Archinect
anchor

Politics Central

4911

Pull that Marjorie lady off her committees ferchrissake. I don’t care if it “sets a precedent “ that means in that in the future the Rs could pull Ds off committees. The second Rs voted for Amy Croupy Barrett hours before the election was proof that they would *never* play fair when they’re in power. The Ds are in power now and they have to fucking use it. Goddam.

Feb 3, 21 9:21 pm  · 
4  · 

Done

Feb 4, 21 11:47 pm  · 
 · 

Any thoughts re: secret ballot implications comparing vote to oust Liz Cheney from party leadership last night vs. convicting Trump on impeachment?

Feb 4, 21 12:11 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

I think Trump might easily be convicted in a secret ballot.

Feb 4, 21 12:44 pm  · 
 · 

"Easily" might be too generous for me, especially after Rand Paul's constitutionality motion and subsequent vote last week, but I agree. I also have issues with representatives feeling like they can vote differently if they feel like they have some plausible deniability in how they voted. A part of me wants to die on that hill, but I'm not that fanatic about it in principle.

My pipe dream would be that they have a secret ballot and it turns out to be 100-0 to convict, so they don't have any option of pointing their fingers at anyone else to say they didn't stand up for Trump.

Feb 4, 21 1:00 pm  · 
 · 

Maybe it would be better for 99-1 so they infighting can happen as they all claim to be the lone vote and avoid getting primaried by a Trumpist.

Feb 4, 21 1:02 pm  · 
 · 
square.

seems to be some serious, albeit small, momentum building re: student loan debt forgiveness. democrats are finally getting serious about progressive, broadly popular policy. pushing for things like debt forgiveness, raising the minimum wage, stimulus checks, etc. will continue to back republicans further into their qrazy qorner.

if anything, this pandemic and the unprecedented response of the government (in terms of spending, aka the end of austerity) has really exposed the policy-based, moral, and ethical bankruptcy of republicans. that tax cut for the rich, the one major policy accomplishment during trump's presidency, isn't aging well...

Feb 4, 21 1:13 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

Yeah square why didn't the Democrats do any of the things they had literally no power to do? We need to stop focusing on the Republicans, who *had* this power and did nothing, and look at the whole picture here.

Feb 4, 21 4:02 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Anyway, I hope the legislature isn't immediately hamstrung by obstructionism & gridlock the way it was from 2010-2016 (and in a different way from 2016-2020). The reconciliation process is absurd and annoying, but at least it seems like they're having an honest go at and end-run around the stupid fucking filibuster (more on this below) to implement, as you said "progressive, broadly popular policy."

The only way the Democrats are going to hold on in 2022 is to provide direct, tangible, visible benefits to average Americans, and publicize the hell out of it. Part of that starts with policy, the other part is to quit letting Republican leadership set the tone of conversation. Dem leadership needs to get on offense, something they're historically terrible at but seems to be getting better with the younger generations. 

Feb 4, 21 4:04 pm  · 
2  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

tduds, at some point, you have to realize, even Babe Ruth stopped embarrassing the kids playing t-ball. You're the GOAT, let Timmy keep swinging at pitches no one is throwing, he'll never get a hit no matter how slow the ball moves on the tee.

Feb 4, 21 7:16 pm  · 
3  · 
tduds

Ok but my actual name is Tim so this confuses me.

Feb 4, 21 9:02 pm  · 
5  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Billy?

Feb 4, 21 9:08 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Sold!

Feb 4, 21 11:05 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Good Op-Ed from Ezra Klein today:

"All of this is a choice. Every Senate rule can be changed by a simple majority vote. A simple majority could end or reform the filibuster — as we saw when Democrats ended it for most executive branch nominations and most judicial nominations in 2013, and when Republicans ended it for Supreme Court nominees in 2017. The details quickly get complicated, but a simple majority of senators could vote to loosen some of the limits on budget reconciliation, as Senator Bernie Sanders, the new chair of the Budget Committee, has suggested. The Senate is bound by nothing but its own convictions.

But this is a Senate that, collectively, has no convictions. It does not believe enough in the filibuster’s 60-vote threshold to simply abide by it. It does not believe enough in passing bills by a simple majority to make that the standard. It is the self-styled moderates, like Manchin and Sinema, who freeze the institution in dysfunction, but there is nothing moderate about the modern Senate: It is radical in its inanity, a legislative chamber designed by dadaists."

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/04/opinion/democrats-senate-reconciliation.html?


Feb 4, 21 4:07 pm  · 
3  · 

The filibuster is a hot potato that is barely above room temp at this point. I'm coming around to the idea that the only reason it is still here is so the opposite team can claim the other one did something bad when they finally get rid of it.

Imagine what it would be like if one of the teams simply got ahead on the messaging and said, 

"This thing sucks and it's why we can't do our jobs (and it's their fault). We're going to fix it by getting rid of it. We'll be in the lobby signing autographs because you should all be screaming our praises like rock stars. If not right now, you'll see in a year and a half when the tangible benefits of us getting rid of it are more apparent. You're welcome."

Feb 4, 21 5:06 pm  · 
2  · 
SneakyPete

McCarthy right now is listing the things Democrats allegedly did just like Greene. But instead of using his own actions to do something different, he's painting the Democrats as the enemy and pledging to use this precedent as a weapon in the future. He could do the right thing and then have the ACTAUL moral high ground, but instead he's playing the pathetic victim. 

Typical. Fucking. Politician.

Feb 4, 21 4:50 pm  · 
2  · 
SneakyPete

"We should get Americans back to work."

As if you ever do any work at all, you slime.

Feb 4, 21 4:52 pm  · 
2  · 
SneakyPete

Jim Jordan is a waste of a bad suit.

Feb 4, 21 5:00 pm  · 
4  · 
tduds

By and large, Republicans are great at messaging and campaigning but bad at governing. While Democrats are good at governing and bad at messaging and campaigning.

Feb 4, 21 5:36 pm  · 
1  ·  1
tduds

Naw I'm right.

Feb 4, 21 11:05 pm  · 
 · 

Who was watching the impeachment trial today? Anything important that I missed?

Feb 9, 21 6:23 pm  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

You missed the part where the really "Schoen" lawyer defended Trump, saying he couldn't POSSIBLY have incited a large number of people as he was only one guy with a constitutionally protected right to speak, but individual Democratic lawmakers' calls for impeachment (not protected, I guess?) drove them all prematurely into the decision to impeach.

Feb 9, 21 6:49 pm  · 
1  · 

So if 44 senators think this is all unconstitutional, they can just stay home, right? Only 2/3 present need to vote to convict.

Feb 10, 21 11:57 am  · 
 · 
tduds

I'm ignoring it. Paraphrasing a Eugene Mirman joke, asking Republicans to convict Trump "is like hiring an insincere baby with amnesia to solve a crime that it committed."

Feb 10, 21 12:40 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

So far the only thing I've read about the trial, and it sounds like a total embarrassment for Trump's legal team. It's a shame that will almost definitely make no difference whatsoever: https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/trumps-impeachment-trial-lawyers-refuse-to-seriously-engage-with-the-constitutional-issues

Feb 10, 21 3:58 pm  · 
 · 

I've been catching bits and pieces today of the House Managers' case and it's being reiterated to me that they are 1) making the case that this wasn't just against Dems, or even the US in general ... this was against the GOP as well; and 2) they are asking for people to side with them that were entirely complicit in the ramp up to this, not only from election night until Jan 6, but also from much earlier in 2020 (really the last 4+ years), and have largely benefitted from it.

The GOP could save themselves here ... but they won't.

Edit: that may be too generous. The GOP could start to save themselves here ... but they won't.

Feb 10, 21 4:05 pm  · 
1  · 

^ hence why they need to try to start the "saving themselves" process.

Feb 11, 21 11:52 am  · 
1  · 
tduds

I truly think they've been insulated from electoral accountability - thanks to a combination of our country's inherent anti-majoritarian institutions and their own decades long campaign of disenfranchisement - that they've simply forgotten about it. That or they really are arrogant enough to assume they can just break the process further to extend their immunity (frighteningly, they might be right).

Feb 11, 21 12:08 pm  · 
2  · 

"insulated from electoral accountability" ... I like that. Well, I like the phrasing, not the actual thing itself.

The scary part is they probably think they *are* acting in a way that the(ir) electorate wants. They are more concerned about getting primaried and needing to beat other Republican challengers than they are concerned about beating Democrats in the general elections ... for exactly the reasons you've outlined.

To me, that's just further evidence that the party is nearly, if not already, gone. When someone who has been embedded in the party long enough to make it to this level of government is worried about the party turning on them, enough to prevent them from making the difficult choices, it's pretty much over for the party they once knew. Seeing the antics of the GOP in AZ, and the fact they even had a vote on Liz Cheney is telling.

Feb 11, 21 1:05 pm  · 
1  · 

^I'm waiting to hear how it's the Democrats fault. You're failing us jla. You have one job here. [winking face emoji]

Feb 11, 21 4:39 pm  · 
2  · 

There's the x-both sides-jla we've been waiting for. I see it took you 4 posts to make your point too. Glad to have you back at full strength.

Feb 11, 21 7:37 pm  · 
2  · 
square.

equivocating what happened over the summer and what happened on january 6th shows any lack of critical thinking skills, and is purely a republican talking point.

Feb 12, 21 9:43 am  · 
 · 
square.

“You can moan and groan, but he was far more explicit about his calls for peace than some of the BLM and left-wing rioters were this summer when we saw violence sweep across this nation,” Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida said in defending Trump before the House voted 232-197 to impeach the president for inciting an insurrection.

https://apnews.com/article/don...

again, not arguing your "points," just noting the fact that your per usual, your talking points are eerily similar to the most far-right members of congress.

Feb 12, 21 10:14 am  · 
 · 
tduds

Jesus fucking Christ not this again. *leaves*

Feb 12, 21 12:01 pm  · 
3  · 

I'm watching jla make his arguments in front of the Senate right now.

Feb 12, 21 12:15 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Tiltin' at windmills again, are we?

Feb 12, 21 2:51 pm  · 
1  · 
square.

the irony is it takes more dogmatism to adhere to the idealized form of belief that both sides are exactly equivalent, all the time.

Feb 12, 21 3:28 pm  · 
1  · 
SneakyPete

It gives him the freedom in his brain (I have acknowledged all sides) to spout his bullshit (Dems and progressives are the bad guys) free of cognitive dissonance.

Feb 12, 21 3:35 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

No cult would suffer you.

Feb 12, 21 5:10 pm  · 
 · 
proto


huh

Feb 10, 21 12:59 pm  · 
3  · 
square.

more than enough evidence that if tRump and the republicans hadn't been in charge, things would have been much, much better.

https://www.usatoday.com/story...

Feb 11, 21 1:20 pm  · 
3  · 
square.

this is the lowest of hanging fruit, and you still can’t grab it.

Feb 12, 21 3:25 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

square it's important to see both sides here. And by both sides I mean we need to only and endlessly talk about the evils of Democrats.

Feb 12, 21 3:34 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

The existence of individual sub-jurisdictions doesn't amount for much when you consider their place within the overall jurisdiction. A state, regardless of the party of their Governor, can only get so far within the confines of the national policy.

Feb 12, 21 5:09 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

"so where is this 40% coming from?" The study is linked in the article. Do your own homework.

Feb 12, 21 5:09 pm  · 
 ·  1
tduds

Again, the answers you seek are in the article, the study, and other articles about the study that are going around this week.

Feb 12, 21 5:29 pm  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

He seeks no answers.

Feb 12, 21 5:54 pm  · 
1  · 
your conscience

i think something would have to literally shatter the earth for trump to get convicted. this is an incredible waste of time

Feb 11, 21 5:20 pm  · 
 ·  2
SneakyPete

The Republicans are wasting all of our time because they refuse to do their jobs. If this was Benghaz instead of the fucking capital, they'd be all over it. But This loss of life requires HEALING and MOVING ON because it was incited by and controlled by their lord and savior Donald Trump.

Feb 11, 21 6:11 pm  · 
2  · 
square.

those who are saying this is a waste of time, because of the republican response, have an acute case of myopia. the democrats are following public opinion on this, and know that it's a winning issue both morally and politically, to frame trump, accurately, as the instigator of this historically embarrassing and destructive episode.

it might have been "a waste of time" trying to convince secessionist senators of anything by the same logic, but history hasn't exactly looked kindly upon them, and thank god for the politicians who did not heed the sort of advice you are giving, allowing our country, albeit much later, to heal and move on.

Feb 12, 21 9:40 am  · 
2  · 
Wood Guy

The impeachment trial is basically theater, but important theater--it's the only official punishment against his actions. Without it, there would be zero reason for Democrats to not storm the Capitol in 2024 if a Republican wins. Precedent matters, or it should.

Feb 12, 21 11:10 am  · 
1  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

I know it's already been stated, but Jlax is the dumbest mf I've seen on this site. "...it's a waste of time, because it won't curb trumpism, it will embolden it." I wonder, is there possibly a counterfactual that will disprove this moronicism? I wonder, does it actually exist, that doing nothing, DOING NOTHING, will actual curb trumpist? You fucking seething idiot. Shoot yourself.

Feb 12, 21 2:47 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Better posthumously convict MLK then, while you're at it.

Feb 12, 21 5:07 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

He's on record encouraging political violence.

Feb 12, 21 5:28 pm  · 
 · 

...

Feb 12, 21 7:17 pm  · 
3  · 
tduds

Wow I'd heard that Trump's legal team was not doing great but this is just embarrassing.

Feb 12, 21 3:20 pm  · 
4  · 

[redacted]

Feb 12, 21 7:16 pm  · 
 · 

well, that was entirely predictable 

Feb 13, 21 4:10 pm  · 
2  · 
proto

WTF is up with McConnell’s bullshit pedantry in avoiding responsibility to convict this impeached president? Too late to convict because he’s out of office?!? Especially when McConnell specifically delayed a senate trial...

Feb 13, 21 4:21 pm  · 
1  · 
Wood Guy

Ignoring the name, we have a centrist party currently in power that should have broad appeal. What we need is a Progressive party as powerful as the right wing. There's not a lot of space between Democratic and Republican platforms to squeeze in a whole new party.

Feb 16, 21 10:57 am  · 
2  · 
Wood Guy

No successful party is going to combine right and left, even if they share a distaste for autocratic/authoritarian governance, because the core values are so different--right is self-oriented, left is collective-oriented.

