|
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 2022 02:41 Zambrah wrote:People in power keep at it and one day they might face the same fate as scores of innocent helpless children. The more they do and the worse things get the more they push the US to a point where one of these people are going to make real contact. Or theyll just give all politicians mega-armed security. That ones probably more likely. McConnell has already called for it, I wouldnt be surprised to see a bill passed today giving the Supreme Court lots of security and for Congress to be next in line for heavy guard in the eventual future. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/man-arrested-supreme-court-justice-kavanaughs-home-allegedly/story?id=85259333&cid=social_twitter_abcnShow nested quote +An armed man was arrested near Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh's Maryland home after allegedly making threats against Kavanaugh, according to a Supreme Court spokesperson.
The man was arrested at about 1:50 a.m. Wednesday and taken into custody in Montgomery County.
The suspect's name has not been released but a law enforcement official told ABC News that he is from California.
Montgomery County police said the case has been transferred to the FBI.
The Department of Homeland Security warned in May that there could be threats against Supreme Court justices over the leaked draft of the Roe v. Wade decision.
Dude was apparently suicidally depressed and looking to give his life meaning by killing Kavanaugh and then himself, but seems to have changed his mind and called the cops to turn himself in. www.washingtonpost.com
I've held the position for a while that violence against conservative political figures by the people they've harmed is an inevitable result of conservatives successfully enacting their policies concerning civil rights, social welfare, and the public good, so this comes as no surprise to me, and I don't expect this man to be the last.
|
I don’t think it’ll be limited to conservatives, I expect it to be both parties getting shot up at some point in the future, if a conservative goes down first it’ll probably spur a liberal to get shot and then the situation will devolve until each member of Congress has their own Secret Service guard and they start gunning randos down in the street like a multicellular organism where every cell is a frightened cop.
|
|
|
I mean, we had January 6th and that changed nothing so I doubt anything can change the trajectory sans fair amounts of bloodshed or massive worker organization fucking their money over.
They need real actual consequences because the threat clearly ain’t something they respect.
|
Wr already had conservatives shot in 2017 but as usual people forget it ever happened. It was memory-holed as quickly as possible.
|
On June 09 2022 07:24 Introvert wrote:
Wr already had conservatives shot in 2017 but as usual people forget it ever happened. It was memory-holed as quickly as possible.
Liberals were consistently promoting more reasonable gun control during that time, and before and after that incident. Clearly, conservatives being shot wasn't a severe enough tragedy to convince conservatives to start caring about gun control, nor do they blink during school shootings, daily mass shootings, or tens of thousands of gun-related suicides/homicides every year. I have no idea what it'll take for conservatives to stop bowing down to the NRA or to start voting for people who want a more nuanced approach to gun regulations and gun safety than "second amendment, no other rules, all loopholes allowed", but it looks like half our country still isn't willing to take action yet, even if polls say that many (most?) conservatives favor some slight pro-control changes.
|
On June 09 2022 07:24 Introvert wrote:
Wr already had conservatives shot in 2017 but as usual people forget it ever happened. It was memory-holed as quickly as possible.
Do you think Kyle didn't shoot liberals and got away with it and was celebrated for it?
|
Northern Ireland26986 Posts
On June 09 2022 07:24 Introvert wrote:
Wr already had conservatives shot in 2017 but as usual people forget it ever happened. It was memory-holed as quickly as possible.
The broad left are perfectly capable of political violence, I don’t think anyone is under illusions otherwise. I’m surprised there’s not more of it in truth.
Indeed it’s why most of here bemoan a seemingly never ending toxifying of the general cultural climate.
|
On June 09 2022 07:37 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2022 07:24 Introvert wrote:
Wr already had conservatives shot in 2017 but as usual people forget it ever happened. It was memory-holed as quickly as possible. Liberals were consistently promoting more reasonable gun control during that time, and before and after that incident. Clearly, conservatives being shot wasn't a severe enough tragedy to convince conservatives to start caring about gun control, nor do they blink during school shootings, daily mass shootings, or tens of thousands of gun-related suicides/homicides every year. I have no idea what it'll take for conservatives to stop bowing down to the NRA or to start voting for people who want a more nuanced approach to gun regulations and gun safety than "second amendment, no other rules, all loopholes allowed", but it looks like half our country still isn't willing to take action yet, even if polls say that many (most?) conservatives favor some slight pro-control changes.
