because whatever they do to Jews is fine with you as long as they do make your nation "great" again. great read. I'm very sorry that you and many thousands have to live with those fears lingering over you on top of what are already very heavy economic burdens due to illness/healthcare cost. It is not humane, it's not the foundation of a content and caring society. on the plus side, it lessens the inequality by getting rid of those bottom 10%, they can't fuck the statistics if they're dead /s Really? Boiling down his grievances to "you and people like you want to kill me"? He all but accuses republicans of being nazi sympathizers that are okay with the holocaust. If his post doesn't shock you with how them vs us it is you really need to read it again. First off, I meant to edit the post I did before that to add the quote, it was meant to be an addition to my point of view, because I cannot provide a first hand experience. I make my assumptions based on what I read, and trying to imagine how different my life would be. Second, he did not accuse reps of being nazi sympathizers. Like, NOT EVEN CLOSE He made a comparison. A comparison of how destructive to other social groups the actions of the republican party are, and how the republican voters enable it, to how people in germany were led to believe that nazism was great, the jews were the problem, and how they enabled one of the biggest atrocities in history. He did not even say all of these germans were ok with the holocaust, I believe they probably weren't but they had no idea what they were actually voting for. Which brings me back to my first post and a point I made there. Society has evolved. Hopefully, in the past 70 years our society has evolved and our problems have become different. I am worried that we are blinded/not seeing the bigger picture/missing something in the peripheral vision. Imagine this: after trump leaves office, we find that thousands of illegal women, children and men were sexually abused while in these detention centers, that some hundreds were sold off by corrupt emigration agents to trafficking rings. Nobody (well, almost nobody) wanted this when they wanted to stop illegal crossings and voted for a man that promised them that. People weren't gassed like the jews were, it doesn't make it any less atrocious. The voters did enable it and they have their share of the blame. You made a post about how you are a jew. As in that gives you authority on what nazis are and how ideology leads to the holocaust. The comparison was about how republicans are a threat to you and that supporting them is the same.behaviour that led to the holocaust. You chose to use nazis and the holocause to describe danglers and people like him. That you are a jew and you believe that hes a threat to your life. Even if its not your intent its what you are doing. This isnt about trump this is about you comparing people to nazis and warning people that supporting trump is the same as people who supported the nazis before the holocaust. Doubling down and explaining how your are right about this and explicitly explaining how you think a holocaust similar event would happen doesnt help your case. I'm not Jewish by any definition commonly used today. I would be considered Jewish by white supremacists the same way white supremacists determined who was black for the purposes of anti-miscegenation laws. One eighth. So there is some real irony that you decided to treat me as Jewish and view everything I wrote view the lens of "This guy is Jewish," when I'm only Jewish if you're using white supremacist framework. I specifically mentioned when I made an edit to a single post about the irony of having Jewish heritage and the situation I found myself in that it was just heritage. tl;dr try addressing what I'm actually saying, not what you want me to be saying so you can feel righteous about me apparently being some Jewish stereotype. Lets adress what you actualy said then in its entirety. Show nested quote +EDIT: I'm also Jewish by decent if not in practice, so Danglars literally defends the rights of the ideological heirs of people who killed my ancestors to continue advocating for that ideology. Liberal hostility to white supremacists and how that infringes on their free speech is pretty much the only issue Danglars gets really passionate about in this thread.
So anyway, he votes for people who will defend the neo-nazi's right to advocate nazi ideology and also have promised to remove as much of the changes to US law that ensure I can get health care as they possibly can.
There's not a lot of ways to dress this up nicely. There's really not a lot of ways to dress this up nicely. Like I said the statement "Instead of elaboration I got confirmation" I was talking about this. You used the fact you were jewish as a reference to disparage Danglers for supporting the first amendment. I can understand you don't want that amendment and want to censor people but you can't retcon your posts like what you're trying to do here. You didn't elaborate on how jewish you were or the irony of it being a point only if you respect white supremacists views on race. You simply said you were jewish and disparaged Danglers for supporting free speech that would be offensive to you if you were jewish.