Feb 17, 21 8:12 am  · 
 · 
Koww

the onus was on the democrats to persuade republicans. they failed, to the surprise of no one. people need to stop electing incompetent officials...this requires education and campaign finance reform... hope we can get it done in the next 50 years. also requires trust and tolerance. right now every move by anyone is assumed to political in motive. not sure how that can be transcended.

Feb 13, 21 7:28 pm  · 
 · 

The point of the impeachment was never about Democrats persuading Republicans, at least not those in the Senate anyway (maybe some of the more moderate Republican voters). The point was to make it as embarrassing as possible for those Republicans to vote to acquit. The trial was always about the show, they teed up witnesses perfectly ... and then took the L everyone knew they were going to get anyway and went home for Valentine’s Day.

It was like watching the team losing by 21 points in the Super Bowl with 2 minutes to go get a 1st and goal ... then just pack it up and say “well we weren’t going to win anyway so let’s just hit the showers.” Unless you were going to make a spectacle and make them look bad, the impeachment was a waste of time. The impeachment, really any impeachment, was always political and they didn’t even try to score any political points.

Feb 13, 21 10:53 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

"The wise man bowed his head..." you know the rest.

Feb 17, 21 5:36 pm  · 
 · 

Ranty update on my homeless friend's situation: Still no housing and it is *truly* Kafkaesque. She can't be accepted to the affordable apartments because, even though she has a state ID, the state ID address isn't accurate because she's been bumped to so many temporary housing situations over the last year, and she doesn't have a birth certificate AND social security card to prove her ID, because she's homeless and *big surprise* has lost pieces of paper while living on the street. You can't get a SScard without a birth certificate, and vice versa, unless you come to the office in person, which they won't allow because of COVID, so you have to do it through the mail, which takes 6-8 weeks, but if she can't produce it in 2 weeks she loses her place on the waiting list for the affordable apartment, an apartment that she needs so she has an address so she can update her state ID to be accurate, so that she can get an apartment so that she's not living on the street.

Capitalism is a sickness. The USA is terminal.

Feb 16, 21 10:49 am  · 
8  · 
Wood Guy

Ugh. We are very good at keeping the poor down. Kudos for supporting her.

Feb 16, 21 10:55 am  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

The system is working as intended.

Feb 16, 21 11:46 am  · 
2  · 
randomised

“The computer says no”

Feb 16, 21 12:41 pm  · 
 · 

archi-dude there is some truth to that statement, but the bigger truth is that the bureaucracy exists in its current form because in the Reagan years we were taught to think of government as able to be "run like a business" and that "public-private partnerships" are better than "big government" and that government agencies need to make a profit. So when it costs a bunch of money to administer a system, like say the DMV, the government is constantly trying to show how responsible it is by squeezing its budget to make it more "efficient" and "create synergies to maximize leanness" and all that other business bullshit rather than make it run perfectly but be accused of wastefulness. My attitude towards waste is: bring it. If every child in this country is fed and every human housed and every pothole filled (lower priority LOL) and every toxic chemical cleaned up then I don't give a damn how much it costs.

Feb 16, 21 3:11 pm  · 
1  · 
randomised

“I don't give a damn how much it costs”

Would be priceless!

Feb 16, 21 3:55 pm  · 
1  · 
SneakyPete

Money exists to rationalize and perpetuate the lies that allow the system to continue.

Feb 16, 21 4:24 pm  · 
 ·  1
b3tadine[sutures]

Donna, you're correct of course. Capitalism and Bureaucracy are ouroboros. The idea that solving the problem is contrary to effective governing, is exactly what capitalism wants; break the government, to prove government doesn't work, to create more private sector governance. The point, end result, of Marxism is to solve the problems of the people, so we can get rid of bourgeois asshat, be free, and happy. We work, to pay bills, and debt - ouroboros - not to be happy. Thank capitalism.

Feb 16, 21 8:34 pm  · 
1  · 
randomised

Dude, they first and foremost escape poverty and oppression...it’s not like they run away because they have a startup idea they really need to pitch to Silicon Valley, they don’t even know what capitalism is, they just want out...

Feb 17, 21 2:20 am  · 
 · 
randomised

Bureaucracy/big government can be found in any political or ideological system and its running successfully is not necessarily tied to the politics. Capitalism and bureaucracy can easily go hand in hand...it’s a great way to keep people busy and employed, it’s nice to know that for the incompetent underachievers there’s also a job available, what if they’d all be sacked because the government is run like a fortune500 company...who’s going to feed them and prevent the Revolution from happening in such a dog eat dog world?

Feb 17, 21 2:29 am  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

"We’re going to fight racism not with racism, but we’re going to fight with solidarity. We say we’re not going to fight capitalism with black capitalism, but we’re going to fight it with socialism."


Feb 17, 21 6:35 am  · 
1  · 

I mean let's be realistic: we could spend a billion dollars on federally-employed social workers so that every human had a main contact person to help them navigate the system, then the system wouldn't be keeping people down. Alternatively, if we invested a billion dollars in making all the different agencies communicate completely and transparently so that a human didn't have to run all across town to get any information, the system wouldn't be so hard to navigate and regular people could do it. Instead we have the Texas power gird: vastly underfunded, operating on short-term thinking to survive the next round of budget cuts rather than actually having the security to be able to focus brainpower on solving the problems we face as a society.

Feb 17, 21 9:06 am  · 
4  · 
randomised

It’s actually capitalism that promotes repetition, the more the better, variation is anticapitalist as it is inefficient and expensive and screws up the profit margins, you know for the sake of efficiency and cutting costs...by your own analogy capitalism is a form of insanity(!)

Feb 17, 21 1:15 pm  · 
 · 
randomised

Global warming “a few side effects”? Mass extinction of species “a few side effects”? Global refugee crisis “a few side effects”? Mass deforestation and loss of habitats “a few side effects”? The so-called side effects of capitalism are worse than the presumed benefits when looking at the big picture holistically, no?

Feb 17, 21 3:45 pm  · 
3  ·  1
BabbleBeautiful

Here we go again...capitalism and free-trade vs socialism/marxism...

As I understand it now, ERCOT, is a private non-profit organization and it exists so to rid itself of gov't regulations. In other words, a private organization. Look at where that got them.

-1 for capitalism and privatization.

The issue is and always will be the PEOPLE running the system - whatever that system is.

Feb 17, 21 4:03 pm  · 
1  · 
randomised

Oh and speaking of side effects of capitalism...Marxism itself is a side effect of capitalism too ;-)

Feb 17, 21 4:11 pm  · 
1  · 
...tumbleweed...

Lb, I respect your thoughtfulness, and well spokenness... but this is not capitalism you are talking about, this is socialism, (and too large a government). Prayers that your friend finds housing soon. Maybe charities could help?

Mar 26, 21 8:58 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Good Riddance Limbaugh.

Feb 17, 21 5:33 pm  · 
2  · 

Bringing back memories of being a high school grad framing houses where the boss would tune the jobsite radio to his show every afternoon ... I certainly won't miss him. I do miss working with those guys sometimes though.

Feb 17, 21 5:38 pm  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

In before someone criticizes you for celebrating the death of someone whose entire thing was being hateful and rooting for the demise of rhetorical foes.

Feb 17, 21 5:40 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

In the (almost definitely apocryphal) words of Mark Twain: "I've never wished a man dead, but I have read some obituaries with great pleasure."

Feb 17, 21 6:25 pm  · 
3  · 
Non Sequitur

Please let me know where to send my thoughts and prayers.

Feb 17, 21 6:27 pm  · 
1  · 
Wood Guy

There are very few people I would wish dead, but I have to say that the world is a better place with Rush gone.

Feb 22, 21 12:18 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

...

Feb 24, 21 5:04 pm  · 
3  · 
SneakyPete

Tduds, for a second there, before I realized you had posted an image, I thought archinect had broken.

Feb 24, 21 6:07 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

"Can't trust google!" *incessantly posts links obviously pulled from google searches* 

idk seems like you're finding what you're looking for.

Feb 24, 21 6:31 pm  · 
4  · 
tduds

I'm not defending Google. You're *using* Google and I'm just pointing it out.

Feb 24, 21 7:07 pm  · 
3  · 
tduds

We're on page 9 of this thread and you still haven't figured out that I'm not making counterpoints, I'm debunking / dunking on / laughing at you. I gave up taking you seriously months ago. Catch up.

Feb 24, 21 7:08 pm  · 
5  · 
tduds

sure you are honey.

Feb 24, 21 7:13 pm  · 
3  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

This,

Is gold.

Feb 24, 21 8:14 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

wise.

Feb 24, 21 8:32 pm  · 
3  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

tduds, and by that I mean, SEVEN comments, to your three, the ratio alone, but actually not getting anywhere after SEVEN. Is extraordinary.

Feb 24, 21 9:09 pm  · 
1  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

TEN to 3.

Feb 25, 21 1:33 am  · 
 · 
randomised

Libertarian? ;-)




Feb 27, 21 9:15 pm  · 
1  · 
randomised

Was just kidding

Feb 28, 21 3:34 am  · 
 · 
Non Sequitur

I like the sexy eye-shadow+mascara eyes, Dark Vader helmet and classic brushy moustache on the potato head. Red high heels optional tho, depending on the day’s schedule.

Feb 28, 21 7:33 am  · 
 · 
Wood Guy

I don't know a single person to the left of center who thinks the potato thing is worthy of discussion. Private company, more inclusion, fewer words. Don't you have something more substantial to worry about?

A friend of mine, politically centrist, had this to say: "My company sells over a quarter million pounds of seed potatoes every year. I've never seen a potato with a cock or a vag, or an apron or a mustache. Even biologically speaking, potato tubers have zero sex or gender. The plants themselves are hermaphroditic (both male and female)." 

Feb 28, 21 4:45 pm  · 
4  · 
Non Sequitur

um... exhibit A below.

Feb 28, 21 5:22 pm  · 
3  · 
Wood Guy

Yeah woke culture, that's the real problem in this country.

Mar 1, 21 9:29 am  · 
2  · 
Wood Guy

Mmm hmm

Mar 1, 21 12:19 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Mmmm hmmm

Mar 1, 21 12:21 pm  · 
 · 
Non Sequitur

https://youtu.be/z8lnOA9xgv8

Mar 1, 21 12:27 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

Mmmm hmmm

Mar 1, 21 1:02 pm  · 
1  · 

"It’s undoing all of the progress that we saw from the 60’s -present."

I'm sorry everyone, I gotta take the bait. Please elaborate on all the progress that woke culture is undoing. Seriously. Lay it out 'cause I gotta hear this. Take your time. None of this off-the-cuff hot take crap you're known for that under the slightest scrutiny falls apart. Convince me your statement above is actually true.

Mar 1, 21 4:46 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

hmm...


Mar 1, 21 5:34 pm  · 
2  · 
Non Sequitur

OooooooOoOoooOoO hmmmm

Mar 1, 21 7:05 pm  · 
 · 

Ok, so nothing then. Can't say I expected anything more. If I were trying to make your argument I'd start with defining what woke culture is, naming progress that has been made since the 60's, then show definitively how the culture you previously defined is undoing that progress. But that's just me. You're obviously trying Bannon's "flood the zone with shit" approach. It's not convincing anyone.

Mar 2, 21 12:40 am  · 
1  · 
tduds

I see a pile of conclusions, but a weak thesis and absolutely no supporting evidence. D+ effort, generously.

Mar 2, 21 12:46 am  · 
 · 

For my last term paper in college I turned in a paragraph that just said, "If you, the professor, don't know this already ... I can't help you." I obviously got 100% because that's how the world works.

Mar 2, 21 12:48 am  · 
2  · 
tduds

It would seem we've yet again reached the point you inexorably drag every discussion towards, where one of us has to take the time to explain that it's not so much your ideas that are bad, as your piss-poor ability to expand upon or defend them that makes them / you unworthy of a serious response. And, just as inevitably, whether through some sort of emotional defense mechanism or simple trolling, you'll assume as a tacit acknowledgement of victory. Rinse, repeat, fuck you.

Mar 2, 21 1:17 am  · 
 · 
tduds

Ok maybe what I said above was a little harsh. 

Still, C- on that last reply

Mar 2, 21 11:03 am  · 
 · 

I'm not asking for what the prominent voices are saying to support whatever they are arguing. I'm asking *you* to support what *you* are arguing.

Your comment, "It’s undoing all of the progress that we saw from the 60’s -present," seems oddly specific yet vague and nondescript and I'd like you to elaborate so I might be able to understand what you're getting at. If you need to quote prominent voices, go ahead. But just like you, I can say woke culture (whatever that means, you still haven't defined it) is progressing us more than anything since the 60s and provide no supporting evidence. I mean that's cool and all, but it gets us nowhere.

BTW, anytime anyone says that something is obvious if you just think about it ... it usually means it isn't obvious and they have no supporting evidence, or they are too lazy to provide supporting evidence.

Mar 2, 21 11:44 am  · 
1  · 

"But here’s on obvious thing- racism." Good set up to lay out the topic (though it isn't obvious).

"The goal was once to make race a less important, less deterministic factor in ones identity. Content of character, judge individuals, etc. Thats an undeniably true and modern view." Who's goal was this, where was this goal laid out and defined? You'll need to provide some supporting evidence if you want me to believe this is "undeniably true."

"It’s also effective and has over time led to progress. Since the 60’s race relations have gotten way better because of that notion." Perhaps, but I think the argument was also that it wasn't doing enough and there are still plenty of people that aren't progressing and holding us as a society back. See all the people that came out and starting saying the racist stuff out loud once it was seen as acceptable because POTUS was giving them hugs and warm feelings.

"The woke movement rejects this notion, and instead pushes a bs critical race theory intersectionality narrative. They view race as the most important aspect of ones identity. It’s not. This is not only a false narrative, but it literally is the definition of racist." Define "woke movement." Link to a source on "critical race theory intersectionality narrative" that supports your statement that "they view race as the most important ..."

"Listen to Coleman Hughes or read his essays on the subject. He covers this in great depth and clarity." Provide some links to sources you find most illuminating on the subject. Or give some quotes of in context of your argument.

It's really not that hard to make a strong argument.

Mar 2, 21 11:50 am  · 
1  · 
tduds

If you just read and think all of the things I've read and thought in my lifetime, and ignore all the things I have not read or thought, the conclusions I've reached are self evident. 

No, actually, I won't tell you what I've read. How dare you.

Mar 2, 21 4:19 pm  · 
1  · 

I'm not arguing anything. I'm just asking you to explain your argument.

I'm also not asking for a term paper (I only brought up the idea of a term paper as I riffed on tduds' letter grade because it was funny). All I'm asking for is a coherent argument. This is the last time I'm asking for it. If you can't present one, I'll just assume you have no idea what you're talking about.

