|
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 25 2018 02:20 Plansix wrote:
It is not any different than an officer flashing is badge at a bar to prevent the bouncer from throwing them out. It’s not allowed. That move would have ended a political career just 10 years ago. Citizens have the right to protest their governments actions without fear of retaliation from government officials inconvenienced by the protest. I’m surprised some of the conservatives are comfortable with this clear abuse of power.
She was kicked out because she was recognized. If she asked for service because she was a government worker that would be the same as a cop flashing his badge but she was recognized because shes on tv. 10 years ago the same thing would have happened and the same result would have happened. It becomes a news story for a few hours and brought up randomly later in arguments.
|
On June 25 2018 02:23 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2018 02:20 Plansix wrote:
It is not any different than an officer flashing is badge at a bar to prevent the bouncer from throwing them out. It’s not allowed. That move would have ended a political career just 10 years ago. Citizens have the right to protest their governments actions without fear of retaliation from government officials inconvenienced by the protest. I’m surprised some of the conservatives are comfortable with this clear abuse of power. She was kicked out because she was recognized. If she asked for service because she was a government worker that would be the same as a cop flashing his badge but she was recognized because shes on tv. 10 years ago the same thing would have happened and the same result would have happened. It becomes a news story for a few hours and brought up randomly later in arguments.
The White House staff member ten years ago would never have publically called out the company that refused them service. Congress would have ended them. It’s not being refused service, it is the press secretary using her public media challenge to call out the business by name. That is an official government statement when she does it.
This has happened to Govement employees before. And they are prohibited from attacking the business when it happens.
|
|
|
On June 25 2018 02:10 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2018 02:02 Sermokala wrote:On June 25 2018 01:57 KwarK wrote:
Danglars, press secretary is not a protected class. Yes the government in in charge of deciding who we should and shouldn't cheer being denied service. The general consensus is that it's not cool to discriminate against someone for what they are (disabled, of a specific race, born a specific nationality, gay etc) but it's okay to discriminate against someone because of what they do (lie to the public, defend indefensible and evil policies etc). Sarah Sanders isn't being discriminated against because of what she is, she's being discriminated against because she acts like a walking piece of shit. Honestly this is really simple and I am amazed that conservatives keep misunderstanding it and thinking that liberals believe that conservatives ought to be a protected class, and then get surprised each time they learn liberals don't actually think that. It rings somewhat of "your ideology isn't the one that I ascribed to you, and that makes you wrong!" to me.
Honestly, it sounds like the way to stop being called out for being a piece of shit, is to stop being a piece of shit, and to let this business exercise their right to free speech and protest. Revolutionary ideas.
|
Trump calls for deporting illegal immigrants with 'no judges or court cases'
...
“We cannot allow all of these people to invade our Country. When somebody comes in, we must immediately, with no Judges or Court Cases, bring them back from where they came. Our system is a mockery to good immigration policy and Law and Order. Most children come without parents,” Trump said Sunday on Twitter.
...
U.S. immigration law provides certain rights for undocumented immigrants arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. In most cases, they are allowed a full hearing before an immigration judge before being deported.
www.cnbc.com
Interesting take on 'Law and Order'.
At least in the Starship Troopers universe people got show trials and service guaranteed citizenship. Trump can't even offer that.
|
On June 25 2018 02:55 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2018 02:02 Sermokala wrote:On June 25 2018 01:57 KwarK wrote:
Danglars, press secretary is not a protected class. Yes the government in in charge of deciding who we should and shouldn't cheer being denied service. On June 25 2018 01:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 25 2018 01:56 Danglars wrote:On June 24 2018 21:44 Plansix wrote:
The most irritating part is that Sanders tweeting about it is a violation of government regulations. They are not allowed to use their position to gain favorable treatment or threaten/cause retaliation. Of course they don’t give a shit, but it is depressing. The owner of Red Hen is going to face a lot of harassment. I think you really have to stretch to say this is "using her position" to "gain favorable treatment or threaten/cause retaliation." You might as well say media are prohibited from reporting on what happened, since they are doing so against a victim that cannot post her own side about what happened. Strangely enough, the "bake that cake" side is strangely silent to say the owner should have been forced to serve the press secretary if there was any justice in the world. Well it was quite the opposite: If people are okay with bakers not baking cakes for gay ceremonies, then those people better not complain about restauranteurs not serving SHS. And then those people who complain about people not baking cakes for gay ceremonies then those people should complain when other people are denied service. This is the big problem with american politics. There are so many people doing wrong on either side and neither side is trying to do better, they just simply point out how bad the other side is and the other side does the same. The real problem in american politics is not that the Dems or Republicans are good, it is that both are shit.