Dude. Can you maybe just forget the fact that I mentioned that I had Jewish heritage for a moment, stop shoving words down my throat like you're trying to kill me with them, and actually respond to what I write?
Danglars has a history of defending the civil rights of white supremacists and Christians, and only the civil rights of white supremacists and Christians. I was pissed because he was talking about wanting to see more respect for the rights of Christians while arguing in favor of letting the Trump administration and republicans roll back our health care system to a terrible state, which is incredibly disrespectful to people who are dealing with substantially more serious issues then whether they're going to bake a cake for any given couple.
That resulted in a rant about how terrible it is from my perspective to be weighing politicians on whether they'll stand up for Christians' right to turn away gays while ignoring how those politicians will vote on matters of life or death to people like me.
Then I generalized that to how Republican politicians promise a lot of things that are terrible for people who aren't their voters that they claim will fix the problems with the country that their voters believe exist. Whether you like it or not, that is one of key components in how the Nazis came to power. Don't take it from me, take it from the post WWII US government.
+ Show Spoiler +
Then I mentioned that I had Jewish heritage, which made the situation a bit more poignant to me given Danglars' positions re: white supremacists.
Then you fixated on the fact that somewhere in my family tree is someone who was Jewish and decided that I'm Jewish and "Jewish" is my primary label for myself, and determined that everything I'd written was a result of me being Jewish, based on one part of one post, edited in after the fact, not part of the original post, on the irony of someone with Jewish heritage arguing with someone who strongly defends neo-nazi's right to march through towns carrying guns about thinking about the effects his vote might have on people who aren't him.
In the midst of that, you made a series of false claims about what I'd said, including but not limited to:
- You claimed that I said Danglars and Republicans want to kill me. I did not. I said that Danglars and Republican voters don't care if the politicians they vote for enact politics that will lead to my death, and that makes Danglars and Republican voters apathy towards how their votes affect other people a threat to my health.
- You claimed that I called Republicans Nazi sympathizers who are okay with the holocaust. Also false. I compared Republican voters oblivious or unconcerned with the detrimental effects their votes have on minorities including but not limited to black, Hispanic, and Muslim people to the self centered focus on how voting for the Nazi party would help them that some German voters had in 1930.
At this point Kwark and Plansix chimed in to try to correct you. That had no measurable effect.
- You then claimed that I called conservatives "ideological heirs to nazis." Yet again, false. I said that conservatives defend the ideological heirs to nazis by supporting neo-nazis and white supremacists' efforts to fight back against people condemning them for being ideological heirs to nazis.
- You then called everything I'd said up until that point appeals to the holocaust, which is the second mention of the holocaust since I started posting. The first was also you. I referenced nothing about the holocaust.
At this point, Zlefin and Misirlou point out that you're completely misrepresenting me. As with Kwark and Plansix, you ignored this. I also made a post trying to point out the ways in which you misrepresented me.
You then quoted misirlou but responded to me. Here, you generalized my one edit about the irony involving my Jewish heritage to being an entire post about how I'm a Jew, and reframed everything I said through a filter of "How his Jewishness makes him feel entitled to talk about the holocaust and how terrible nazis are" or something like that. You put the exaggerated "fact" that I'm a Jew next to my expression that Republicans who vote for repealing the ACA are a hazard to my health in a way that implied that I'm a Jew calling Danglars a Nazi looking to kill me.
And then you claimed that the entire discussion isn't about Trump, but about me being a Jew trying to spread panic about a how Trump and Republicans are Nazis leading up to a new holocaust. This is all sorts of fucked up, by the way.
Then you posted that I'm the one who keeps bringing up nazis and the holocaust. I would like to point out once again that I did not bring the holocaust up. You did. And then you suggested that I use the point that I originally started with a metaphor for some underlying point you think I want to make. I'd assume, based on your prior posts, that this underlying point would be something about how Republicans are Nazis trying to kill American Jews or something like that. The previous sentence is sarcasm.
