Jump to content

U.S. Politics: A Request to Address the Cleft on the Left


Manhole Eunuchsbane

Recommended Posts

 So in light of the nastiness and general snark that has been tossed about among many liberal/lefty posters here, I wanted to offer an olive branch to those I have been short (or worse) with for the past 10 or so days. By my reckoning this all really started the Friday night before last, when a group of neo-nazis conducted a late night Tiki Torch march at the UVA campus as a run up to their Charlottesville march. 

 Anyway, it took a fairly heated exchange with someone here @DanteGabriel who I consider to be an online friend to get me to realize that I have been hypocritical in some sense. Despite having been the target of some fairly nasty labels and insults myself, I choose to throw gasoline on the fire instead of seeking the high road. An exchange earlier in the week with @r'hllor's red lobster left a similar bad taste in my mouth. I would like to apologize personally to both of those posters for the part I played in those exchanges.

A post by @IamMe90  posted either last night or this morning really made me take a good look at myself and the manner and tone in which I have been posting. It was a really effective call for civility, and I thank him/her for making it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With respect to the First Amendment, we don't have an absolute right to free speech, per SCOUTS. We already have restrictions on speech under existing jurisprudence. The canonical example is the "yelling fire in a crowded theater," but there are others. We do insist that there be a really good reason for it. I don't think there's much doubt that fucking Nazism is a good reason. If you disagree you better have a good goddamned reason.

As for punching Nazis, I'm not suggesting it's legal. I just think it's a good idea, and I'm grateful for the people doing it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Inigima said:

With respect to the First Amendment, we don't have an absolute right to free speech, per SCOUTS. We already have restrictions on speech under existing jurisprudence. The canonical example is the "yelling fire in a crowded theater," but there are others. We do insist that there be a really good reason for it. I don't think there's much doubt that fucking Nazism is a good reason. If you disagree you better have a good goddamned reason.

As for punching Nazis, I'm not suggesting it's legal. I just think it's a good idea, and I'm grateful for the people doing it. 

 Yeah, I'm not going to agree with that in total, but it's not so far off from my beliefs that I need to get snarky or nasty with you or anyone else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

I'm glad to have you back, despite the circumstance. 

I admit, it was a nice bit of catharsis.

I'll do my best to be less of a dick to posters who have the toolkit to engage in discussion, because you're right -- the divided left is part of the reason the right has been able to consolidate so much power -- well, that and the fecklessness of the Democratic Party. I've ranted at a number of Dem fundraisers who keep calling me about their Keystone Kops act.

I'm paying close attention to my local Congressman, a promising young Democrat, a Marine captain who served in Iraq, who's already agitated to replace Pelosi as House Minority Leader. He first earned my approval two years ago, when there was first a hubbub about accepting Syrian refugees (when that shitty M&Ms analogy first started getting memed), and there was a story in the Globe about how he'd already invited his unit's Iraqi translator to live with him in Massachusetts.

Do you have any opinions on Pelosi? I know she's popular in her district and I know she's a hell of a fundraiser, but Jesus God, I think we need some new blood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DanteGabriel said:

I admit, it was a nice bit of catharsis.

I'll do my best to be less of a dick to posters who have the toolkit to engage in discussion, because you're right -- the divided left is part of the reason the right has been able to consolidate so much power -- well, that and the fecklessness of the Democratic Party. I've ranted at a number of Dem fundraisers who keep calling me about their Keystone Kops act.

I'm paying close attention to my local Congressman, a promising young Democrat, a Marine captain who served in Iraq, who's already agitated to replace Pelosi as House Minority Leader. He first earned my approval two years ago, when there was first a hubbub about accepting Syrian refugees (when that shitty M&Ms analogy first started getting memed), and there was a story in the Globe about how he'd already invited his unit's Iraqi translator to live with him in Massachusetts.

Do you have any opinions on Pelosi? I know she's popular in her district and I know she's a hell of a fundraiser, but Jesus God, I think we need some new blood.

 

Pelosi will hang on to her seat. But in truth I would love to see her voted out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said:

Do you have any opinions on Pelosi? I know she's popular in her district and I know she's a hell of a fundraiser, but Jesus God, I think we need some new blood.

 Yeah, I'm with you on this point. I think our reps are too old in general, and Pelosi specifically I think is more of a detriment than she is an advantage at this point. That said, she's not going to go without a fight, and I'm not sure she can be unseated. I guess the 2018 midterms will go a long way in determining how much longer she holds onto the House Minority Leader seat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said:

Do you have any opinions on Pelosi? I know she's popular in her district and I know she's a hell of a fundraiser, but Jesus God, I think we need some new blood.