Mar 2, 21 4:28 pm  · 
1  · 
square.

i see we're still doing this, huh?

Mar 2, 21 4:31 pm  · 
1  · 

I'm giving you permission to get into the weeds (not that you need it). But it is *your* argument so *you* need to present it if you want to get into the weeds on it.

Mar 2, 21 4:32 pm  · 
1  · 
Non Sequitur

I came here to discuss potato head builds.

Mar 2, 21 4:33 pm  · 
3  · 

I never gave you any "umm hmm" or whatever. I just want to hear you lay out a coherent argument.

Mar 2, 21 4:34 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

My argument is that you suck at making a point, and when asked to elaborate, you stubbornly refuse to. I even said this explicitly a few posts ago, and roughly 2-3 times per month since we first began discussing politics several years ago, so I don't know why it's unclear.

Mar 2, 21 4:35 pm  · 
 · 

NS, if you keep discussing potato head builds, you'll undo all the progress we've made since the 60s. You know, the progress that said potatoes have penises or vaginas. 

Mar 2, 21 4:40 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Please define "woke culture"

Mar 2, 21 4:47 pm  · 
1  · 

If something is not universally defined and accepted, the starting point to define and come to a consensus on it. Not just say it exists and if you don't think so you're not reading and thinking the same way as me. Applies to both Bigfoot and "woke culture."

Mar 2, 21 4:53 pm  · 
 · 

TIL that the Republican party was responsible for "woke culture" in the 60's ... the 1860's. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wide_Awakes

Mar 2, 21 5:08 pm  · 
1  · 
Non Sequitur

define bigfoot

Mar 2, 21 6:01 pm  · 
4  · 

Thanks, I'm won't get into the definition with you, but thanks for providing it. Now, please explain how what you just defined is "undoing all of the progress that we saw from the 60’s -present." You might first start with defining what that progress is so we are all on the same page, then show how "woke culture" is undoing it.

Mar 3, 21 11:44 am  · 
1  · 
square.

i can recognize abstractly the there are issues with "woke" culture- but this mr potato head thing is making a mountain out of a mole hill.

are there people who's worlds are so small that they are enraged by the brand removing mr? while mr and mrs still exist as products?

this is not an issue to the majority of americans; sometimes it's important to recognize when you're spending too much time in your internet bubble.

Mar 3, 21 11:50 am  · 
 · 

.

Mar 3, 21 12:15 pm  · 
 · 
square.

"i don't see race" is definitely one of my favorite mlk quotes.

Mar 3, 21 12:25 pm  · 
2  · 
Non Sequitur

Sorry, been a busy morning and I meant to post this last night. See above build, inspired by this thread's discussions.


Mar 3, 21 12:46 pm  · 
3  · 
square.

just fyi, that's not mlk.

Mar 3, 21 1:13 pm  · 
1  · 

So is it racism, racial relations, and/or racial tension that has seen progress from the 60s until today. You bring up all three in your post but they aren't all the same and you really only make statements that there has been progress with racial relations, and that racial tension has been reduced through overly broad statements. You note that colorblindness "has led us into a better place since the 1960s" but don't address that "a better place" does not equal "the best place" or "a place where racism is solved."

Nor have you really addressed that "woke culture" is undoing, or will undo, "all the progress" that has happened with regard to race since the 60s. All you've done is say that MLK advocated for colorblindness, and that woke culture rejects it (which in itself could be a topic of hot debate without even getting into the undoing progress thing). The whole time apparently assuming that we've actually reached the form of colorblindness that MLK advocated for (or at the very least getting there) and that rejecting it would be detrimental to society. It's a big leap and you haven't really provided supporting arguments in favor of making that leap.

Mar 3, 21 1:18 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

The sheer depth of misunderstanding is kind of impressive.

Mar 3, 21 2:51 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Yeah that's the common line. Yet there are vanishingly few (not zero, but very few) examples of this happening where the things being said were not deserving of the backlash.

Mar 3, 21 3:06 pm  · 
 · 

"in the past stupid people believed that race determined one’s characteristics...it caused lots of problems...we now know that race is a trivial factor..."

One might argue that that trivialization of race and other identity characteristics is the reason we are where we are today with regard to race and identity, both good and bad (you seem to only be focusing on the good while ignoring the bad). All of this isn't to say that one's individual characteristics are not important and that only their racial identity or other group identity is important. Rather it's to say that you can't simply negate *any* part of someone as trivial simply because you want to ... whether it's their race, gender, etc. or other characteristic of their individuality not tied to a group identity.

Also, I said I wouldn't get into your definition of woke culture but I kind of need to now as none of this is really related to your definition of "woke culture" unless you assume this "ideological mindset" is part of the "socially progressive creed" you put in your definition as "absolute, utopian, unquestionable, and unreasonable." You haven't defined what "socially progressive creed" is (let alone why it is absolute, utopian, unquestionable, and unreasonable) so all it really does right now is allow you to lump together anything you don't like and categorize it there as unacceptable and therefore a problem with "woke culture." So what is the socially progressive creed that your definition relies on?

Mar 3, 21 3:08 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

There's a sleight of hand here where you're defining things in terms that people who identify with the movement you're talking about would not use or agree with. You're telling people what they think and then telling them that they're wrong. But your interpretations are simplified and quite frequently mis-conflating unrelated things. It would take a lot of time and effort to really dive into this and you'll just dismiss it anyway so I'm gonna go do something else. I really should just ignore this thread permanently.

Mar 3, 21 3:09 pm  · 
1  · 

So I see we aren't going to respond to my valid questions or criticisms then and instead just flood the zone again. Cool.

There is what is, and how we navigate it. What is cannot change. The past is the past. We should not ignore the past, or its effect on the present. We can however empower ourselves and our culture with a mindset that creates a new path, maybe it's woke-ism, maybe it's not. You say woke-ism is not the right tool box to navigate this reality, but you've offered nothing of substance to support that view. It’s completely counterproductive and divisive.

Mar 3, 21 3:53 pm  · 
1  · 

Your last statement is also a very high-level, lack-of-details view for someone that said, "I’d like to get into the weeds" just yesterday. Seems to me that someone started getting into the weeds and couldn't handle it.

Mar 3, 21 4:09 pm  · 
 · 
square.

Identity politics in general (race being one major parameter) places emphasis on group identity over individual identity.

i'll be honest- there are parts of this i agree with. critical race theory puts primacy on identity through race above everything else. one can't deny race as identity, but overemphasizing it rejects the other conditions (social, economic, political) that also make up identity.

the problem is your cram 30 thoughts into 3 sentences, and when paired together they are incredibly incoherent.

The narrative of victims and oppressors is not a healthy, accurate, or effective way to promote the interracial “brotherhood” that MLK preached, and that we (people growing up pre 2000’s) learned.

this is the next sentence, a rambling, unconnected thought about oppression and exploitation, aka your typical "anti-marxist" bent.

if you stuck to one idea, these might be real conversations. instead you throw whatever latest youtube video you watched in the wall and hope something sticks. there's not debate here. no conversation. just you talking to a wall.

Mar 3, 21 5:06 pm  · 
 · 

I've learned from the past and realized that trying to argue with you without first establishing what page you're on is pointless because you always seem to be on a different page. So I wanted you to define the page you were on, so we could at least speak the same language from the beginning.

I mean you tried to take a comment about how one party is focusing on covid relief and the other is focusing on potato genitalia so you tried to use that to say that wokeness is undoing all progress in the past 50 years (like it was even close to the same page). I'm sorry, that needs a little explaining if you want anyone to take it seriously. Apparently that's too much of a chore for you.

tduds said it earlier, "My argument is that you suck at making a point, and when asked to elaborate, you stubbornly refuse to." I've given you every chance to make your point, you just stubbornly refuse to do so. You wanted to get in the weeds, I'm down here playing in the dirt while you stubbornly refuse to do so.

At this point all I've been able to gather is 1) you think wokeism is bad. 2) You think it's bad because it rejects colorblindness (citation needed). 3) You think colorblindness is good because it was supported by MLK (citation needed). 4) Colorblindness has been the source of all racial progress in the past 50 years (citation needed). Conclusion: Wokeness is undoing all progress in the past 50 years including, but not limited to, Mr. Potato Head's penis. 

Is there any other way to connect the dots you've actually laid out here? I could argue with you on points 2, 3, 4, and your conclusion, but it would be worthless unless you're willing to actually define what page the debate will take place on. I'd provide the page and the context but you'd just dismiss it without offering anything substantial to rebut it except some zone flooding shit.

"Huge chore to bring [me] up to speed" ... please. You're not even close to being at my speed. Come back when you're ready to have a debate.

Mar 3, 21 7:41 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

"He expects me to argue as if he’s unaware of the many arguments that have been made already"

Hey, not all of us spend our entire day digesting Reason, Federalist, and National Review blog posts.

Mar 3, 21 8:26 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

The "dream" of King was to someday build a society in which colorblindness was possible, not to simply decide to be colorblind while still inhabiting our current - quite racist - world. Until we've done the work to undo the cultural & systemic racism built into our world by our ancestors, insisting that we ignore race is to insist that we ignore the pressures and prejudices that have been foisted upon people throughout their entire life *because* of their race. It's callous and it's lazy. 

"you are really saying that identity is immutable, because race is immutable." No, we're saying that we still live in a world where your outward appearance affects your lot in life, and in order to be anti-racist you need to acknowledge that experience in your interactions with people of different backgrounds - whether that's people of color, people of different genders, nationalities, orientations, etc. 

You speak of "a place of heightened enlightenment and perspective" and our counterpoint is that this is the work that needs to be done to get there. We're certainly not there yet.

Mar 3, 21 8:35 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Guess I failed (again) at quitting the thread.

Mar 3, 21 8:35 pm  · 
 ·  1

I'm going to quote tduds because I let the MLK colorblindness stuff go without comment because I was trying to get to something larger without following jla down the rabbit hole, but it shouldn't be left without comment because it is a completely bad take on Dr. King's work and legacy.

"The 'dream' of King was to someday build a society in which colorblindness was possible, not to simply decide to be colorblind while still inhabiting our current - quite racist - world. Until we've done the work to undo the cultural & systemic racism built into our world by our ancestors, insisting that we ignore race is to insist that we ignore the pressures and prejudices that have been foisted upon people throughout their entire life *because* of their race. It's callous and it's lazy."

That is all. I'm going to enjoy a long weekend without feeling the need to get involved in arguments on the internet.

Mar 4, 21 2:25 pm  · 
1  · 
randomised

“ “Diplomacy is back!” President Joe Biden declared at the Munich Security Conference last week. But so is bombing Syria, apparently. Biden has only been president a bit more than a month, but he has already ordered his first bombing campaign. (It took Trump four months to do the same.)” https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/26/biden-iran-deal-diplomacy-syria

Feb 28, 21 2:33 pm  · 
1  · 
bowling_ball

What are you trying to say with that? "Haha! Your guy did the same thing our guy did, which makes your guy worse!"? Something like that? Everybody knows that Biden is a centrist. I don't know enough about Syria specifically, but speaking personally I don't support what I consider to be global military over reach, and violently meddling in the affairs of others, regardless of who's in the White House.

Feb 28, 21 6:07 pm  · 
1  · 
bowling_ball

Deep state? Trojan horse? Establishment? GTFOH with your conspiracy nonsense. Maybe if Trump hadn't so completely and utterly fucked up everything he touched, he'd still be in office. I think I'm putting you on ignore now.

Feb 28, 21 9:02 pm  · 
1  · 
randomised

All I’m trying to say bb is po-tah-to puh-tei-tow...same shit different president

Mar 1, 21 4:08 am  · 
 · 
tduds

By the nature of their job I'd argue all presidents are essentially war criminals. But only Trump was *gleefully* a war criminal. Important distinction, if you ask me.

Mar 1, 21 11:21 am  · 
 · 
tduds

I think begrudgingly accepting the moral quandary of an inherited broken system (even if one were to want to change it, institutional inertia would mean any substantial change takes years) is morally superior to indulging in and actively worsening the system. Not by a lot, but certainly not equivalent. 

Put more simply: I disagree with Biden on policy and individual actions &I'm happy to call him out when his admin disappoints me. I disagreed with Trump on philosophy, character, and direction and I think he nearly brought the system down entirely. 

Better isn't necessarily good, but "not good" isn't just as bad. All things exist on a spectrum. It's not inconsistent to recognize improvement while also recognizing room for further improvement.

Mar 1, 21 12:07 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

That's all I gotta say about that.

Mar 1, 21 12:09 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

The style is not what offends me. The content is what offends me. I'm a brash as fuck Bostonian, but I do it to call out assholes, not be one. Trump is an childish asshole who appeals to other childish assholes. It's nothing to do with "delicate sensilibites" and everything to do with people who were quietly shitty people inside and got permission from him to be loud about it. It's quite simple.

Mar 1, 21 1:02 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

"The people who voted for him are not responsible for his bad deeds." 

I never said they were. Of course you're not responsible for the actions of people you publicly support, but your continued vocal support of that person is - in light of those actions - reprehensible itself. Again this is simple. Quit making me expand on obvious ethical philosophy.

Mar 1, 21 1:20 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

It was a proverbial 'you', obviously.

Mar 1, 21 2:16 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

It's exhausting to keep up with this tendency to introduce a wholly novel concept and/or metaphor with every reply. Good day.

Mar 1, 21 2:18 pm  · 
1  · 
Wood Guy

Tduds, you do know what they say about wrestling with pigs, right?

Mar 1, 21 6:48 pm  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Everything America does in the Middle East can be traced to decisions made right after World War 2. We're managing shit that is 70 years old. If we can stop fucking around, and end the "war" with Iran, we'd actual set a course where 70 years from now, we can have a better situation, and lessen the Saudi bullshit. Political courage is lacking, fuck the Saudis.

Mar 1, 21 7:18 pm  · 
2  · 
randomised

no time to raise minimum wage at home but all the time in the world to kill somewhere on the other side of the world, Biden sure shows his cards :-(

Mar 2, 21 4:34 am  · 
 · 
randomised

no, I was convinced it would pick up again, continue if not intensify...as posted before: 

Mar 2, 21 10:57 am  · 
1  · 
tduds

Well here's a simple uncontroversial opinion that certainly won't ruffle any feathers around here:

"I do not mean that modern American Republicans are communists. Rather, I mean that the Republicans have entered their own kind of end-stage Bolshevism, as members of a party that is now exhausted by its failures, cynical about its own ideology, authoritarian by reflex, controlled as a personality cult by a failing old man, and looking for new adventures to rejuvenate its fortunes."

https://www.theatlantic.com/id...