This brings us to the present, where you are now claiming that I'm using the fact that I have a Jewish ancestor as a weapon to browbeat Danglars, and you have completely lost my initial point, which I have simplified below into a single sentence that has lost all nuance, but at least should be simple enough that you'll have to actively work to misconstrue it.
"People should be aware of how policies that don't affect them can still harm other people."
|
Well I missed two pages of crazy while I was sleeping.
Do these last two pages need to be memorialised as a current example of why not to bring nazis into online discussions? Things can degenerate into nonsense sooooo quickly.
|
On June 09 2018 13:40 mierin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 13:20 Kyadytim wrote:On June 09 2018 09:54 Sermokala wrote:On June 09 2018 09:34 misirlou wrote:On June 09 2018 08:48 Sermokala wrote:On June 09 2018 08:24 misirlou wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On June 09 2018 08:06 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2018 07:29 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 07:12 Plansix wrote:Why would Dems in this thread condemn what Obama did when it is abundantly clear you don't hold your own politicians to the same standards? Why would they meet half way when it is clear you won't show up? As far as I am concerned, Sessions would have done this anyways, even without DOMA to use as an excuse. Just like holding up the Supreme Court nomination until after the election. It has never been a question of if they should, it is always can the Democrats stop them and will it cost them an election. On June 09 2018 07:08 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 07:00 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 06:44 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 06:25 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 06:18 Danglars wrote:On June 09 2018 06:12 Plansix wrote:On June 09 2018 05:09 Danglars wrote:
[quote]
The Obama administration with Holder as the Attorney General shredded the norms when they refused to defend DOMA in court. I thought it was an incredibly shitty thing to do, and keeping the norms in place would redound to everybody's satisfaction, but they didn't.
Behold, the logical consequence. Without norms, somebody you hate will take it to something you love. And they'll do it bigly. The chickens are really coming home to roost in that respect. So next time, defend section 3 of DOMA in court even if you disagree with it.
We're no longer willing to play nice with rules when you refuse to apply them to yourselves. In other words, sorry, but you did this to yourselves. The difference is that Obama and the DOJ wrote a letter to congress and announced it, they stood by it and took question. The Trump administration just filed a withdrawal and just hoped no one would notice on a Friday, like a coward. When Obama and Holder did it, they signed their name to the decision. And if this is the route the conservatives want to do, I'm all about it. Whine about it when the Democrats do it, throw a fit and then do the exact same thing once they are in power. Hypocrisy all around, but at least we are honest with ourselves. I feel good about the odds of how the 130 million Americans who will be impacted by this case will feel about the decision. There’s no constitutional exemption forcing you to defend laws, unless you send a nicely written letter to Congress displaying your intention. That is foolishness. The question is whether to hold your administration to a higher standard than Obama did with his, or show that the new rules will be used against your favorite things and not just your disfavored things and see how you like it. That’s one point in favor of upholding norms in the first place, for fear your political opponents turn it back in your face when you’re out of power. If Obama & his subordinate Holder reversed and had listened to conservative opinion pieces back in the day and (say) fought a losing battle in court, we could’ve avoided all this. What I am saying is that Jeff Sessions is a hypocrite, since he objected to the move back in 2011. I might be willing to say the Obama was wrong at the time too, but I'm not seeing a lot to gain from that. And gain is what this is all about. The key tactic for me it to be outraged now, claim the that this is an erosion of norms and the rule of law. Then break norms again to get what I want politically. Because its clear that its winner take all and none of these rules or norms matters. So time to get outraged and win an election. But I will encourage my representatives to sign a letter and announce the intent to erode the norms. Because I do think people should sign their names to their work, rather than doing it under the radar like cowards. You see what their objections go them. First, try to see if your objections will help the executive think better of their actions. If not, second, make sure