LongRider Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 It's Mueller time! Go! Go! Go! Go! Go! Go! "Charges." They said charges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mexal Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 And so it may begin. Uranium One and Dossier stories from the right should have been a hint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueMetis Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 2 hours ago, GAROVORKIN said: As long they don't turn their malicious malevolent and mindless stupidity into action and break the law , they have first amendment rights to express themselves. In the long run these Nazi Fringe dwellers are not going to amount to a hill of beans. - some random guy in Germany circa 1920. Which I suppose was technically correct, but not perhaps in the way we might hope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 Paul Manafort! Micheal Flynn! COME ON DOWN! YOU'RE THE FIRST TWO CONTESTANTS ON YOUR ASS OR TRUMPS! Choose wisely. /https://media.tenor.com/images/395e17b22264b6ad8efca358f3e30cff/tenor.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongRider Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 I bet one American Dollar that Manfort is the lucky recipient of the first unsealed indictment. Bobby Three Sticks has given Manny plenty of attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 1 minute ago, Nasty LongRider said: I bet one American Dollar that Manfort is the lucky recipient of the first unsealed indictment. Bobby Three Sticks has given Manny plenty of attention. Yeah, he's first on the block, no doubt. I wouldn't take that bet. And he looks like a squealer to me. Gonna fold like a 6 dollar Walmart lawnchair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
all swedes are racist Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 news cuts to split screen when mueller is about to announce the first indictment at the same time a scholar at the national archives is about to announce a shocking twist discovered in the released jfk papers.... the babble of two press conferences is unintelligible until — in a moment of perfect synchronicity — they both look up at the camera and say a single name.... JEB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 2 minutes ago, r'hllor's redrum lobster said: news cuts to split screen when mueller is about to announce the first indictment at the same time a scholar at the national archives is about to announce a shocking twist discovered in the released jfk papers.... the babble of two press conferences is unintelligible until — in a moment of perfect synchronicity — they both look up at the camera and say a single name.... JEB http://www.bankers-anonymous.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Jeb.jpeg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lokisnow Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 10 hours ago, Ormond said: Oh they aren't? I myself remained a registered Republican for over a decade after I started regularly voting for Democrats. And certainly there are many people out there who consider themselves Independents who, rightly or wrongly, will be turned off by Democrats calling all Republicans "Nazis" and so will be less likely to vote for Democrats because of that. True. There are republicans that vote democrat. Just as there are Nebraska alumni who root for Oklahoma when the two teams play each other. they are very rare of course, because most people don't switch teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 I have to say that outside of the breaking news aspect of this story, the coverage has been dry as all hell. Parade of legal wonks describing the process of a Grand Jury with a sprinkling of speculation as to who the indicted party might be. I guess it's a confirmation of just how tight a ship Mueller runs, which is a good thing, but this story is going to be a slog, methinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 On 10/26/2017 at 9:40 PM, r'hllor's redrum lobster said: lol, what about them? they are cruel and evil motherfuckers that should [have] be[en] fucking hanged as well. Ok. If you think Bill Clinton should be hanged I don't think any discussion is going to be productive. On 10/26/2017 at 9:40 PM, r'hllor's redrum lobster said: like, do you really think he was incapable of understanding invading two nations and launching a poorly planned war would just like, surgically strike out the "bad guys"? and you really, really believe he thought what he was doing was morally right, especially irt iraq? gtfoh Yes, the administration was overconfident with poor planning. I don't even get how that's a question. From myriad statements from all involved - most famously Cheney on MTP - to Woodward's accounts, they clearly did not understand what the hell they were doing. And yes, I do believe Dubya thought what he was doing was right. You get out of here. Anyway, sorry I seemed to start something here that I still haven't caught up with. It's like I took a crap then left for about 30 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 14 minutes ago, dmc515 said: Anyway, sorry I seemed to start something here that I still haven't caught up with. It's like I took a crap then left for about 30 hours. And nary a courtesy flush! Bad form, ser. Bad form indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 