r'hllor's red lobster

u.s. politics: molotov cocktail through the overton window

334 posts in this topic

1 hour ago, r'hllor's red lobster said:

lol buddy thats what we've been saying

Maybe everyone's just been taking turns misunderstanding each other heh heh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Zorral said:

but-BUT-But- BUTTTTTTT -- what about her e-mails??????????????????????

huh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, IamMe90 said:

Maybe everyone's just been taking turns misunderstanding each other heh heh

Apparently.

1 hour ago, r'hllor's red lobster said:

Yeah this is McCain gone wild.  Ya got Corker against it - 

Quote

Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., said he voted against the defense bill because the measure "blows the budget caps by nearly $83 billion." Corker, who chairs the Foreign Relations Committee, also said the overseas missions account is "repeatedly abused" to pay for normal operations.

And, as per usual, an incoming SecDef tries to close bases, and Congress says NEVER!

Quote

As their House counterparts did, the Senate bill rejects Mattis' plan to launch a new round of base closings starting in 2021. He told lawmakers in June that closing excess installations would save $10 billion over a five-year period. Mattis said the savings could be used to acquire four nuclear submarines or dozens of jet fighters. But military installations are prized possessions in states and lawmakers refused to go along.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, r'hllor's red lobster said:

no, that's not all he is saying. he has repeatedly equated antifa or anyone willing to use violence against the far right nationalists as 'just as bad as nazis' 

In terms of enthusiasm for violence, that's not an inaccurate statement. But I've not read any suggestion that the ideological position should in anyway be equated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

In terms of enthusiasm for violence, that's not an inaccurate statement. But I've not read any suggestion that the ideological position should in anyway be equated.

if that's your definition, it's so broad as to be meaningless. but, seeing as there are any number of defining traits that characterize nazis/fascists, beyond the simple use of or "enthusiasm for" violence, we can all agree that it is a wildly inaccurate statement and move on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, r'hllor's red lobster said:

lol buddy thats what we've been saying

Is it though? It seems there are plenty of people among those who oppose the WS&N who are quite enthusiastically in favour of a strategy of violence. And it seems Antifa very much has violence as part of its strategic plan to oppose.

If I am wrong that some people on this forum are in favour of planned, premeditated violent attacks on WS&N groups then I apologise for mis-reading them. I'm not sure I am wrong though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, r'hllor's red lobster said:

if that's your definition, it's so broad as to be meaningless. but, seeing as there are any number of defining traits that characterize nazis/fascists, beyond the simple use of or "enthusiasm for" violence, we can all agree that it is a wildly inaccurate statement and move on

If the goal is to uphold the rules of democratic society, then it is essential to condemn violence on all sides, and uphold the rule of law.  Assaulting your fellow citizen is wrong, whether antifa punches the nazi, or the nazi punches antifa.  An the party that is attacked has the usual rights of self defense, whether he is antifa or nazi.

When nazi and antifa are attacking each other in the streets, the only responsible thing for a leader to do is to condemn violence on all sides.  The nazi, accused nazi, or non-nazi, must be assured that the law will protect him when the antifa vigilante mob targets him.  Otherwise, such citizen must take up arms in his own defense, as he has no other reasonable option.

Certainly, the ideas of both antifa and nazi should be rejected.  But judging souls, and condemning souls to hell, and deciding which sinners will burn in Hell the longest, should be left to theologians.

As to that, the rule among Christians is "Judge not lest ye be judged" and "Love thine enemy."

The rule among certain Progressive moralists, apparently, is "Thou shalt hate the nazi with all thy heart, all thy soul, and all thy being.   And anyone who thou hatest, thou must call a nazi".  But that is their religion, not mine, and I reject it absolutely.

Edited by Lew Theobald

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

If the general public see’s what they perceive as the left promoting violence then they’ll equate that with the more clear promotion of violence by the right.

There's an article about this in the generally anti-Trump Bloomberg:

Quote

 

I don’t have an ironclad date for when antifa became a recognizable, and destructive, force in our politics. But I really began to notice them around the time of Trump’s election, when I saw people defending their actions on the grounds that they were trying to stop Trump from being “normalized.” It was argued that protesting-as-usual -- show up, mill around for a while, chant a bit, and then go home to see how much news coverage you got -- was inadequate to our uniquely dangerous historical moment. Stronger action was called for.

I think it’s safe to say that Donald Trump has not been normalized by anyone. The media treats him with deep contempt -- mostly earned, I’d argue, but still not the normal way you expect to see a president portrayed. Foreign leaders sure don’t seem to think he is normal, and nor do the bureaucracy or the courts. And partisans on both sides are behaving distinctly abnormally. They do not see themselves as arguing over policy or even values, but as engaged in an existential battle between good and evil, with President Trump as the avatar for one side or another.

But the process of not normalizing Trump has instead normalized a lot of other things, bad ones. Like public disorder. Like persistent, pervasive anxiety that often looks like mass hysteria. Like people on both sides who try to minimize the illiberal tactics of the radicals on their own side by pointing mostly to the offenses of the other.

 

I think the antifa and their supporters are underestimating how disliked they are, both in terms of the number of people who dislike them and the intensity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Is it though? It seems there are plenty of people among those who oppose the WS&N who are quite enthusiastically in favour of a strategy of violence. And it seems Antifa very much has violence as part of its strategic plan to oppose.

If I am wrong that some people on this forum are in favour of planned, premeditated violent attacks on WS&N groups then I apologise for mis-reading them. I'm not sure I am wrong though.

 

2 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

There is a difference between violence as an immediate, protective reaction to a dangerous situation, and violence as a premeditated political strategy.

the anti fascists are taking immediate protective action in standing up to a dangerous situtation, to whit the violence as a premediated political strategy inherent to fascism and white supremacy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh no, i am coming down on the wrong side of the morality fence as altherion and lou thrawnbold, must be time for some serious self reflection

eta: linking an op ed decrying violence by megen fucking mcardle lmfao

Edited by r'hllor's red lobster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Altherion said:

There's an article about this in the generally anti-Trump Bloomberg:

I think the antifa and their supporters are underestimating how disliked they are, both in terms of the number of people who dislike them and the intensity.

You have to also consider that humans have a tendency to create dualities, even if they are nonsensical. Hence why violence on left can be equated with violence on the right, even if they’re in no way equal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a sad day when you realize Archie Bunker is more Progressive and more coherent than the POTUS in 2017:

(heads up, this contains some fairly offensive language as Archie Bunker was meant to satirize the 1960s-era American bigot)

Got me thinking about sanctuary cities though. It's interesting that with a man like Trump in the White House and the GOP controlling both houses of Congress, it's now liberals who are using the doctrine of State Rights to protect their ideals from federal overreach.

Edited by Let's Get Kraken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now