The democrats absolutely need new blood.  I am not going to support anyone over 65 for President whether it be Sanders or Biden or whoever.  I don't know whether that extends to Pelosi specifically, because the question is whether she can be effective as minority leader in helping Democrats win back the House, and pass legislation if that happens.  On the latter, her track record from 2006-10 was excellent.  On actually winning back the House...hard to say.  I don't think that we should be getting rid of people just because Republicans view them as toxic (they can always make the next person equally toxic).  But I don't put much credence in "great fundraiser" since the Democrats weren't having any trouble fundraising in 2016 (for all the good it did them) and I don't think they'll be having any as long as Trump is in office.  What we need is someone who helps motivate Democrats to the polls, and Pelosi isn't great for that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

But I don't put much credence in "great fundraiser" since the Democrats weren't having any trouble fundraising in 2016 (for all the good it did them) and I don't think they'll be having any as long as Trump is in office.  

Well, the Republicans have been eating the Democrats' lunch on fundraising in 2017, so Pelosi is failing the thing she's supposed to be good at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

The democrats absolutely need new blood.  I am not going to support anyone over 65 for President whether it be Sanders or Biden or whoever.  I don't know whether that extends to Pelosi specifically, because the question is whether she can be effective as minority leader in helping Democrats win back the House, and pass legislation if that happens.  On the latter, her track record from 2006-10 was excellent.  On actually winning back the House...hard to say.  I don't think that we should be getting rid of people just because Republicans view them as toxic (they can always make the next person equally toxic).  But I don't put much credence in "great fundraiser" since the Democrats weren't having any trouble fundraising in 2016 (for all the good it did them) and I don't think they'll be having any as long as Trump is in office.  What we need is someone who helps motivate Democrats to the polls, and Pelosi isn't great for that. 

Personally I don't want anyone to run for President who would be over 70 at the end of a second term--which means 62 is the oldest I would support. And yet a lot of friends of mine who are further to the left than me seem to think I'm being horribly ageist when I express that. (I myself am 66 years old, by the way.) I have one leftist friend in particular who I think is really looking forward to having Bernie Sanders run again in 2020. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

The democrats absolutely need new blood.  I am not going to support anyone over 65 for President whether it be Sanders or Biden or whoever. 

NOOOOOO

NOOOOOOOOO

SUPPORT ANYONE WHO CAN AND WILL BEAT TRUMP

I DON"T CARE IF THEY'RE 95 AND HAVE A COLOSTOMY BAG

VOTE FOR THE COLOSTOMY BAG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, here's a cool thing I found out last year - I'm largely descended from Jews. I didn't know that. But now I can show my line is very, very Jewish.

It isn't that weird of a stretch for a government to want to use Ancestry.com or 23andMe to find out, say, who is Jewish or Arabic or Persian. And that information is technically not owned by me, either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

NOOOOOO

NOOOOOOOOO

SUPPORT ANYONE WHO CAN AND WILL BEAT TRUMP

I DON"T CARE IF THEY'RE 95 AND HAVE A COLOSTOMY BAG

VOTE FOR THE COLOSTOMY BAG

What if the vice president is ancient as well and they both die soon after taking office?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

NOOOOOO

NOOOOOOOOO

SUPPORT ANYONE WHO CAN AND WILL BEAT TRUMP

I DON"T CARE IF THEY'RE 95 AND HAVE A COLOSTOMY BAG

VOTE FOR THE COLOSTOMY BAG

I think those of us who want a younger person for the Democratic candidate in 2020 are talking about our preferences for who we support BEFORE the Democratic convention that year.

If the Democrats are stupid enough to nominate a 95 year old quadriplegic with a colostomy in 2020, I will vote for him or her against Trump. I just think if they do something like that it makes it way more unlikely they can and will beat Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Red Tiger said:

What if the vice president is ancient as well and they both die soon after taking office?

I HOPE THEY HAVE A BACKUP COLOSTOMY BAG

Just now, Ormond said:

I think those of us who want a younger person for the Democratic candidate in 2020 are talking about our preferences for who we support BEFORE the Democratic convention that year.

If the Democrats are stupid enough to nominate a 95 year old quadriplegic with a colostomy in 2020, I will vote for him or her against Trump. I just think if they do something like that it makes it way more unlikely they can and will beat Trump.

Okay, but forgive me if I'm just a smidgen gunshy that democrats are talking about not supporting anyone over 70 literally 3 years before the election that likely had Trump win for precisely that reason

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the end of the day, if there are still elections in 2020, I'm going to vote for the colostomy bag.  I'd just prefer the Dem candidate to not be a colostomy bag.  I want someone who will be capable of leading the Democratic party to success for the sake of all of us.  I just have a hard time imagining that person will be a colostomy bag.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...