The point of my post wasn't gun control, I will just say that I think that's another issue, in fact maybe the issue that most illustrates, the difference between polling support for something and electoral support for it.
In fact the elections data guy at the NYT just had a piece about this the other day. it's the not the NRA (which right now is in a bad spot and and is less influential than ever before), it's the voters. He makes the point I have tried to make here many, many, many times. Even if the question in a poll is worded well, and fairly, support for things should be expected to drop when the other side gets a chance to engage the argument and make their case. Also, actual legislation is different than 2-3 sentence proposals in a poll. I don't know if there's an issue that really like 90-10 in this country.
On June 09 2022 08:08 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2022 07:24 Introvert wrote:
Wr already had conservatives shot in 2017 but as usual people forget it ever happened. It was memory-holed as quickly as possible. Do you think Kyle didn't shoot liberals and got away with it and was celebrated for it?
This question sounds like bait, but I'll answer it. I think the jury was correct in saying Rittenhouse acted in self-defense. He shouldn't have been there, but maybe the people he shot shouldn't have been chasing someone with a gun? I'm still amazed that he was armed with a rifle he was not concealing and still they went after him as he was running away. So no, I don't think that's a correct characterization of what happened.
edit: also i wouldn't call the people burning stuff down in kenosha "liberals." Unless you would like that association?
|
On June 09 2022 07:24 Introvert wrote:
Wr already had conservatives shot in 2017 but as usual people forget it ever happened. It was memory-holed as quickly as possible.
None of them died, I didn’t forget shit, they just escaped without enough bloodshed to be made to care.
|
On June 09 2022 08:24 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2022 07:24 Introvert wrote:
Wr already had conservatives shot in 2017 but as usual people forget it ever happened. It was memory-holed as quickly as possible. The broad left are perfectly capable of political violence, I don’t think anyone is under illusions otherwise. I’m surprised there’s not more of it in truth. Indeed it’s why most of here bemoan a seemingly never ending toxifying of the general cultural climate.
Compared to past decades of American history we still live in a remarkably peaceful time, politically. And just to put aside the morality of it for a moment, political unrest in America almost always benefits conservatives. Two examples from recent history that lefties hate should cause them pause, Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan. But these are lefties we are talking about. Looking backwards is not always high on their list of things to do 
|
Mm yes, America has experienced such conservative victories as The Civil Rights Movement, and The Gilded Age, and The Civil War, and The American Revolution.
|
On June 09 2022 09:30 Zambrah wrote:
Mm yes, America has experienced such conservative victories as The Civil Rights Movement, and The Gilded Age, and The Civil War, and The American Revolution.
The fact that you lumped all that stuff together is yikes. But not surprising I suppose. While of course I disagree with the new left's version of history wrt the civil rights movements, I will note it is commonly believed among that same group that Nixon and Reagan were backlashes. but if you want to believe the violence of the 60s didn't lead the way to Nixon and/or Reagan fine (or the turmoil of the Wilson years leading to Harding and Coolidge). If I were being espeically charitable and wanted to split hairs, I'd separate out the violence that occurred during those movements and say they worked to the detriment of the movements themselves. Again tho, common narrative among those on the left is that the violence was essential, so perhaps there's no common ground here to start.
|
On June 09 2022 09:39 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2022 09:30 Zambrah wrote:
Mm yes, America has experienced such conservative victories as The Civil Rights Movement, and The Gilded Age, and The Civil War, and The American Revolution. The fact that you lumped all that stuff together is yikes. But not surprising I suppose. While of course I disagree with the new left's version of history wrt the civil rights movements, I will note it is commonly believed among that same group that Nixon and Reagan were backlashes. but if you want to believe the violence of the 60s didn't lead the way to Nixon and/or Reagan fine. If I were being espeically charitable and wanted to split hairs, I'd separate out the violence that occurred during those movements and say they worked to the detriment of the movements themselves. Again tho, common narrative among those on the left is that the violence was essential, so perhaps there's no common ground here to start.