while somewhat true; it's also the case that one is very much worse than the other; so I'd say one side is trying to do better, and that's the one that is in fact considerably better (but still poor).
|
I mean, Sarah Sanders being refused is free speech 101. Which all constitutional wanks should be entirely behind, if they weren't trying to draw some false equivalence to anti-discrimination laws.
|
On June 25 2018 02:02 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2018 01:57 KwarK wrote:
Danglars, press secretary is not a protected class. Yes the government in in charge of deciding who we should and shouldn't cheer being denied service. Show nested quote +On June 25 2018 01:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 25 2018 01:56 Danglars wrote:On June 24 2018 21:44 Plansix wrote:
The most irritating part is that Sanders tweeting about it is a violation of government regulations. They are not allowed to use their position to gain favorable treatment or threaten/cause retaliation. Of course they don’t give a shit, but it is depressing. The owner of Red Hen is going to face a lot of harassment. https://twitter.com/PressSec/status/1010536237457924096I think you really have to stretch to say this is "using her position" to "gain favorable treatment or threaten/cause retaliation." You might as well say media are prohibited from reporting on what happened, since they are doing so against a victim that cannot post her own side about what happened. Strangely enough, the "bake that cake" side is strangely silent to say the owner should have been forced to serve the press secretary if there was any justice in the world. Well it was quite the opposite: If people are okay with bakers not baking cakes for gay ceremonies, then those people better not complain about restauranteurs not serving SHS. And then those people who complain about people not baking cakes for gay ceremonies then those people should complain when other people are denied service.
Can't you see the difference?
I can't decide whether the lack of nuance is deliberate to support the extremely basic faulty logic, or whether its a issue of capability.
Can you confirm that you are able to understand the difference between discrimination against a minority and refusing to serve someone because of something they have done?
|
|
|
On June 25 2018 03:55 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2018 03:32 zlefin wrote:On June 25 2018 02:55 JimmiC wrote:On June 25 2018 02:02 Sermokala wrote:On June 25 2018 01:57 KwarK wrote:
Danglars, press secretary is not a protected class. Yes the government in in charge of deciding who we should and shouldn't cheer being denied service. On June 25 2018 01:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 25 2018 01:56 Danglars wrote:On June 24 2018 21:44 Plansix wrote:
The most irritating part is that Sanders tweeting about it is a violation of government regulations. They are not allowed to use their position to gain favorable treatment or threaten/cause retaliation. Of course they don’t give a shit, but it is depressing. The owner of Red Hen is going to face a lot of harassment. https://twitter.com/PressSec/status/1010536237457924096I think you really have to stretch to say this is "using her position" to "gain favorable treatment or threaten/cause retaliation." You might as well say media are prohibited from reporting on what happened, since they are doing so against a victim that cannot post her own side about what happened. Strangely enough, the "bake that cake" side is strangely silent to say the owner should have been forced to serve the press secretary if there was any justice in the world. Well it was quite the opposite: If people are okay with bakers not baking cakes for gay ceremonies, then those people better not complain about restauranteurs not serving SHS. And then those people who complain about people not baking cakes for gay ceremonies then those people should complain when other people are denied service. This is the big problem with american politics. There are so many people doing wrong on either side and neither side is trying to do better, they just simply point out how bad the other side is and the other side does the same. The real problem in american politics is not that the Dems or Republicans are good, it is that both are shit. while somewhat true; it's also the case that one is very much worse than the other; so I'd say one side is trying to do better, and that's the one that is in fact considerably better (but still poor). But both sides feel that way and focus on the other sides problems. They need to fix their own shit so badly.
While true, it's an overly broad statement that ultimately serves no purpose. It's like saying our #1 energy concern right now is working out renewable energy. It's true, but it glosses over all the hard work that tons of engineers are dedicating themselves to so we can get there. The first step on the political side is to call out hypocrisy when it happens, such as when the same Republicans who were up in arms over the rights of the cake baker are now suddenly shocked that the workers of a restaurant exercised their right to deny service to our Press Secretary in protest, which is on considerably less shaky ground than the cake case. They choose to ignore the impropriety she displayed by having people harass an establishment that simply expressed their first amendment right, but were the first ones to invoke the sacred 1st amendment when the gay couple was looking for a wedding service. This is not a case of both sides doing bad things, this is a case of very clear hypocrisy, that prevent the honest discussions from ever taking place.