*pulls pin. runs like hell*

Mar 1, 21 11:26 am  · 
4  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

If I recall correctly, neo-cons, trace their lineage to Trotsky?

Mar 1, 21 7:19 pm  · 
 · 

Meh, it's wishful thinking that the current republican party will implode under it's own failures but it won't. We have a two party system and it's going to be nearly impossible for the current republican party to be forced to change itself.

Mar 2, 21 9:38 am  · 
 · 

Their formula is hate.

Mar 2, 21 2:01 pm  · 
 · 
Wood Guy

To be fair, I know enough R's that I am confident that they are fueled by more than hate. There is also a lot of fear. In fact I think fear is the engine that drives them, and hate is a result.

Mar 2, 21 2:26 pm  · 
4  · 

Racism, bigotry, sexism, and homophobia are hate.

Mar 2, 21 5:49 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

The anger, like the hate, is a product of exploited fear. They know exactly what they're doing, but they were too arrogant to realize that eventually they'd lose control of the asylum.

Mar 2, 21 6:02 pm  · 
2  · 
atelier nobody

I've been characterizing the Republican Party the same way since not long after I left it: 

  • Republican Base: We fear/hate those people so much that we'll accept policies that hurt them, even if those policies also hurt us.
  • Republican Establishment: Economic policies that hurt everyone (except our rich donors and ourselves, of course) coming right up.
Mar 2, 21 6:13 pm  · 
6  · 
atelier nobody

I used "those people" as a catch-all term. There are separate (but often overlapping) constituencies for "those people" being blacks, white liberals, illegal aliens, LGBTQ, perfectly legal Latino permanent residents and citizens, non-Evangelical Christians, "coastal elites", intellectuals, women's' libbers, etc.

Mar 2, 21 6:32 pm  · 
1  · 

Racism and homophobia do play a huge part in this. The current republican party has used it to stir up fear in their base and claim that they are the only ones who can protect them from all the bad things they say non whites and LGTB people are trying to do to 'Murica.

Mar 2, 21 6:49 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Just to bring it back to the original topic, here's some charts. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/22274429/republicans-anti-democracy-13-charts

Mar 2, 21 7:53 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

"All the reasons for the GOP’s turn against democracy — backlash to racial progress, rising partisanship, a powerful right-wing media sphere — remain in force after Trump. The leadership is still afraid of Trump and the anti-democratic MAGA movement he commands. 

More fundamentally, they are still committed to a political approach that can’t win in a majoritarian system, requiring the defense of the undemocratic status quo in institutions like the Senate and in state-level electoral rules."

To use the Soviet comparison, the only reason the Party was able to hang on for so long was the lack of competition. The GOP is approaching this level of out-of-touch-ness, and so the natural inclination is to undermine the mechanisms of accountability that would otherwise keep them in check.

If we had a fair democracy, the Republican party would win very few elections, either driving them towards reform or irrelevance, from which a new 2nd major party would eventually emerge. The only reason the Democrat/Republican divide seems remotely competitive is through a combination of a rural advantage enshrined in The Constitution, and good old fashioned disenfranchisement. They're staking their own success on undermining democracy. The "other side", to put it simply, isn't.

Mar 2, 21 7:54 pm  · 
 · 
curtkram

https://miro.medium.com/max/2590/1*dUTkjI-1JieCQeS_xvJNyA.png can't i just post an image?

Mar 2, 21 8:34 pm  · 
 · 
curtkram

for my dem friends https://miro.medium.com/max/1200/1*oM8JgvgcpwuF_E1DB4sDfg.png

Mar 2, 21 8:36 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

"Did you read the chart in that article?" There are 13 charts, in fact. Did you read them?

"Majority believes fraud occurred." despite *overwhelming* evidence to the contrary, and in line with a series of lies fed to them by elected Republicans and right wing media.

 "Majority believes voting should be easier." Re-read that. A *huge* majority (looks like around 80%) believe voting *should not* be made easier.

Mar 3, 21 12:42 am  · 
1  · 
tduds

I feel like its important at this point to distinguish between Republican *voters* and Republican *representatives* (and the same for Democrats). 

The charts represent mostly polls of voters, but from those results conjecture a narrative about elected representatives (and their media sycophants). For example, the so-called "Big Lie" about election fraud. The voters believe it because the representatives & the media machine planted it and amplified it. I'm not saying the voters are anti-democracy, I'm saying the reps & pundits are, and their ploy is working.

Nevertheless, the point remains that the Republican Party policy is deeply unpopular, and they only win elections through lies and disenfranchisement. If you think otherwise, feel free to plead your case.

Mar 3, 21 1:06 am  · 
1  · 
tduds

Notice the word "possibility"

Mar 3, 21 1:09 am  · 
 · 
tduds

Please stop responding to events with hypotheticals.

Mar 3, 21 1:10 am  · 
 · 
tduds

Please stop responding to events with hypotheticals.

Mar 3, 21 1:11 am  · 
 · 
tduds

I frequently change my mind in light of new evidence. Do you not?

Mar 3, 21 1:12 am  · 
 · 
tduds

No.

the Republican Party policy is deeply unpopular, and they only win elections through lies and disenfranchisement. If you think otherwise, feel free to plead your case. Otherwise, go to bed.

Mar 3, 21 1:13 am  · 
1  · 
tduds

No I suggested they're losing because their platform is quite unpopular, and instead of pivoting to a more popular platform they're using what little power they have left to make voting harder. Hell, they literally torched the official platform in 2020 and exist solely to do what Trump wants (look at the National GOP Convention statement, it is exactly this and nothing more). They're also spinning up a propaganda campaign that seems to be working among their most fervent supporters, which is troubling.

Mar 3, 21 10:50 am  · 
 · 
tduds

I thought it went without saying but I guess I need to say it: The main difference I see between election skeptics on the left and election skeptics on the right is that, on the left these people tend to be far-left, out of the mainstream of Democratic identity (many would balk at being labeled "Democrat" or "Liberal", and largely a "bottom-up" kind of thing. On the right, it's much more "top-down", and completely in line with the mainstream of Republican identity, to the point where it's a primary motivator of their actions within government. Yes, this exists on "both sides" but in wildly different capacities.

You want to talk about 2016? Then look at the two candidates' answers to the debate question "Will you accept the results?"

Mar 3, 21 11:43 am  · 
 · 
tduds

"... allowed the Dems to bend laws, act outside of certain traditions, etc" Give examples.

Mar 3, 21 11:44 am  · 
 · 
tduds

I agree but that's not what we're talking about right now.

Mar 3, 21 11:47 am  · 
 · 
tduds

Lot to unpack there but short answer is *eyeroll*

Mar 3, 21 11:54 am  · 
 · 
tduds

I've said it before but here we go again: For someone so fervently anti-partisan you frequently and uncritically parrot Fox News narratives. I've got a busy workday ahead so I doubt I'll have time to pick apart the subtleties of the 3 things you just said, but suffice to say each one could be its own longform article. Maybe I can find some articles...

Mar 3, 21 11:57 am  · 
1  · 

You know what might be nice in a 2-party, binary star, inevitable implosion, death spiral scenario? That the third party that wants to assert itself as the alternative to that scenario, and eventual savior of cosmic implosion, would come up with new content that isn't just regurgitating the major talking points of one of the stars caught in the death spiral as a way to criticize the other star in the death spiral. Cause in that way it sounds less like the third party is trying to save us, and instead is simply trying to replace one of the stars.

Mar 3, 21 1:25 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Not holding my breath there.

Mar 3, 21 2:50 pm  · 
1  · 

Thanks Biden. My state has now reversed policy to allow teachers to get the vaccine, and I made an appointment for my wife to get her first dose next week. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Mar 3, 21 11:52 am  · 
4  · 

She then goes and shows off by finding an appointment for herself on Friday through a different provider. Which was really the plan all along. Book something just to get it on the calendar, then try to find something better if we could and cancel the first appointment.

Mar 3, 21 2:15 pm  · 
1  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

You mean to tell me, Government, works?

Mar 3, 21 3:37 pm  · 
 · 

Well, leadership from the federal level in this case worked.

Mar 3, 21 3:48 pm  · 
 · 
square.

Dr. Seuss! Mr. Potato Head! Why the Culture Wars Have Never Been Dumber


https://newrepublic.com/articl...

"..it’s worth stressing that the entire episode is embarrassing for everyone involved and deeply stupid. It’s emblematic of the state of the culture wars right now, in which bad-faith nonsense is continuously elevated into existential importance."

couldn't have said it better. this stuff is such a stupid distraction from the material concerns of real americans.

Mar 4, 21 9:29 am  · 
3  · 
Wood Guy

Good, smart, simple article. Thanks for sharing.

Mar 4, 21 10:43 am  · 
1  · 
square.

np- i love new republic, it has thoughtful, sober analysis that like you said is easily digestible. another point i really liked:

Never mind that Mr. Potato Head is gender neutral by design—you can make it look however you want! Never mind that the allegation also wasn’t true—Hasbro was still making Mr. and Mrs. Potato Heads, it had just changed the name of the umbrella brand. And never mind that, in the end, it’s a toy potato.

it's just further proof that the right, aimless without their cult-of-personality leader, are now almost entirely a party of grievance. i miss the days of debating conservative economic policy.

Mar 4, 21 10:51 am  · 
2  · 
square.

Have you noticed that [xlax] treats every instance of leftist lunacy as a [part of a larger trend], and every instance of right lunacy as [an isolated incident]?

see, it's easy to make incredible generic sentences instead of engaging with the specific ideas at hand.

Mar 4, 21 11:05 am  · 
5  · 
tduds

Way to talk past the sale. This can't be an isolated incident of "left lunacy" since it isn't lunacy or leftist at all. It's a manufactured outrage and you're out there guzzling bait.

Mar 4, 21 11:07 am  · 
6  · 
Wood Guy

Yes. Just once I'd like to see him make one, salient response and move on instead of spamming every comment with multiple responses that don't say anything. But maybe that's just me. I guess it's a numbers game for him?

Mar 4, 21 11:07 am  · 
3  · 
square.

it's a combination of delusions of grandeur, paranoia, and distraction from the most shiny grievance of the day.

Mar 4, 21 11:09 am  · 
1  · 
Wood Guy

No, you are using the article to spew the same multiple points you always make. Have you noticed how every other forum regular puts their thoughts into a single response? That's good forum etiquette.

Mar 4, 21 11:12 am  · 
4  · 

No, you're just typing a lot of text without saying anything.

Mar 4, 21 11:13 am  · 
2  · 
tduds

Here are the topics at hand: 

"Dr. Seuss Enterprises won’t be publishing new versions of six books"
"Hasbro is still making Mr. and Mrs. Potato Heads, it just changed the name of the umbrella brand." 

Please, please explain how in the hell these two events are remotely "left lunacy."

Mar 4, 21 11:17 am  · 
6  · 
tduds

Dr Seuss is not getting cancelled. 

To reiterate: "Dr. Seuss Enterprises won’t be publishing new versions of six books"

SIX. BOOKS. Less than 10% of his published work, and among the *least* popular. More than that, the Seuss estate itself elected to stop publishing these books. No one made anyone do anything. No one cancelled anyone. It's a manufactured outrage. Take the L, man.

Mar 4, 21 11:38 am  · 
6  · 
square.

the article that he claims he "read"

clearly went right over his head.

Mar 4, 21 11:39 am  · 
4  ·  1
square.

his attempt at debate completely stunk

on which all of archinect was able to dunk

Mar 4, 21 11:44 am  · 
5  · 
Wood Guy

"Be less white" or "be less of an asshole?" If being less of an asshole makes a company more money, seems like a win/win to me. Manufactured rage from wackos who think potatoes have genders aside.

Mar 4, 21 11:51 am  · 
5  ·  1
gibbost

Just my casual observance, but it seems the neurosis is not from the left but more the odd fascination on the right to bring it to everyone's attention all the time. In the case of Hasbro or the Dr. S Foundation, each of these enterprises simply asked themselves 'how can we do better, how can we be more inclusive?' Many of Dr. Seuss' books touch on environmental awareness, listening to the minority, raising up the weak, and in general, being a decent person (or creature). The Foundation doesn't have to be defensive about racism because they know that the author never intended to hurt with his words. They're simply acknowledging that some of their catalogue is outdated and needs retired. Why does the right have this weird obsession with pointing out the natural progression and evolution of the world getting slightly better each day at a time? Oh yeah, because they see it as a slight against them. 'Your win, is my loss--poor me.'

Mar 4, 21 11:52 am  · 
6  · 
Wood Guy

If the majority thought it was a good idea for you to jump off a bridge, would you do it?

Mar 4, 21 12:25 pm  · 
1  · 
SneakyPete

Nah, but if the minority claimed they had won the poll suggesting he jump, he'd bitch and moan about being prevented from doing so and then whine about how his taxes were being wasted on the facility at which he was being treated at no further cost.

Mar 4, 21 12:32 pm  · 
1  · 
square.

xlax- the majority of the country does not give a shit about mr potato head. they care about raising the minimum wage, unemployment benefits, federal stimulus checks, and health care- all of which enjoy upwards 70% support nationwide.

the irony is that you are the one who is out of touch obsessing about the decisions of private company's toys and children's books.

Mar 4, 21 12:33 pm  · 
3  · 
tduds

This is the free market at work.

Mar 4, 21 12:36 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

80% of people believe a thing that this isn't an example of. Cool. cool.

Mar 4, 21 12:36 pm  · 
4  ·  1
tduds

lol you're all over the map, man. I'm bored, see you in a day or two when you make some other unrelated issue into a crusade about the only thing you're able to talk about.

Mar 4, 21 1:06 pm  · 
4  · 
SneakyPete

...

Don Quijote by Octavio Ocampo | Pinturas ilusionistas, Ilusão de ótica,  Ilusão óptica

Mar 4, 21 1:26 pm  · 
1  · 

x-jla - you're an idiot

Mar 4, 21 1:58 pm  · 
 · 

You're an idiot.

The books where pulled because they where the lowest selling of all of the Seuss catalog - almost zero sales. During market research with a focus group of teachers in the US the six books in question where identified as ones that they didn't use. The teachers also mentioned that there where questionable racial characterchers illustrations in the books as well. Even the late Dr. Seuss said that the six books in question where disappointments and because of his racial drawings in it they should never be sold again.

The company owning Seuss' work decided to pull the six books because they weren't selling, no body was using them. AND they had racial characterchers from early on in Seuss' career as a cartoonist.