I can lump these things into broad periods in history because after enough time having passed its obvious to anyone sans lunatics that the conservative factors, the racist Segregationists, the vicious Robber barons, the treasonous South, and the dumb British lost overall. Black people are allowed to go to school and interact with white people, we have labor laws (as grossly inadequate as they are for modern times we at least dont have children being crushed to pulp by machinery at work,) the Confederacy doesnt exist and slavery was mostly abolished (I see you text of the 13th Amendment,) and America isn't under the British monarchy.
Conservatives lose long term, the only question is how much bloodshed it takes society to buck their dipshit ways.
|
United States44056 Posts
Is the narrative in conservative circles that the violence in the civil rights era was coming from the liberals? Did they miss all the institutional violence against the people wanting civil rights?
|
|
|
I’m not normally a CCStealthBlue but:
Several Texas families are under investigation for child abuse because of providing gender-affirming care to their trans children (AKA the care recommended by every major medical authority for gender dysphoria). The Texas Supreme Court shielded some, but not all of these families from investigation.
link
According to the lawsuit, a 16-year-old transgender boy tried to kill himself the same day that Abbott issued the child abuse directive.
“[He] said that the political environment, including Abbott’s Letter, and being misgendered at school, led him to take these actions,” the lawsuit said.
He survived the attempt and was admitted to an outpatient psychiatric facility, where staff learned that he was undergoing hormone therapy. A week after he was discharged, an investigator from DFPS visited the family’s home and, according to the lawsuit, said that the psychiatric facility had reported the family for child abuse. The family remains under investigation.
|
On June 09 2022 09:50 KwarK wrote:
Is the narrative in conservative circles that the violence in the civil rights era was coming from the liberals? Did they miss all the institutional violence against the people wanting civil rights?
no. although i was speaking a little quickly, the 60s had more violence than just around civil rights. the 1910s and 1960s were tumultuous, imo (and not just me) contributing directly rightward political shifts.
|
On June 09 2022 09:55 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2022 09:22 Introvert wrote:On June 09 2022 08:24 WombaT wrote:On June 09 2022 07:24 Introvert wrote:
Wr already had conservatives shot in 2017 but as usual people forget it ever happened. It was memory-holed as quickly as possible. The broad left are perfectly capable of political violence, I don’t think anyone is under illusions otherwise. I’m surprised there’s not more of it in truth. Indeed it’s why most of here bemoan a seemingly never ending toxifying of the general cultural climate. Compared to past decades of American history we still live in a remarkably peaceful time, politically. And just to put aside the morality of it for a moment, political unrest in America almost always benefits conservatives. Two examples from recent history that lefties hate should cause them pause, Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan. But these are lefties we are talking about. Looking backwards is not always high on their list of things to do Those RINOs? They would not even pretend Trump won the election he clearly lost if they were around. They are basically libruls, Nixon thought some abortions were nessecary (on tape) and Reagan support assualt weapon bans in the early 90s. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=105832640Show nested quote +In a March 1991 editorial, President Reagan opined that the Brady Act would provide a crucial "enforcement mechanism" to end the "honor system" of the 1968 Gun Control Act and "can't help but stop thousands of illegal handgun purchases." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brady_Handgun_Violence_Prevention_ActShow nested quote +In May 1994, former presidents Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and Ronald Reagan, wrote to the U.S. House of Representatives in support of banning "semi-automatic assault guns." They cited a 1993 CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll that found 77 percent of Americans supported a ban on the manufacture, sale, and possession of such weapons https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban#:~:text=In May 1994, former presidents,semi-automatic assault guns."
not sure why you went back to guns when i expressly said to DPB that I wasn't talking about guns. but Nixon had some good aspects and many bad aspects. the second half of his presidency was less good. and he campaigned in a law and order way, to appeal to the "Dayton Housewife." That person was neither an ideological conservative nor liberal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