|
On June 25 2018 01:56 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2018 21:44 Plansix wrote:
The most irritating part is that Sanders tweeting about it is a violation of government regulations. They are not allowed to use their position to gain favorable treatment or threaten/cause retaliation. Of course they don’t give a shit, but it is depressing. The owner of Red Hen is going to face a lot of harassment. https://twitter.com/PressSec/status/1010536237457924096I think you really have to stretch to say this is "using her position" to "gain favorable treatment or threaten/cause retaliation." You might as well say media are prohibited from reporting on what happened, since they are doing so against a victim that cannot post her own side about what happened. Strangely enough, the "bake that cake" side is strangely silent to say the owner should have been forced to serve the press secretary if there was any justice in the world. + Show Spoiler +
One of the only times I will agree with this man. Trump truly does view most of the world as tribal. He's unashamed in fighting for his presumed tribe. The left, far from showing the world is not close to Trump's vision, actively seeks to make it so. Sad, really.
So you agree that it's fine for her to be denied service then?
|
On June 25 2018 02:32 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2018 02:23 Sermokala wrote:On June 25 2018 02:20 Plansix wrote:
It is not any different than an officer flashing is badge at a bar to prevent the bouncer from throwing them out. It’s not allowed. That move would have ended a political career just 10 years ago. Citizens have the right to protest their governments actions without fear of retaliation from government officials inconvenienced by the protest. I’m surprised some of the conservatives are comfortable with this clear abuse of power. She was kicked out because she was recognized. If she asked for service because she was a government worker that would be the same as a cop flashing his badge but she was recognized because shes on tv. 10 years ago the same thing would have happened and the same result would have happened. It becomes a news story for a few hours and brought up randomly later in arguments. The White House staff member ten years ago would never have publically called out the company that refused them service. Congress would have ended them. It’s not being refused service, it is the press secretary using her public media challenge to call out the business by name. That is an official government statement when she does it. This has happened to Govement employees before. And they are prohibited from attacking the business when it happens.
The staff member would have called a journo friendly to them to report the story instead of publishing it themselves like they can today. The same result happens, we can't take tweets seriously as "official government statements" especially when those tweets are simply clarifying what happened.
You're not attacking a business when you're simply reporting what happened.
|
|
|
I wish people could stop pretending that this is the same issue as cakegate. The subtleties of the two cases make the important discussion points of each case completely and utterly different.
In the case of the baker, the question was whether discrimination against a protected group takes legal precedence over the right to free expression.
In the case of Sanders, there is no protected group, and the only issue is whether or not its sensible for a business to start discriminating against members of a major political group, given the obvious consequences for their bottom line.
|
United States43365 Posts
On June 25 2018 04:30 Jockmcplop wrote:
I wish people could stop pretending that this is the same issue as cakegate. The subtleties of the two cases make the important discussion points of each case completely and utterly different.
In the case of the baker, the question was whether discrimination against a protected group takes legal precedence over the right to free expression.
In the case of Sanders, there is no protected group, and the only issue is whether or not its sensible for a business to start discriminating against members of a major political group, given the obvious consequences for their bottom line.
Even then, I don't think it's right to conflate Sanders, who is a particularly loathsome individual, with all conservatives. I'm sure people will because if there is one thing conservative America loves it's feeling personally attacked by things, but as far as I know the restaurant didn't post a "no conservatives" sign.
|
On June 25 2018 03:42 WolfintheSheep wrote:
I mean, Sarah Sanders being refused is free speech 101. Which all constitutional wanks should be entirely behind, if they weren't trying to draw some false equivalence to anti-discrimination laws.
My favorite was her father referring to it as bigotry.
|
United States43365 Posts
On June 25 2018 04:56 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2018 03:42 WolfintheSheep wrote:
I mean, Sarah Sanders being refused is free speech 101. Which all constitutional wanks should be entirely behind, if they weren't trying to draw some false equivalence to anti-discrimination laws. My favorite was her father referring to it as bigotry.