No on 'canceled' the books.  

Mar 4, 21 2:10 pm  · 
5  · 
Wood Guy

jla, this game is old. I'm not interested in playing anymore. If anyone wants to have actual discussions, I'm all for it. Your style of "debate" is a complete waste of time.

Mar 4, 21 2:42 pm  · 
4  · 
square.

we were making progress when people ignored him and talked to each other instead. unfortunately, his verbal vomiting is like a car wreck and hard to ignore sometimes, especially by a select few.... while the occasional collective dunking is helpful, trying to engage him point for point is completely useless if others hope to raise the level of discourse beyond toy potatoes and imaginary conservative greivances.

Mar 4, 21 2:49 pm  · 
3  · 
tduds

I'm all for trying to revive this thread again by ignoring or disregarding these rants, to the best of my ability.

Mar 4, 21 3:10 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

Honestly attempting to counter the right's pretend outrage lends it a legitimacy on which they can further their platform, yes. Quit falling for it.

Mar 4, 21 3:35 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spo1jK4CCEU

Mar 4, 21 3:38 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

I dunno man you seem like the angriest one around here by a long shot.

Mar 4, 21 4:17 pm  · 
3  · 
SneakyPete

IM NOT SHOUTING YOURE SHOUTING

Mar 4, 21 4:33 pm  · 
1  · 
square.

dunkkk.

vs what xlax thinks dunking is.



Mar 4, 21 4:45 pm  · 
 · 

Also the one most "religiously" dedicated to a cause.

Mar 4, 21 5:45 pm  · 
 · 

^lol

Mar 4, 21 5:55 pm  · 
2  · 
Wood Guy

^^lolol

I knew it--he thinks the one with the most comments wins!

Mar 4, 21 6:01 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Halfwit Calvinball world champ right here.

Mar 4, 21 6:19 pm  · 
2  · 
randomised

“I retire champion”

Undisputed!

Mar 4, 21 7:08 pm  · 
 · 
square.

please, retire. preferably somewhere off the grid.

Mar 4, 21 8:10 pm  · 
1  · 

Oh man. I just felt a deep pang of sadness over the loss of Philip Seymour Hoffman. I miss him.

Mar 5, 21 9:03 am  · 
4  · 
square.

ugh, for real. every time i see him in a movie it's heartbreaking.

Mar 5, 21 9:15 am  · 
2  · 
tduds

Say what you will about Hillary, she knows how to hire good social media managers.


Mar 5, 21 12:35 am  · 
4  ·  1
tduds

Barr killed Epstein, duh.

Mar 5, 21 2:44 pm  · 
 · 
proto

maybe it was a virus...

Mar 5, 21 4:05 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

I've been trying to figure out a good Epstein-Barr Virus joke for well over a year. The setup is so obvious, yet any clever construction has so far eluded me.

Mar 5, 21 4:26 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

what

Mar 5, 21 6:38 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

ahhhh I get it.

Friday brain.

Mar 5, 21 8:02 pm  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

CAN WE PLEASE STOP CALLING THEM MODERATE DEMOCRATS?

It suggests, in very real language, that the other Democrats are:

excessive, extreme, inordinate, radical
irrational, unreasonable, unreasoning
extremist, fanatic (or fanatical), rabid
unbridled, unchecked, uncontrolled, unrestrained

This is unhelpful to our discourse and has become normalized. I'm also starting to hear mainstream media call it the "Democrat Party."

For fuck's sake, as much as certain rabid, mouth-breathing members might suggest, the media spends WAY more time giving a shit about offending and cow-towing to the GOP than they ever have the Democrats.


Mar 5, 21 5:46 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Call them what they are: sane Republicans.

Mar 5, 21 6:42 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

I'm also with you on "Democrat Party" - like nails on a chalkboard every time I hear someone say it.

Mar 5, 21 6:42 pm  · 
 · 
proto

well, that is the purpose: to demonize the other

That said...I don't necessarily agree with SP that "moderate democrat" is problematic. No one has exclusive right to to the majority view & describing moderates as distinct from progressives isn't divisive as much as descriptive. The label isn't a smear from the GOP but a self-described one.

Mar 5, 21 6:58 pm  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

It's the same issue I have with pro-life and pro-choice. They are cynically chosen self-labels which intentionally cast the people who disagree as bad, not just people with different opinions. The opposite of moderate (excessive, etc) is not what the rest of the democrats are, the opposite of pro-choice (anti-choice) is not what the opposition is, same with pro-life (anti-life?).

Mar 5, 21 7:04 pm  · 
1  · 
proto

I see what you mean, but, at some point, we can only use the language that we have. Perhaps the exclusionary aspect is more in the eye of the beholder/ear of the listener? But my perception may be jaded by my predilections...

Mar 5, 21 7:43 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

I'd counter that we have lots of language, and it's not much effort to carefully choose the pieces of it we employ.

Mar 5, 21 8:02 pm  · 
1  · 
SneakyPete

People often claim I'm overly concerned with the meaning of words, but I figure that makes them anti-semantic.

Mar 5, 21 8:16 pm  · 
6  · 
Non Sequitur

X-jla, please edit your comment and list in alphabetical order please.

Mar 11, 21 11:03 am  · 
3  · 
square.

yes, there are some people who can be described with certain adjectives, and others who can be described using entirely different adjectives!!

Mar 11, 21 11:33 am  · 
1  · 
tduds

My father once knew a man

Mar 11, 21 12:15 pm  · 
1  · 
square.

i like lamp

Mar 11, 21 12:39 pm  · 
 · 
square.

https://jacobinmag.com/2021/03...

The Stimulus Bill Is a Step Toward Aggressively Fighting Poverty


BuT bOtH sIdEs.


it isn't perfect, but even jacobin can recognize that it's the most significant bill in terms of fighting poverty in decades. at this point it's clear who each party represents, both in words and actions.

Mar 11, 21 8:44 am  · 
3  ·  1
randomised

Curious when they will raise minimum wage, hope they can keep the momentum going...

Mar 13, 21 3:13 pm  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Byyyyeeeeee....

Mar 12, 21 8:48 pm  · 
4  · 
randomised

But did you realise other people have feelings?

Mar 13, 21 3:06 pm  · 
2  · 
Wood Guy

Jla, you need more mdma. Or maybe some psilocybin.

Mar 13, 21 3:28 pm  · 
4  · 
Wood Guy

I haven't tried LSD but from what I've heard, shrooms may give you more of the "we're all connected" feeling that right-libertarians seem to be missing.

Mar 13, 21 5:05 pm  · 
1  · 
Wood Guy

"government mandated community or good will" is not the goal of the left, at least not for most of us. It's about not leaving the less fortunate behind while the selfish and greedy bask in their riches. I'm left/libertarian; I get the desire to keep government involvement out of things. But the right--authoritarian and libertarian alike--are entirely focused on themselves and their own needs without understanding or feeling responsibility to the rest of the world. Maybe if you try some shrooms you'll get it.

Mar 13, 21 6:28 pm  · 
4  · 
bowling_ball

So you want to severely restrict government but want to implement UBI. Well I see no contradiction there.

Mar 13, 21 7:56 pm  · 
1  · 
Wood Guy

Labels can be useful. Or more specifically, categorizing viewpoints. But if you really believe in UBI as a solution for addressing poverty and oppression, I agree with you.

I don't see how we can address the climate crisis and other environmental concerns without government help; people in general are far too selfish and self-oriented to do it on their own. The few of us who try are still not doing enough, and are regularly ridiculed for trying.

While spontaneous order may be possible in some cases, entropy is far more common.

Mar 14, 21 11:08 am  · 
4  · 
Wood Guy

I share many of your utopian ideas above. Say we absolve government--every individual is free to do as they wish, around the world. Some realize that if they pool resources they can live easier, more productive lives.

But there is in-fighting because humans are jealous creatures. Small groups start to form, leaders emerge, whether by personality or force.

Small groups join forces to become larger groups, to hoard resources and share labor. The groups are too large for each individual to have a say--they can either choose to take their changes and leave the group, or stay and benefit from sharing of labor and resources. The smaller groups send their leaders as representatives to make decisions. Voila, government.

Although I would love to live in a world of equality and freedom, I can't see any system surviving without some form of government.

Mar 14, 21 1:57 pm  · 
2  · 
curtkram

i think jla needs to look into a guided ayahuasca trip.

Mar 14, 21 2:07 pm  · 
2  · 
bowling_ball

Every culture and society on the planet has some form of government, and has for thousands and thousands of years. It's the only realistic way to get anything done beyond one's own personal subsistence. This entire argument is ridiculous. We can argue about the right strategy - reform, clean slate, whatever - but no society can exist (nevermind thrive) without government.. without it, you're left with individuals living as islands to themselves.

Mar 14, 21 3:16 pm  · 
1  · 
Wood Guy

Jla, if the long game means a post-apocalyptic timeframe where the earth's climate and biodiversity are nearly destroyed and humankind has mostly killed each other off, then I agree--libertarianism/anarchism may well be the rule. Hopefully that's after my time on earth but at the current pace I'm not sure it will be.

On a related note, has anyone read my buddy Dan's sister's latest book: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/54814834-under-a-white-sky? She's a good researcher, thinker and writer. Previously wrote this uplifting book: https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/elizabeth-kolbert.

Mar 14, 21 4:08 pm  · 
 · 
square.

why are we still talking about libertarians as if they are an influential force in politics in this country?

we all know what happened with the bears in new hampshire (spoiler, the bears did very well):

Libertarian vs. Bear

https://newrepublic.com/articl...

Mar 15, 21 9:55 am  · 
2  · 
Wood Guy

Have you read Guns, Germs and Steel? It's well researched and has a different conclusion.

Mar 15, 21 12:27 pm  · 
2  · 
square.

yes. the big government coalition of independent white farmers perpetuated slavery in america.

you have an interesting reading of history.

Mar 15, 21 12:42 pm  · 
1  · 
Wood Guy

I don't disagree that big government is a problem. That's why political tests always put me as a liberal libertarian. While I don't trust large government, I trust big businesses even less, and trust individuals to do the right thing the least. Pooling our opinions via voting and using government to administer the will of the majority should be effective. Our current system in the US has become less and less effective, with a minority now controlling most decisions.

In mostly unrelated news, do any of you read Dr. Heather Cox Richardson's daily letters? She lives not far from me, and is a brilliant historian and communicator. Today's post was interesting: https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/march-14-2021.

Mar 15, 21 1:38 pm  · 
 · 
square.

note the qualifier: "big" government, not "any" government- those are your words. read a little more carefully arch bro.

you two are really trying to argue that the south stood for "big government" (quoting xlax) in the civil war? novel take, for sure.

Mar 15, 21 2:10 pm  · 
 · 
square.

no, not what i'm arguing. you claimed "big government" is the cause of slavery, which has partial truth, but fails to acknowledge what the south stood for, which was small independent farming estates which carried out said violence. nuance. big government also ended the system.

more interested in the convenient yet dubious "center" (often imagined as above the fray) that libertarians claim to occupy, which happens to be an easy way to never be "this side" or "that side."

Mar 15, 21 3:02 pm  · 
2  · 
proto

"I’m not saying “no government” I’m saying minimal government."

A country of 330M spread across climate & time zones & urban/nonurban conditions is a complicated country with diverse perspectives. Our history has demonstrated that people WILL abuse whatever undefined space there is to create personal benefit at the expense of others. The greater good, or community-based good-faith support of the less fortunate, does not happen without organization from the federal government. It just doesn't. The romantic myth of small town caring for your community does not translate to the larger scale of community that dominates our culture currently. To wit, a large segment of society doesn't want "their" taxes to pay for benefits for others.

Mar 15, 21 2:45 pm  · 
4  · 
bowling_ball

Or even simpler: who pays for infrastructure between two or more communities? Who organizes the process? Who ensures that the citizens are safe and getting fair value? Like WG said, I'm also in favour of smaller government, but who gets to decide what's small, big, or appropriate? There are people with PhDs who don't agree on any of these details.

Mar 15, 21 4:59 pm  · 
 · 
proto

Hitting [return] sends the quick reply. You can "edit" your reply to add the other parts of your post to the same post with paragraph breaks & formatting, etc (for a limited time).

Sales tax doesn't decide anything. A person is required...maybe even many people are required depending on the decision's sphere of influence.

Mar 15, 21 7:18 pm  · 
 · 
bowling_ball

Yeah x, that doesn't answer anything.

Mar 15, 21 7:29 pm  · 
1  · 
randomised

x-jla , just type your replies in notepad or email program first and copy paste it in. That’s what Rick is doing ;-)

Mar 16, 21 1:57 am  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

Tell me again how guns aren't the problem. TELL ME AGAIN; I FUCKING DARE YOU.

Mar 22, 21 8:35 pm  · 
3  · 
Non Sequitur

I thought they were the solution.

Mar 22, 21 8:44 pm  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

Feel pretty confident without unmuting you that the proper response is "Fuck off."

Mar 22, 21 9:15 pm  · 
2  · 
Non Sequitur

Very happy that guns for personal protection is not a thing here. very happy. Ditto for real laws with balls that keep murder toys out of the common idiot's hands.

Mar 22, 21 10:22 pm  · 
4  · 
Non Sequitur

Jla, like always, the issue is not mental health. The problem is the cavalier attitude (or the god's given right to own) you express towards ownership. The problem will not go away until people stop buying and carrying silly murder toys. I don't expect you to understand.

Mar 22, 21 10:25 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

Quoting myself from 2014: Guns don't kill people, complex combinations of poverty, chronic bullying, undertreated mental illness, domestic and emotional abuse, hyperbolic political rhetoric, media glorification, and lack of proper gun regulation kill people. With guns.

Mar 22, 21 10:29 pm  · 
3  · 
tduds

The same people who like to yell that Guns Don't Kill People also like to dodge or in many cases exacerbate the problems they themselves point to every time some mother fucker kills people with a gun. If, in 2021, that's still your idiotic refrain, you can kindly see yourself out.

Mar 22, 21 10:30 pm  · 
4  · 
Non Sequitur

^and there's a big part of the problem.

Mar 23, 21 12:05 am  · 
 · 
Non Sequitur

your inane pov Jla. That's the problem... you're one of the crazy motherfucker with guns. No debate here.

Mar 23, 21 12:26 am  · 
3  · 
sameolddoctor

The problem with this country is that the right wing nuts think guns are the solution. The liberals like to give them a free pass and say that mental health is the problem.

Guess what, there are mental health problems in every country, but the mass murders are only in the US. GUNS ARE THE FUCKING PROBLEM YOU BOZOS.