4 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: And nary a courtesy flush! Bad form, ser. Bad form indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 5 minutes ago, dmc515 said: Not bad, but I'll raise... /I've got a Flush Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 24 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: Not bad, but I'll raise... /I've got a Flush I see your Powers with Butters: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 11 hours ago, mormont said: Sometimes, in politics, you win by winning people over to your side. Sometimes, though, you win by defeating them. Sometimes you need to show them that they're wrong, instead of persuading them that they're really reasonable people. Sometimes you need to say 'you realise that these beliefs are not new, that they are in fact the thing we sacrificed so many lives to defeat, that we are so proud of vanquishing and we must vanquish again'. Sometimes, in short, you need to show a little leadership. That's what's missing from your strategy, with all due respect. Sadly, it's also missing from the political scene in your country and mine. This is well said, particularly in regards to the lack of leadership, but I think it misses the point that both I and @Tywin et al. ** are making. There is a way to "craft a message" without impugning individuals. To take your example, you can say the travel ban or perhaps Shelby v. Holder (2013) is cruel or even evil. But once you say that individuals - officeholders and citizens alike - are themselves evil, cruel, or - as seems to be en vogue around here - Nazis for holding such beliefs, you instantly turn off an important portion of the electorate. Pew just came out with a very interesting typology that distinguishes certain groups within each party. At least a substantial portion of four of those groups - Market Sceptic Republicans & New Era Enterprisers (GOP); Devout and Diverse & Opportunity Democrats (Dem) - disapprove of Trump right now. You know what's a great way to turn them off to the Democratic message? Engaging in rhetoric that accuses political adversaries of being cruel, evil, Nazis, or rightfully being hanged. How you defeat them is by saying the policies propagated by the GOP are cruel. Otherwise, you're going to cue these voters' susceptibility to racial resentment and turn them off to your message. **BTW Ty, I agree with mormont and others on your "typology" of alt-righters. There's no differentiation between white nationalist, white supremacist, and Nazi. If you're willing to identify yourself as a white nationalist, that just means you're not comfortable calling yourself a Nazi - yet. There's no spectrum or slippery slope here, and there's no utility in distinguishing between them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horza Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 On typology: there are differences within the far right in terms of ideology, priorities, language, class and style. Witness the contempt highfalutin' silicon valley neoreactionaries have for swastika-tattooed types, or the friction between blut-und-boden 14 words natalists and those wacky media provocateurs like Milo and Baked Alaska. There are ideological fault lines that run quite deep between socially conservative milita/patriot types and impious neonazis (mostly condensible to a question of whether Jews or Muslims are the biggest menace to the white race) and differences over strategy and campaign style, hilariously illustrated in this encounter. It's important when discussing these proud dipshits not to give the impression that they're an overly uniform bunch, but by the same token, the same was true of the Nazis themselves. What unites the far right, and what it ultimately stands for hasn't changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 23 minutes ago, Horza said: There are ideological fault lines that run quite deep between socially conservative milita/patriot types and impious neonazis (mostly condensible to a question of whether Jews or Muslims are the biggest menace to the white race) and differences over strategy and campaign style, hilariously illustrated in this encounter. What exactly are the ideological fault lines? Not trying to be a dick here, honestly don't see it. If it's really just whether Jews or Muslims are the greatest satan, yeah, that's really not ideological. File that more under stylistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rippounet Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 I have no problem calling all political racists nazis, but I'm don't mind being called a communist either (I have no opposition to communism on principle). Are you guys really ok with erasing all subtelty and nuance from political discourse though? You have to realize it's a two-way street. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horza Posted October 28, 2017 Share Posted October 28, 2017 54 minutes ago, dmc515 said: What exactly are the ideological fault lines? Not trying to be a dick here, honestly don't see it. If it's really just whether Jews or Muslims are the greatest satan, yeah, that's really not ideological. File that more under stylistic. Why would that be stylistic? It's a difference with clear implications for domestic and international political priorities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.