they have reason to fear the consequences of breaking them. Not for straightforward realpolitik use of power, but that less may be broken in future. Men are not hanged for stealing horses, but that less horses might be stolen in the future. Their objections were like yours, hollow. Meaningless. The thing that you expressed outraged about in 2011 in now totally sweet revenge in 2018. The only thing I learned today was Obama made the right move in 2011 and it just got a little riskier for me and my wife to move out of MA. Same justification can be used for Trump. “Oh, does Plansix say Obama did the right thing choosing to let partisan motives fuel his justice department, even as Trump uses that principle back against his allies? Okay, fine. Trump did the right thing today and tomorrow, because the next Democratic administration will always show they’re unprincipled and they’re whining about what Trump does because they wish they were the ones in power doing it. Oh well.” I’m not with you. No, Danlgars. I've joined you. You were always here. I just been reminded that any bipartisan future for congress and politics is years away. Fire has to be fought with fire until everyone is so burned they don't want to do it any more. See, I’ll reverse the roles a little here, but end in almost the same place. I opposed Clinton on abuses, I opposed Bush on abuses, I opposed Obama on abused, and look just how far that got me. Liberals will still say I started it and they’re justified in this response. Turns out, I find little common ground when people that stood idly by when Obama did something suddenly react in outrage when Trump does it. So it’s tough to care. I don’t know who will lay down the gloves first, and if there’s an acceptable road back to make America great again. I know I have to see a little more respect for the rights of religious Americans, and much more respect for the division of powers in general. It’s tough to see that future, but I at least know an electoral majority in 2016 put their foot down in the face of a Clinton presidency. That was a incredibly good thing that I’m thankful for. At least now the left recognizes, albeit imperfectly, something about where we are as a country. Allow me to change the terms of the discussion. Or don't allow me, I'm doing it anyway. You talk about high minded points, or respect for people who are definitely not the least respected demographic in America. You cheer Trump refusing to defend the ACA as a way to chalk up petty points against Democrats. You who talk about religious freedom to discriminate against minorities, or freedom of Nazis to have platforms on college campuses. And you vote for Republicans who work to undermine the ACA most basic, unarguable elements, such as guaranteeing people with serious health issues can get medical coverage that actually covers those issues. You, and people like you, are a threat to my life. You are a threat to my life in the same way that Germans who voted for Nazis during the 1920s and early 1930s were a threat to the lives of Jews living in Germany. You have put my life and the lives of people like me on a scale and weighed them against the moral outrage of a subset of the population who did not want to see people of the same sex marry, and found those things to be of equal weight. You are a threat to my life, and you are a threat to the lives of countless people like me. We are not people to you, we are just statistics. But for us, you and people like you are attempting to pull the trigger to kill us on a regular basis, every time you walk into a polling station and vote for a Republican who has sworn to repeal the ACA. You may feel that America is not on a good path, but for me, every time you and people like you become less comfortable voicing your opinions, every time an idea that helps Republicans get elected has to crawl back into the darkness, I live with a little less fear that I will die a miserable death so that a bunch of people I have never met can celebrate something like "free markets," or "standing up to liberals." In case you didn't catch it, you're voting for people who would see me dead not because they actively hate me, but because promising to see people like me dead makes people like you happy, and actually managing to follow through with it would make people like you even happier. You, collectively, are exactly the Germans in the 1930s who voted for people blaming Jews for all of the nation's ills because whatever they do to Jews is fine with you as long as they do make your nation "great" again. great read. I'm very sorry that you and many thousands have to live with those fears lingering over you on top of what are already very heavy economic burdens due to illness/healthcare cost. It is not humane, it's not the foundation of a content and caring society. on the plus side, it lessens the inequality by getting rid of those bottom 10%, they can't fuck the statistics if they're dead /s Really? Boiling down his