Mar 23, 21 2:06 am  · 
4  · 
Non Sequitur

Not the issue at hand Jla.

Mar 23, 21 10:14 am  · 
 · 
Non Sequitur

Not going to waste time on your sources. Your obsession with silly murder toys is the problem and you, and others with dumb-as-fuck guns are not the problem pov, are major contributors to it. You are partially responsible for the deaths in Colorado.

Mar 23, 21 10:28 am  · 
1  · 
Non Sequitur

not going to waste time looking at your own terrible short comings, typical these days.

Mar 23, 21 10:47 am  · 
2  · 
Non Sequitur

wrong, again... so wrong. Keep your murder toys and keep supporting the nonsense. Such silliness is the fucked-up comfort level you idiots have with that 2A that you can't see your own very real problems.

Mar 23, 21 11:12 am  · 
1  ·  1
square.

it's looking like march madness in here with all this dunking on xlax

Mar 23, 21 11:16 am  · 
1  ·  1
Wood Guy

Jla's link shows a single data source, this ABC article: https://wjla.com/news/nation-world/mass-shootings-in-us-compared-with-other-countries. That article shares a single data source, this website: https://crimeresearch.org/data/. If you click "Op-Eds" on that site, you get a list starting with, "Democrat Hypocrisy" and containing such classics as, "Trudeau’s gun ban won’t make us safer" and, "Punished for tweeting the truth." I think it's safe to assume that their "data" should be considered suspect.

Mar 23, 21 11:29 am  · 
6  ·  1

Who's running the archinect March madness pool for dunks on jla? Where can I fill out my bracket!?

Mar 23, 21 12:01 pm  · 
3  ·  1
Non Sequitur

The families of the victims thank you Jla for contributing to their pain and suffering.

Mar 23, 21 12:11 pm  · 
1  · 
square.

agreed. what would help with this is if you stopped posting.

Mar 23, 21 12:31 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

I wish debate was possible, but it’s not

That's on you, dumbfuck.

Mar 23, 21 12:41 pm  · 
3  ·  1
tduds

Counterpoint: Yup.

Mar 23, 21 1:18 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

"I have a family to protect." 

Statistically the person most likely to be harmed by a gun you own is a family member. It's an oversimplified statistic that I'll admit clouds the narrative, but then again so does the 'data' you posted so we'll call it even.

Mar 23, 21 1:20 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

"Not relevant" might more accurately describe my feelings.

Mar 23, 21 4:30 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

I make my thesis once per thread. It's a few posts up. My posts since then are mostly intentionally lazy prodding. Anyway, back to work.

Mar 23, 21 4:51 pm  · 
2  ·  1
BabbleBeautiful

Regardless of source, I find the study quiet odd and inhumane - and the use of it to justify pro-gun laws even more so. It’s very premise normalizes gun violence. It accepts the fact the US has the highest number of mass shootings in the world and then tries to mitigate it by comparing it against “per capita” as if it has any real relevance to the problem at hand. Here’s the way I look at it and always have - If guns were removed from people’s hands it will reduce unnecessary loss of life. Period. I would sleep much better at night.

Mar 24, 21 3:35 am  · 
 · 
BabbleBeautiful

I think what gets me irked about pro-gunners that use this kind of argument is that even if it were statistically proven that less access to guns = fewer mortality
rate they would immediately jump on the 2A argument.

Mar 24, 21 11:09 am  · 
1  · 

The thing that I don't understand is how people say they need these firearms for protection yet nearly every gun owner I meet has no training and thinks shooting at a paper target 20' away, once a month will prepare them for defensive combat. It won't

Mar 24, 21 11:10 am  · 
 · 
Non Sequitur

Your points are less than moot, JLA. I can't believe there is a place in a apparently developed world, where it is acceptable and celebrated to own murder toys... even under the illusion of your sudden rape scenario. I get it, it's another trolley problem, but instead of picking the best outcome for the largest % (ie. massively reduced gun access bordering on absolute zero and a complete removal of the 2A as a defense for auto ownership "rights"), you choose to set the trolley on fire and toss it into an orphanage.

Mar 24, 21 11:43 am  · 
 · 
BabbleBeautiful

x-jla, look, I've this exact conversation with others with your sentiments and I've come to realize the basic premise of our beliefs on this matter are at odds. We can throw statistics at each other all day long, but your status quo is fear/paranoia and you've accepted the norm that guns need to exist in this society. This is the debate I want to have.

Mar 24, 21 12:17 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

It would seem the disagreement is about who is most vulnerable.

Mar 24, 21 1:00 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

In Trump's case, most of the 2A nuts showed up to fight *for* tyranny. So, idk there.

Mar 24, 21 1:13 pm  · 
2  · 

Everything looks like a nail if all you have is a hammer.

Mar 24, 21 2:36 pm  · 
2  · 
BabbleBeautiful

tduds: "It would seem the disagreement is about who is most vulnerable."

What do you mean?

Mar 24, 21 6:48 pm  · 
 · 
BabbleBeautiful

x-jla: you are basically saying a gun is the and only answer to all the problems your stating. I find this mindset problematic and simply disagree.

Mar 24, 21 6:52 pm  · 
 · 
BabbleBeautiful

I want to be clear. I don't hate guns. As an object and piece of technology/machine I actually find them quite fascinating . I've gone to shooting ranges and played around with them, albeit got bored quickly. I do believe the majority of gun-carriers, hobbyists, hunters are respectful of the power they hold in their hands. I do believe there is an element of mental issues when someone finds it ok to take another person's life.

BUT, my stance is simply this: If we can reduce the mortality rate by removing guns then I'm all for it. We don't NEED them and I'm not going to shed a single tear for the hobbyists or hunters out there. A human life will always take priority.

Mar 24, 21 7:02 pm  · 
1  · 
BabbleBeautiful

Well, if we lived in my utopia then the hypothetical assailant wouldn't have a gun. As for a knife, with 34 years of MMA training you should be able to take him/her down with ease.

Mar 24, 21 7:28 pm  · 
 · 
BabbleBeautiful

It should be a group effort! The burden shall not only be placed my shoulders.

Mar 24, 21 9:20 pm  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

Anyone surprised?

Mar 23, 21 12:43 pm  · 
1  · 
square.

seems like these arguments hit a peak during the trump years, and have not aged well, at all. not that they were ever really taken seriously... looking at you, rudy.

Mar 23, 21 1:02 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

The Far Right Playbook: Lie loudly, apologize quietly.

Mar 23, 21 1:13 pm  · 
3  · 
tduds

You have some kind of disorder.

Mar 25, 21 4:33 pm  · 
 · 

Troll is hungry.

Mar 23, 21 4:49 pm  · 
3  · 
square.

hmm.. not your best.

Mar 24, 21 8:49 am  · 
 · 
tduds

I posted this elsewhere & thought it belonged here. In response to the most recent back & forth but also as a general point of annoyance about certain tactics in this thread:

One thing that really annoys me, that isn't called out enough, is anytime someone points out a huge and obvious problem - like, oh I dunno, gun violence - some rando chimes in demanding specific and well researched policy proposals.

No. I'm not going to do that for you. That's not the conversation I'm having. I'm not going to take the bait that allows you to poke easy holes in the inevitably undercooked ideas I had an hour ago. I'm not going to go on the defensive because you misunderstood my demand. It's not my job to solve the crisis of gun violence. It's not my job to create policy.

It *is* my job to yell at the people whose job *is* to do that. It's my job to hold accountable the people who were elected to craft policy. They put a ton of effort into getting a job whose primary responsibility is to solve problems, or at least try, through policy.

If they want their job so bad, they need to listen to problems and try to solve them. If they are deliberately refusing to do that job, it's my job - it's all of our jobs - to call that out. And, if they ignore us, it's our job to campaign for their challengers.

Mar 23, 21 9:38 pm  · 
6  · 
square.

what annoys me is that your STILL don't understand that people don't enjoy interacting with you on this thread. you're more of a gnat to swat and much less an intellect to banter with.

Mar 24, 21 8:51 am  · 
3  · 
square.

honestly, if you truly want a substantive conversation (which i'm skeptical of), even if we assume everyone else is completely wrong, and you are completely right, you might want to change your approach to "debate," because there is more than enough evidence that it's not working, and it never has been.

your "audience" is over it- change your approach, or move on.

Mar 24, 21 9:04 am  · 
1  · 
Non Sequitur

Gun owners like you are bible thumpers. Same thing, just different sacred cows.

Mar 24, 21 11:44 am  · 
4  · 
tduds

"when big problems are pointed out, a simplistic, too easy, often incorrect causation is identified, and then a knee jerk policy is demanded" 

To me this is indicative of a public education failure, and perhaps a case for more scientists and fewer lawyers in congress.

Mar 24, 21 12:39 pm  · 
2  · 

Ok everyone. We've reached the point where protecting your family (including sudden rape threats in the middle of the night), gun ownership, and Bible thumping / religion have been brought up in the thread that it becomes obligatory for someone to post a link to this twitter thread. I really should have waited for more misogyny to come up, but I have other things to do ... and really, who wants to wait around for misogyny?

So here you go; https://twitter.com/designmom/...

If you need me, I'll be multi-tasking on some specification stuff while waiting for the laundry to finish.

Mar 24, 21 12:33 pm  · 
 · 
Non Sequitur

But the bible is fiction (bad fiction, at best). We wants "facts" so that we can scream without thinking.... and there goes my cap for inteligent comments in this thread. I made it to 2. (2 and half if you count this one). Good thing I just picked up some poutine from the street vendor.

Mar 24, 21 12:37 pm  · 
 · 

The beauty of the thread is that it doesn't matter if you believe it to be the word of God or bad fiction at best. In fact, it probably works better if you do believe it to be direct from God's printer.

Mar 24, 21 12:45 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Way to miss the point.

Mar 24, 21 1:08 pm  · 
5  · 

like did you even read it?

Mar 24, 21 1:10 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

I know you would, jla, cause I've seen your photos in the cookin' thread, but the question that many men would not be able to answer correctly is: Would you clean the house to protect your kids? Would you cook dinner to protect your kids? Would you do laundry to protect your kids? Would you *lock your guns in a safe* to protect your kids?

Anyone who doesn't do those things is not a good parent. Period.

Mar 24, 21 1:12 pm  · 
2  · 

Would you parent to protect your kids?

Or maybe more on point, would you sacrifice your gun fetish to protect your kids?

Mar 24, 21 1:14 pm  · 
2  · 
SneakyPete

Of course the easy way to win this specific ARGUMENT is to declare loudly that OF COURSE I WOULD. But you're not the end-all be-all. You're not the point. You're not even a proper representation of the intended audience, so you're over here on the edge of the war setting up a boxing ring and pretending your personal views somehow have an effect on the larger discourse.

Disclosure: I still have you on mute, so what I wrote above is based on my understanding of x-lax based on past behavior, not specific to his recent comments. How'd I do?

Mar 24, 21 1:37 pm  · 
4  ·  1
square.

dunk.

Mar 24, 21 1:39 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

No true gunsman.

Mar 24, 21 1:42 pm  · 
3  · 

If guns aren't the problem and people are the problem why would you ever give the problem guns?


Oh, x-jla - I'm sure you've been posting a lot of injudicious nonsense but I've blocked you so . . .

Mar 24, 21 1:46 pm  · 
3  · 

jla, you really need to stop taking everything I post as directly targeted at you. The fetish comment was more generally targeted at people with a gun fetish in the terms of the twitter thread ... but be as narcissistic as you want to be I guess.

As for the dangers posed by guns in gun safes to children ... I'll just point out that there have been cases where safes have found to be faulty and even resulted in the death of children who were able to gain access to them. Also, my father (a responsible gun owner) had a gun safe and stored his guns, unloaded, locked inside, with the ammo locked in a different part of the home in a different safe with a different code/key to access it. I think I first figured out where everything was and how to unlock the safes when I was about 10 years old. So overall, I'd disagree that having a gun in a safe does not pose any danger to kids.

Mar 24, 21 2:08 pm  · 
3  · 

I own firearms. I conceal and carry nearly every day. I been trained by experts in defensive handgun combat.  I train a lot with my firearms.  I've had to use a firearm to defend myself form an attacker who broke into my home.

I have no children.

I still lock up my firearms when not in active use. 

When nieces and nephews come to visit the firearms are disabled so they cannot fire.  The parts are stored high up out of reach, then the ammo is stored separately. 

If you have children in your house you NEVER leave a firearm (even locked up) where a child to get to it.  EVER. 

Mar 24, 21 2:10 pm  · 
4  · 
tduds

My dad is a retired cop and I spent the majority of my childhood in the boy scouts, so I know my way around guns & gun safety. I'm with Chad on this. As a kid, our guns were locked in a keyed-safe that only my dad had a key to. More than that, I was taught from a very early age that you don't touch the safe. Frankly, I don't trust any gun owner who isn't somewhat terrified of their guns. In the way that I don't trust a carpenter who isn't somewhat terrified of their tablesaw. If you can't acknowledge the increased risk to your own safety & the safety of your loved ones because of the tool you have, I don't trust you to be responsible with the tool.

Mar 24, 21 2:21 pm  · 
4  · 

Chad's comment's begs the question if there even is a "responsible" gun storage solution for a household with an inquisitive 10-year-old who can literally access every part of his home and had done it because he has an interest in architecture and how houses and things get put together and the mechanical inner workings of things like locks and safes and figuring out what secrets might be hiding in plain sight. 

FWIW, there are no hidden secret passageways or doors behind bookshelves in my childhood home. Though there were decent hiding places in the basement where the floor joists sit on top of the foundation wall once you open up the return air register to gain access to the cavity above the ceiling (not where my father kept his gun safe by the way). 

I can also say that my friend's basement had a purpose build hiding place in the foundation wall that was accessed via a magnetic catch on some plywood paneling that was all hidden behind some artwork (it was empty when we found it, but we soon filled it up with our treasures).

Mar 24, 21 2:31 pm  · 
 · 
Wood Guy

I agree with tduds' comments about tools, except I wouldn't say terrified, but certainly a healthy respect. Partly because I've seen the results of tablesaw, jointer and shaper accidents. I'm not terrified of my guns--they are just tools, after all--but I definitely have a healthy respect for them and wish they would be regulated at least as strictly as automobiles. I learned gun safety at a young age. In 6th grade a classmate shot and killed another classmate (and friend) in the neck and killed him.