Hey, the man is an authority on bigotry.
|
On June 25 2018 03:55 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2018 03:32 zlefin wrote:On June 25 2018 02:55 JimmiC wrote:On June 25 2018 02:02 Sermokala wrote:On June 25 2018 01:57 KwarK wrote:
Danglars, press secretary is not a protected class. Yes the government in in charge of deciding who we should and shouldn't cheer being denied service. On June 25 2018 01:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 25 2018 01:56 Danglars wrote:On June 24 2018 21:44 Plansix wrote:
The most irritating part is that Sanders tweeting about it is a violation of government regulations. They are not allowed to use their position to gain favorable treatment or threaten/cause retaliation. Of course they don’t give a shit, but it is depressing. The owner of Red Hen is going to face a lot of harassment. https://twitter.com/PressSec/status/1010536237457924096I think you really have to stretch to say this is "using her position" to "gain favorable treatment or threaten/cause retaliation." You might as well say media are prohibited from reporting on what happened, since they are doing so against a victim that cannot post her own side about what happened. Strangely enough, the "bake that cake" side is strangely silent to say the owner should have been forced to serve the press secretary if there was any justice in the world. Well it was quite the opposite: If people are okay with bakers not baking cakes for gay ceremonies, then those people better not complain about restauranteurs not serving SHS. And then those people who complain about people not baking cakes for gay ceremonies then those people should complain when other people are denied service. This is the big problem with american politics. There are so many people doing wrong on either side and neither side is trying to do better, they just simply point out how bad the other side is and the other side does the same. The real problem in american politics is not that the Dems or Republicans are good, it is that both are shit. while somewhat true; it's also the case that one is very much worse than the other; so I'd say one side is trying to do better, and that's the one that is in fact considerably better (but still poor). But both sides feel that way and focus on the other sides problems. They need to fix their own shit so badly.
just becuase both sides feel that way doesn't mean one of them isn't more wrong. not all feelings/opinions are equally justified.
you're making a false equivalence, and that's not constructive either. one side IS doing far more to fix their own shit; you're ignoring that and lumping in two different degrees of badness.
|
|
|
On June 25 2018 05:25 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2018 05:07 zlefin wrote:On June 25 2018 03:55 JimmiC wrote:On June 25 2018 03:32 zlefin wrote:On June 25 2018 02:55 JimmiC wrote:On June 25 2018 02:02 Sermokala wrote:On June 25 2018 01:57 KwarK wrote:
Danglars, press secretary is not a protected class. Yes the government in in charge of deciding who we should and shouldn't cheer being denied service. On June 25 2018 01:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 25 2018 01:56 Danglars wrote:On June 24 2018 21:44 Plansix wrote:
The most irritating part is that Sanders tweeting about it is a violation of government regulations. They are not allowed to use their position to gain favorable treatment or threaten/cause retaliation. Of course they don’t give a shit, but it is depressing. The owner of Red Hen is going to face a lot of harassment. https://twitter.com/PressSec/status/1010536237457924096I think you really have to stretch to say this is "using her position" to "gain favorable treatment or threaten/cause retaliation." You might as well say media are prohibited from reporting on what happened, since they are doing so against a victim that cannot post her own side about what happened. Strangely enough, the "bake that cake" side is strangely silent to say the owner should have been forced to serve the press secretary if there was any justice in the world. Well it was quite the opposite: If people are okay with bakers not baking cakes for gay ceremonies, then those people better not complain about restauranteurs not serving SHS. And then those people who complain about people not baking cakes for gay ceremonies then those people should complain when other people are denied service. This is the big problem with american politics. There are so many people doing wrong on either side and neither side is trying to do better, they just simply point out how bad the other side is and the other side does the same. The real problem in american politics is not that the Dems or Republicans are good, it is that both are shit. while somewhat true; it's also the case that one is very much worse than the other; so I'd say one side is trying to do better, and that's the one that is in fact considerably better (but still poor). But both sides feel that way and focus on the other sides problems. They need to fix their own shit so badly. just becuase both sides feel that way doesn't mean one of them isn't more wrong. not all feelings/opinions are equally justified. you're making a false equivalence, and that's not constructive either. one side IS doing far more to fix their own shit; you're ignoring that and lumping in two different degrees of badness. Nope that is all you, I have put no value or claimed equality. I have simply said that I wish both sides would take responsibility for what they or their members are doing and also work toward what they feel is best instead of just fighting each other. And for some reason you think this puts me against you and are now trying to fight with me... There is no hope.
it's not all me; others read what you said and reached a similar conclusion.
the way you were speaking was pretty clearly making an equivalence.
It's also the case that one side very clearly is doing more to take responsibility for their own members than the other is.
and that side has also done more to promote actual good rather than just fighting.
you were castigating both sides equally for things one side does far more than the other.
don't blame me for their being "no hope" when you're the one who spoke unclearly.
especially when this started with you making the outright FALSE claim that "neither side is trying to do better,"
when one side is in fact at least trying a bit to do better; and is in fact doing quite a bit better than the other.
also that statement IS an equivalence you made.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