grievances to "you and people like you want to kill me"? He all but accuses republicans of being nazi sympathizers that are okay with the holocaust. If his post doesn't shock you with how them vs us it is you really need to read it again. First off, I meant to edit the post I did before that to add the quote, it was meant to be an addition to my point of view, because I cannot provide a first hand experience. I make my assumptions based on what I read, and trying to imagine how different my life would be. Second, he did not accuse reps of being nazi sympathizers. Like, NOT EVEN CLOSE He made a comparison. A comparison of how destructive to other social groups the actions of the republican party are, and how the republican voters enable it, to how people in germany were led to believe that nazism was great, the jews were the problem, and how they enabled one of the biggest atrocities in history. He did not even say all of these germans were ok with the holocaust, I believe they probably weren't but they had no idea what they were actually voting for. Which brings me back to my first post and a point I made there. Society has evolved. Hopefully, in the past 70 years our society has evolved and our problems have become different. I am worried that we are blinded/not seeing the bigger picture/missing something in the peripheral vision. Imagine this: after trump leaves office, we find that thousands of illegal women, children and men were sexually abused while in these detention centers, that some hundreds were sold off by corrupt emigration agents to trafficking rings. Nobody (well, almost nobody) wanted this when they wanted to stop illegal crossings and voted for a man that promised them that. People weren't gassed like the jews were, it doesn't make it any less atrocious. The voters did enable it and they have their share of the blame. You made a post about how you are a jew. As in that gives you authority on what nazis are and how ideology leads to the holocaust. The comparison was about how republicans are a threat to you and that supporting them is the same.behaviour that led to the holocaust. You chose to use nazis and the holocause to describe danglers and people like him. That you are a jew and you believe that hes a threat to your life. Even if its not your intent its what you are doing. This isnt about trump this is about you comparing people to nazis and warning people that supporting trump is the same as people who supported the nazis before the holocaust. Doubling down and explaining how your are right about this and explicitly explaining how you think a holocaust similar event would happen doesnt help your case. I'm not Jewish by any definition commonly used today. I would be considered Jewish by white supremacists the same way white supremacists determined who was black for the purposes of anti-miscegenation laws. One eighth. So there is some real irony that you decided to treat me as Jewish and view everything I wrote view the lens of "This guy is Jewish," when I'm only Jewish if you're using white supremacist framework. I specifically mentioned when I made an edit to a single post about the irony of having Jewish heritage and the situation I found myself in that it was just heritage. tl;dr try addressing what I'm actually saying, not what you want me to be saying so you can feel righteous about me apparently being some Jewish stereotype. Honestly, what are you trying to say here? So...you're Jewish. Okay... Analogues of the "white supremacist philosophies" is what lets your people kill anyone of Palestinian descent and be justified.The whole racism argument, at least in the context of black vs. white in the USA, is not comparable at all to the situation in Israel/Palestine. Even if it were, Israelis take the role of the whites in this conflict. I agree with you wholeheartedly that the USA Republican party is pretty sad, but I'm not sure we're at Nazi levels yet.
For anyone that ever struggles with what anti-semitism is, especially in the modern world, it's exactly this.
|
If that quote is antisemtic then i am afraid the most of the world is antisemitic.
|
On June 09 2018 18:41 Silvanel wrote:
If that quote is antisemtic then i am afraid the most of the world is antisemitic.
Yes that's probably true. Saying 'your people' to a Jewish person in relation to Israel is quite anti semitic because it conflates Zionism with Jewishness when they are not the same thing.
|
On June 09 2018 18:41 Silvanel wrote:
If that quote is antisemtic then i am afraid the most of the world is antisemitic.
Making Jews collectively responsible for the crimes of Israël is antisemitic, yes
|
If You are not identyfing Yourself with Israel then You shouldnt be ofended since "Your people" part of equation isnt true. The premise is false hence the conclusion is not applicable. I dont think the assumption itself that "All jews identify with Isreal" is antisemitic its just ignorant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