I don't have mine locked up but they are well-hidden and their ammunition is not in the same location. Part of learning gun safety is to obsessively check the chamber. I can't pick up a gun without doing so. We don't have kids or really any visitors so it's not as much of a problem as it could be. But thanks for the reminder to get or make a locking safe for them.

Mar 24, 21 2:32 pm  · 
3  · 

I'd say there isn't. The best you can do is keep firearms unloaded, locked up, and if possible disabled with either a trigger lock or a cable lock. Then the ammo is stored someplace else, and again locked.


I like the secrete hidie-hole in the basement you found!  That would be cool for a kid to find.  That brings up a good point - kids WILL find any and all firearms in the house.  

Mar 24, 21 2:33 pm  · 
1  · 

Completely agree Chad. I tend to think of it like when I lock up my bicycle in public. Anyone intent on gaining access will be able to, the locks are just keeping the people without that much intent from trying. 

As a 10-year-old, I had all the intent to gain access. Luckily, I never had any intent to do anything with the guns once I gained access. It was a puzzle for me, not a means for anything else.

Puzzles were really my thing if I'm being honest. Relating to another story about guns, I was the fastest in my JROTC class in 9th grade for disassembly and reassembly of the M1 rifle. I don't remember the time exactly, but it was just a puzzle to me. It was about the only part of the class that appealed to me in any way. Well that, and tracking the shadow line on my desk at the exact same time each day (really another type of puzzle).

Mar 24, 21 2:40 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

EA - speaking from my own childhood, the solution is less about "hiding" and more about awareness. I knew exactly where the guns were, and if I really wanted to I probably could have figure out a way in. But it was *drilled* into my head practically from birth that you don't touch the gun safe. Zero exceptions. Don't even look at it. If you want to go shooting, ask dad. If you mess with the safe, there's hell to pay. 

Wood Guy - That's a good point, maybe "terrified" is an overstatement. Healthy respect, for sure, which imo is rooted in the gruesome knowledge of consequences that come from a lack of respect (the consequences, I guess, are what's terrifying).

Mar 24, 21 2:48 pm  · 
1  · 

tduds, essentially the same for me. My father never tried to "hide" them, I'm just pointing out that if he had, I would have found them. He did tell us to not touch it, but if I'm honest, that just made me want to get into it all the more. He also taught the awareness, well before I ever actually gained access, and would take me shooting as much as I wanted to. I just never really wanted to all that much. I saw no need for it. There was one time in my entire life where I used a gun for anything other than shooting at an inanimate target and it was enough for me that I immediately regretted it because I didn't "need" to do it. There were plenty of other solutions to the problem that would have been better.

Mar 24, 21 3:13 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

It's funny I don't really think of target shooting as "training" for anything. I just like marksmanship. Now that I think of it, I have a similar relationship to running.

Mar 24, 21 3:43 pm  · 
 · 
Wood Guy

Growing up we always had several guns hanging on the wall and ammo was in the adjacent closet. When friends would come over we'd often do some target practicing. But I grew up in the middle of nowhere, and most of my friends grew up hunting, so we followed good safety protocols and nobody got hurt.

Well, there was that one time we convinced a friend who was NOT experienced with guns to hold the 12-ga a few inches from his shoulder, "to absorb the kickback." We didn't realize that he didn't know he shouldn't pull both triggers for the double barrel at once. A few years ago I saw him and he was still pissed about it, 25 years later. Fortunately he didn't break his shoulder. 

With power tools, I learned how to use a table saw and radial arm saw with little instruction; my brother and I were just expected to figure it out, and we did. Though I've had many close calls and I'm surprised I have all of my body parts today. The reason I take issue with the word "terrified" is that I have seen how people act when operating power tools while terrified, or driving, or climbing ladders or walking on roofs. Terror does not lead to good decisions. Confidence and respect, with a dash of fear, earned through experience and education are better qualities to have when in potentially deadly situations, IMO.

Mar 24, 21 4:10 pm  · 
2  · 
SneakyPete

Knew a guy once who was missing his ring finger. Found out he actually lost all of his fingers and thumb to a table saw and the reconstruction was why his thumb looked like a ring could fit on it.

Mar 24, 21 4:26 pm  · 
 · 
bowling_ball

I used to work at a saw mill as a teen. A good percentage of the sawyers were missing fingers and/or had reconstructive surgery. Thankfully I never witnessed any bad accidents, though one guy got run over by an extension-boom forklift one day. We all had to get forklift licenses after that. Ha!

Apr 1, 21 4:27 pm  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

I am obliged to post this.


Apr 1, 21 4:49 pm  · 
 · 
Bench

Just my friendly quarterly reminder that, yes, you can block jlax, and yes, it does make the forum much more desirable to read.

Mar 24, 21 3:14 pm  · 
4  · 
square.

i was off the wagon for a bit.. but i'm back on.

Mar 24, 21 4:40 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

Dude we're playing soccer.

Mar 24, 21 9:34 pm  · 
 · 
Non Sequitur

you sunk my scrabble-ship.

Mar 24, 21 9:37 pm  · 
 · 

I have this image of x-jla sitting at his computer and wondering why no one is responding to him . . .

Mar 25, 21 10:32 am  · 
 · 
Bench

"x-jla is ignored by you"

Mar 25, 21 11:28 am  · 
 · 
Bench

"x-jla is ignored by you"

Mar 25, 21 11:58 am  · 
 · 

'x-jla is ignored by you'

At this point he's just talking to himself . . . 

Mar 25, 21 12:34 pm  · 
1  · 
SneakyPete

Because it looks gooood:


Mar 25, 21 12:35 pm  · 
4  · 
square.


doing pretty well myself here. in no way did i ever think an article about jp+libertarianism would trigger xlax. never.

Mar 25, 21 2:35 pm  · 
3  · 

He's triggered by almost anything.

Mar 25, 21 2:45 pm  · 
2  · 

Can the BGH update the text so that when you have him blocked the text reads "x-jla is triggered by you" ... yes?

Mar 25, 21 3:31 pm  · 
4  · 

Oh gowd, that would be funny. BGH - do it!

Mar 25, 21 4:20 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

You'd think a guy so obsessed with convincing us he should be trusted with guns would be less easily triggered.

Mar 25, 21 4:36 pm  · 
1  · 

Actually, that's a valid point. When you carry a firearm you need to ignore and 'brush off' a lot of stuff. Legally there is a very narrow set of circumstances that allow someone to use deadly force in self defense or the defense of others. Hell, even drawing a firearm is limited to a super narrow set of circumstances.

Mar 25, 21 5:13 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Maybe it's some sort of amnesia.

Mar 25, 21 5:15 pm  · 
 · 
randomised

talking about getting triggered in a debate about firearms...

Mar 26, 21 4:55 am  · 
 · 

I just assume every post jla makes is a obtuse reaction to being triggered.

Mar 26, 21 11:00 am  · 
 · 
square.

https://jacobinmag.com/2021/03...

"Jordan Peterson claims to slay sacred cows and challenge prevailing

orthodoxies. But what he’s really offering is a minor twist on
tried-and-true conservatism — defending existing hierarchies and
opposing the democratization of political and economic life."

essentially my opinion of most libertarians.

Mar 25, 21 11:03 am  · 
4  ·  1
Non Sequitur

Ah yes... JP... typical pseudo-intellectual jive now it bite-size pop culture snippets!

Mar 25, 21 11:48 am  · 
2  · 
Non Sequitur

jla, JP's popularity si due to clueless wankers quoting snippets and treating them like mic-drops. He uses language and typical word definition arguments to appear to make a point all while layering it in a thick coat of social science evolutionary vibe. It's philosophy with training wheels masquerading as critical thinking.

Mar 25, 21 12:01 pm  · 
3  · 
Non Sequitur

^Douglas Adams

Mar 25, 21 12:07 pm  · 
1  · 
Non Sequitur

jla, I don't care much for conclusions. I do care about the process and the way in which they frame their observations that lead to said conclusions. Hitchens and Adams are those I'd consider intellectuals.

Mar 25, 21 12:11 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Solzhenitsyn, now there's an intellectual.

Mar 25, 21 4:41 pm  · 
1  · 
square.

by the way, this link included in the article, is worth visiting. love seeing jp get dunked on by zizek (a real intellectual) - what a hack.


Mar 26, 21 11:10 am  · 
2  · 
bowling_ball

Well this is exciting conversation...




Mar 31, 21 7:32 pm  · 
 · 

You're not missing anything

Mar 31, 21 11:23 pm  · 
1  · 
square.

same here... waiting for someone to post something who is worth while listening to.

Apr 1, 21 10:39 am  · 
 ·  1

While tainting any discussion of it with his bad faith efforts to own the libs, and "give them a taste their own medicine," jla actually brought up an interesting bill. It was introduced in CA regarding social media companies, their terms of service when it comes to hate speech, extremism, foreign interference, etc., and it would be interesting to talk about .. but not here with jla.

I'm not sure if Paul would want to wade into it, but given that he owns a social media company based in CA I'd be interested in hearing his take on it, even if it isn't on the merits of the bill itself but whether or not this would affect Archinect (there are some qualifiers for what constitutes a social media company in the text of the bill).

Apr 1, 21 12:02 pm  · 
2  ·  1
square.

is there a cliffs notes version?

Apr 1, 21 2:08 pm  · 
 · 

Companies have to clearly define and make available the terms of use for their websites and state what can get you banned and for how long.

Apr 1, 21 2:19 pm  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

I imagine a steep downside to this which can be seen in the lengthy EULA hiding stuff that is only "legal" as long as nobody takes the EULA writing company to court. Vague language makes bad law and all that. 

Apr 1, 21 2:22 pm  · 
 · 
randomised

And what's the deal with foreign interference, asking for a friend...

Apr 1, 21 5:00 pm  · 
 · 
archanonymous

The democrats are criminally stupid. 

Should have said, "Look at our nice new infrastructure plan! Exciting! Oh, how will we fund it? With TAX CUTS of course."

Cut taxes (even marginally) for 90% of people and raise them for the groups they were going to raise them on anyways. 

Apr 2, 21 11:07 am  · 
 · 

Too bad the tax increases on those remaining 10% not pay for all the infrastructure improvements but also more than make up for the reduction in taxes in the remaining 90%.

Apr 2, 21 12:42 pm  · 
 · 
Wood Guy

Democrats would fumble a wet dream if given the opportunity. Marketing is not their strong suit.

Apr 2, 21 1:19 pm  · 
3  · 
Wood Guy

I was about to respond but I can't deal with the number of notifications I'm going to get if I do, and I'm not going to change anyone's opinion, so what's the point in posting here.

Apr 2, 21 2:02 pm  · 
3  · 
tduds

The top 10% hold about 70% of the total wealth, so it seems extremely fair that they'd be responsible for *at least* 70% of the total tax revenue. 

Apr 2, 21 2:32 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

The Democratic Party platform is objectively popular and the party is absurdly bad at selling their proposals. The Republican Party platform (well, back when it existed) is objectively unpopular and the party is frighteningly good at marketing to racial and class grievance to garner identitarian support since they lack ideological support.

Apr 2, 21 2:36 pm  · 
3  · 
tduds

It's funny when you get mad at facts.

Apr 4, 21 11:09 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

"taxing the top half into economic pain."

lol


Apr 4, 21 11:11 pm  · 
1  · 
SneakyPete

New page for the rest of us.

Apr 2, 21 2:47 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

We might have a shot at not screwing this one up.

Apr 2, 21 2:52 pm  · 
2  · 
Wood Guy

I finally got tired of getting sucked in enough to put xjla on ignore. So what do you want to talk about?

Apr 2, 21 3:24 pm  · 
2  · 
SneakyPete

In my neighborhood it's become difficult to address problems because things have gotten to a point where institutional and very old failures have created a situation in which one can't say "Man, this place is a mess" or "I do not feel safe" without someone else accusing that individual of intent that was not there, and at most they were simply ignorant of the underlying issues while being a bit selfish with their feelings.

Apr 2, 21 4:59 pm  · 
3  · 
Wood Guy

Social media has changed how we think about and interact with everyone, often not in a good way.

Apr 3, 21 8:58 am  · 
1  · 
randomised

“Social” media...

Apr 3, 21 2:41 pm  · 
 · 
square.

i'm thankful everyday i didn't grow up with social media. this was plenty of social media for me.. was always quite sad to lose stewart to a snake bite:

Apr 5, 21 9:58 am  · 
2  · 

Fancy.

I had this:

Westward Expansion: The Oregon Trail — The Daily Tofu

Apr 5, 21 2:17 pm  · 
3  · 
randomised

“ Social media has changed how we think about and interact with everyone”

I still remember phone numbers from friends and family from the pre-internet/text times...some of whom dead for decades.

Apr 5, 21 2:40 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

I won Oregon Trail IRL.

Apr 5, 21 3:34 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

rando: Smart phones mean I haven't had to actually memorize a phone number in years. I can remember my high school fling's phone number, but sometimes forget my wife's.

Apr 5, 21 3:40 pm  · 
2  · 

tduds - how many of your party got dysentery though?

Apr 6, 21 4:31 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

I got shingles once.

Apr 6, 21 4:48 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

My dog poops on John McLoughlin's front lawn.

Apr 6, 21 4:49 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Interesting: https://apnews.com/article/jan...

“Competitiveness is about more than how U.S.-headquartered companies fare against other companies in global merger and acquisition bids,” Yellen said in a virtual speech to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. “It is about making sure that governments have stable tax systems that raise sufficient revenue to invest in essential public goods.”

While this certainly has its drawbacks & flaws, and it's definitely going to be a huge political lift, I think something along these lines has real potential to quell the rampant off-shoring of profits and the "race to the bottom" mentality that (imo) is largely responsible for the hollowing out of the US' public coffers.

Apr 6, 21 3:50 pm  · 
1  · 
square.

same issue happens locally between states- would love to see something there as well.

Apr 6, 21 4:10 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

...with President Delaware in the big seat I'm not holding my breath on that one.

Apr 6, 21 4:48 pm  · 
2  · 

Yellen finally got something right. States need to do the same thing to keep corporations honest. Many corps get decades-long tax abatements to set up business in a state then move 6 months before the abatement is up.

Apr 6, 21 8:36 pm  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

BUT MILES THEYRE CALLED OPPORTUNITY ZONES. WHY DO YOU HATE OPPORTUNITIES?!

Apr 6, 21 9:55 pm  · 
2  · 

Opportunities for who? The usual suspects.

Apr 6, 21 9:58 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

I get caught up in it sometimes, but to be honest I typically don't give much attention to the "current events" of Politics. 95% of it is soap opera, palace-intrigue, and dumb sports analogue. What *does* interest me is the history of politics, & how policy echoes through the generations, & how it evolves, & how precedent is established and so on. Everything is history. If I can't place an action in a context of decades, it's functionally meaningless.

All this to say I'm going to make more effort to post things like that in here, to hopefully open up some more interesting discussions and drown out the "gotcha!" bullshit that seems to consume this & so many other political online discussions.

First up, this great history on the "New Left" of the '60s. Read it over a couple of drams of cheap scotch the other night and not only is it a fantastic history in itself, I noticed a lot of relevant similarities to today's Leftist (and Leftist-in-name-only) movements. Useful precedent, and plenty of lessons to be learned.

https://www.newyorker.com/maga...

Apr 6, 21 10:36 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

This song explains how I view "liberals" vs. "leftists" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nFvhhCulaw

Apr 7, 21 12:08 pm  · 
 · 
Wood Guy

Tduds, did you read today's HCR post: https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/april-6-2021? I've heard most of it before but I love how she puts things in context. Seems to relate to your post.

Apr 7, 21 12:29 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Trend? yes. Point? no.

Apr 7, 21 1:10 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Thanks Wood Guy. I only catch her posts occasionally, but I always enjoy them. I agree she is great at finding the context of the moment (Others I think are good at this: Daniel Dale, Jared Yates Sexton, & Ezra Klein)

Apr 7, 21 1:11 pm  · 
1  · 

Ukraine redux: war, Russophobia and Pipelineistan

https://thesaker.is/ukraine-redux-war-russophobia-and-pipelineistan/

Apr 10, 21 9:56 am  · 
 · 
randomised

The Biden-Ukraine Conspiracy!

Apr 11, 21 6:12 am  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

This is what pass for intelligent thinking in some circles. If you even spent half-a-minute and read just a little bit of "How To Be An Anti-Racist" you'd find that Black racists exist, something I had a difficult time accepting.

Apr 12, 21 4:55 pm  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]
b3tadine[sutures]

https://www.naacp.org/criminal-justice-fact-sheet/

Apr 12, 21 5:43 pm  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]
b3tadine[sutures]

Everything has gotten worse. This place is just a refection of that. And that trend is accelerating rapidly.

Apr 13, 21 8:57 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

lol

Apr 14, 21 10:51 am  · 
1  · 
square.

this place has somehow gotten worse.

Apr 13, 21 5:04 pm  · 
4  · 

Pagination changed recently. There used to be a comment about a new page and a chance to get it right at the top. Now it's at the bottom of page 9.

Somebody got their comments nuked from the thread. 

archi_dude?

Apr 14, 21 6:37 pm  · 
 · 
randomised

Seems like it...

Apr 14, 21 6:59 pm  · 
 · 

no double standard here:

https://www.instagram.com/p/CNswTDWF9EL/?igshid=4frnnwem29vb

Apr 15, 21 7:21 pm  · 
2  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Maybe the kkkiller kkkops need more training?

Apr 15, 21 7:51 pm  · 
 · 
randomised

So a black guy in a black neighbourhood is killed by cops because of the higher crime in that neighbourhood, the black guy in the white neighbourhood is killed by cops because he looks like coming from a neighbourhood with higher crime? What can black people do to finally not get killed by cops, because it seems to me they're in a Catch-22 situation here...

Apr 16, 21 3:45 am  · 
1  · 

Nothing. The culture is to kill Blacks. Whites don't get executed at random traffic stops. Police, economic persecution, racism, it's all part of the program to maintain an underclass that is used to instill fear in the general population, which makes them easier to manipulate. Hitler did it with Jews, the US is doing it with Blacks, Hispanics, Muslims, Asians ...

Apr 16, 21 10:28 am  · 
1  · 
tduds

More white people swim because of vestigial generational effects from segregated pools.

Apr 16, 21 11:01 am  · 
2  · 
tduds

No one is saying (okay, no one worth taking seriously is saying..) that cops deliberately go out looking to murder some black folk because they're hood-wearing violent white supremacists. What people are saying is that the legacy of racism in this country has left us with a slew of different factors - from poverty to health to crime to education to stereotype to implicit & explicit bias - which American minorities, especially black Americans, being disproportionately impacted by. That's what we keep trying to explain by saying these things are systemic & structural. You just accidentally explained it to yourself above, but you're too arrogant or ignorant to figure that out.

Apr 16, 21 11:05 am  · 
3  · 
tduds

I do agree with your solution though. It's not *the whole* solution, but its definitely part of a solution.

Apr 16, 21 11:07 am  · 
1  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

A system, that has its own historical legacy, tied to capturing runaway slaves, cannot be given the benefit of doubt when it comes to race, and racism. Chairman Hampton was sleeping in his bed, executed by kkkops. Police, real estate, medical, education, governance, all have tentacles in 18th and 19th century racist policies, that they, we, refuse to grapple with, all because, why? Because, that was in the past, yet, it wasn't thousands of years ago, it was only in a handful of generations ago.

Apr 16, 21 11:32 am  · 
1  · 

kudos to jla for making a clear point in one comment using paragraphs and everything.

Apr 16, 21 11:35 am  · 
1  · 
tduds

I can't remember where I heard it first but someone said it seems like America is trying to run out the clock on racism. & sorry but that's not how it works. Inertia won't fix itself, it takes action.

Apr 16, 21 11:42 am  · 
2  · 

Inertia: 

  1. a tendency to do nothing or to remain unchanged. 
  2. a property of matter by which it continues in its existing state of rest or uniform motion in a straight line, unless that state is changed by an external force.
Apr 16, 21 12:06 pm  · 
 · 
randomised

“If you make up 13% of the population and commit 2x the amount of crime you can expect 2x the amount of police interactions and therefore 2x the amount of misfortunes at the hands of bad cops, overly vigilant cops, or negligent cops.”

If you are being singled out more by the police, it only makes sense they are likely going to find something that sticks...it is a self-fulfilling prophecy and a downward spiral in one...as black people also simply show up more in the statistics because they have more police interactions but they have more police interactions because they show up more in the statistics(!)

you can’t find what you’re not looking for...

Apr 17, 21 2:45 pm  · 
2  · 
randomised

That IS how it works x-jla, it's called racial profiling and it targets non-whites specifically and intentionally, richer or poorer...why'd you think Chris Rock had to make his "PSA"?


Apr 18, 21 3:24 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

*Describes the system exactly* 

"See, it's not about the system."

Apr 18, 21 6:40 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

"Telling young kids growing up in the inner city that nothing is their fault is putting them in harms way." 

Good thing nobody's telling them that.

Apr 19, 21 7:58 pm  · 
4  ·  1
b3tadine[sutures]

xlax, you know what you've accomplished here, you and you alone? you've single-handedly have wore the fuck out of the term "woke", in fact 2020 is asking you to stop already...

Apr 19, 21 10:31 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Post some examples then.

Apr 20, 21 5:59 pm  · 
1  · 

I can only imagine what jla is saying in response to this .

Apr 20, 21 3:10 pm  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

There's a verdict.

Apr 20, 21 3:48 pm  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

I expect that we'll be hearing helicopters all evening again...

Apr 20, 21 4:31 pm  · 
 · 

seeing on the twitter that it's guilty

Apr 20, 21 5:15 pm  · 
1  · 

"Former Minneapolis Police Officer Derek Chauvin was found guilty on charges of second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter."

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/live-blog/derek-chauvin-trial-verdict-n1264670

Apr 20, 21 5:17 pm  · 
2  · 

Yup. Guilty. The governor of MN still declared a state of emergency this morning at 7am CST.

Apr 20, 21 5:44 pm  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

HRRRRG!

Sisyphus. The painting by Tiziano Vecellio (Titian)

Apr 23, 21 4:15 pm  · 
3  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Minnesota AIA continues to get it correct.

Apr 23, 21 8:30 pm  · 
3  · 
curtkram

something like this? https://www.aia.org/pages/6303978-racial-equity-initiative-

Apr 25, 21 11:49 am  · 
1  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

People using the term "woke" are either incapable of seeing the systemic problems that exist, or racists. Or both. You decide.

Apr 26, 21 10:13 am  · 
3  · 
Wood Guy

"Woke" is similar to "snowflake"--meant as an insult, but I wear the terms with pride--I'd rather be sensitive to others' plights than to be an insensitive asshole.

Apr 26, 21 10:36 am  · 
3  · 

I wonder what jla's clients would think of his views

Apr 26, 21 10:51 am  · 
2  ·  1

Sorry Chad, strong thumbs down on that one. That's the sort of talk that keeps me anonymous around here. Whether they would love, hate, or be indifferent about his views, that's something you don't mess with.

Apr 26, 21 12:36 pm  · 
1  · 
Wood Guy

As a purely hypothetical comment I think it's fine to wonder, but it does read a bit like a threat. I may not agree with most of XJLA's opinions but he has the right to hold them.

Apr 26, 21 12:41 pm  · 
1  · 
square.

i'm missing the problem here, seems like a bit of an overreaction. unless chad knows xlax's identity, i think the speculation is proving a point. not that i've read a post from xlax anytime recently..

Apr 26, 21 12:57 pm  · 
 · 

I actually do know jla's identity and business. I find many of his comments racist and stupid. However he's allowed to have those opinions as long as he's not causing harm.  Square is correct in my intent though - would jla say these things to his clients?

For me posting anonymous is a pet peeve of mine.  What you say online is no different than saying it in person.  If you're not comfortable with someone knowing who you are online because of what you say then you shouldn't be saying it. 

That being said I do see a difference between posting anonymously to protect yourself from retribution for exposing harmful or illegal actions of others and posting anonymously just so you can get away with saying shit that would get you in trouble.  

Apr 26, 21 1:16 pm  · 
 · 
Witty Banter

"I agree with everything in this statement except “anti-black bias in architecture”. What’s an example of this?"

To begin, that isn't the quote.

"Looks like a lot of typical identity politics bullshit. Any mention of...idk...removing expensive barriers to entry like licensing? Surly if a 15$ id is a barrier to vote then a 2-10 year low paid internship following a 100k degree program must be too, no?"

I'm not aware of AIA National publicly supporting this position but there are AIA chapters working on removing the education requirement as we speak.  My state has an alternative path to licensure and as a member of my chapter's board I have been involved in discussions of how we can support other states adopt similar alternative paths.

Apr 26, 21 1:20 pm  · 
 · 
square.

yeah, i mean you sort of have to be aware that anything you say online could eventually come back to you, even if anonymous. there's no guaranteed protection.

Apr 26, 21 2:39 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

exhibit a

Apr 26, 21 3:47 pm  · 
1  · 
square.

i can't believe i have to respond to this.. but what's the common thread here, mentioned 7 times?

poverty.

Apr 26, 21 4:00 pm  · 
1  · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Wood, I agree, I don't care if people think I'm woke. Dumbasses who do, don't know shit about me. I didn't wake up in 2008 and think that racism was over, just the opposite. It's these racist smear merchants like xlax spreading a blatant disregard for the reality that exists, who often resort to that bullshit.

Apr 26, 21 4:24 pm  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

I wonder how all this garbage reconciles with the idea of a "color blind" society? Color blind, but a limited understanding of one aspect of a culture, means the entirety of that culture is "x". We're one step away from calling Jews good with money, and Chinese are great at math and science, hell everyone knows that all Russians are forced to drink vodka from the bottle at birth.

Apr 26, 21 4:38 pm  · 
 · 
Witty Banter

Just because a colorblind society was your goalpost does not mean it was the goalpost.

Apr 26, 21 5:16 pm  · 
2  · 
tduds

Listen I didn't look very hard I'm sure there are better examples.

Apr 26, 21 5:22 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Anyway my Irish great grandfather famously (within the family, at least) slowly drank himself to death after immigrating because of the lack of social cohesion, constant money worry, and frequent exclusion he faced in America. So, you know, if you see an overlap between a "whiskey culture" and "alcoholism" there's a causal instigator there and its - if not explicit than implicit - racism.

Apr 26, 21 5:25 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

And just for the record, jla, I do not think you're racist. I do think your views are much less examined than you think they are, but not racist. Ok back to lazily trolling...

Apr 26, 21 5:27 pm  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

Of course you'd misunderstand MLK's words. You read them as passive, divinely provided, and nothing could be further from the truth.

Go read a book, or a fucking article.

Apr 26, 21 5:32 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

Which culture does your beating of a dead horse arise from?

Apr 26, 21 6:14 pm  · 
 · 
tduds

*Looking into 'not shutting the fuck up' culture in White America*

Apr 26, 21 6:23 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Sure I could focus on rhetoric, citations, examples, history, etc. but that's only part of the story. Turns out that not shutting the fuck up is considered honorable in some subcultures of White America.

Apr 26, 21 6:24 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

I've even heard that, in some remote villages, shutting the fuck up is considered a violation of ones fundamental rights.

Apr 26, 21 6:25 pm  · 
1  · 
tduds

Look I gave you plenty of heads up...

Apr 26, 21 6:38 pm  · 
1  · 
SneakyPete

Why do we have any lower courts again? Oh, right. To make sure the pea brains in the supreme court's conservative club don't have to work as hard to dismantle protections for everyone who isn't white, male,  a gun, or a corporation.

Apr 26, 21 11:51 am  · 
3  · 
tduds

I think I missed the context that this is referring to?

Apr 26, 21 6:38 pm  · 
 · 

Not sure tduds. Only thing I've seen lately that might fit is the "public charge" rule that SCOTUS essentially sent back to the lower courts. I'm not fully up to speed on it though so I'm not sure if it really fits SP's complaint.

Apr 26, 21 6:53 pm  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

Recent decision to make sure we can keep kids of color in prison for life with no pesky reading or thinking required for the judge or jury, upcoming loosening of gun "rights'," making sure there's no oversight abilities for charitable donations, etc etc.

Apr 26, 21 9:16 pm  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

Point being that the lower court decisions (as well as previous SCOTUS rulings) do nothing except make sure the only cases that percolate up through the system are the ones these shitgibbons can use to the greatest political effect.

Apr 26, 21 9:18 pm  · 
 · 
SneakyPete

x-jla is ignored by you

Apr 27, 21 11:55 am  · 
2  · 
square.

*looks to see if there is anything lively, thoughtful conversation going on*

May 4, 21 12:32 pm  · 
4  · 

.


May 4, 21 1:08 pm  · 
2  · 
Bench

OK now this is getting too meta, most of the thread is me seeing the message "x-jla is ignored by you" and the rest of it is people posting the same thing as images or quotes.

May 4, 21 1:19 pm  · 
5  · 

Block this user


Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?

  • ×Search in: