US Politics: Rural Southernification… (thanks Zorral)

[mcbigski]

2 hours ago, Arakan said:

 

That mcbigski user used the example of Hunter Biden to show how corrupt and self-serving the Democrat Elite actually is. True self-serving elitists, preaching of all the good things while actually just abusing the minorities for their own goals. That’s what he wants to convey. And now all of you are forced to defend nepotism and corruption within your own in-group. 

Biden is a representative of the elite. Hunter Biden and his shady deals are a sign of nepotism and corruption. But it doesn’t matter. Shades of Grey. 
As if the mcbigski user whould really care about this. All of his beloved Republicans are corrupt and self-serving to the bone, all of them representatives of the elite. He only cares that you and other defend Biden to get his soundbites.

Call a spade a spade. Deny them the oxygen. Even if Biden were corrupt, that doesn’t devalue his fight for the rights of minorities. 

Though obviously the Democrats should take a long look at themselves as well. Self-improvement is a real thing. And they should fight to de-monetize electoral campaigns. I think we can all agree. Not only is the increase in campaign costs over the last 20-30 years INSANE, it also fucks over democratic accountability and independence of representatives. It’s fucked up and basically everyone knows it.

Well I feel like calling me "mcbigski user" is a way to dehumanize me and make violence against me acceptable.  But at least you got the capitalization right, a lot of posters miss that.

And I was pretty drunk the other night, but I'm pretty sure I posted that the Republicans are almost as corrupt as the Democrats at the national level when it comes to fleecing the non elites.  So I think we actually agree there.  Kind of like how Charlie Stross kept going off in his blog about British politics and what he called either the Greys or the Browns, essentially an elitist uniparty conspiracy fucking over the rank and file citizens.  Same thing happening here.  (Though Stross wants a collectivist solution, and I certainly don't, but we the people are getting fucked regardless.).

Though speaking of minorities, what's the Black unemployment rate trend these days?  Trump did more for the working class than Biden ever will (save perhaps Russian pipeline construction workers).  Do you really think the bottom quartile of workers, regardless of race, are doing better now than they were 3 years ago?  

Apparently where we differ most is that I think Biden is a fantastic example of how DC is so corrupt, but you seem to still have loyalty to your team, regardless.

As for solutions, I'm all for decentralizing power, taxation, and spending, and letting local jurisdictions have more influence.  Does anyone actually think that having a few hundred people responsible for allocation $3 to $5 trillion in spending annually is going to make for efficient results?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 minutes ago, mcbigski said:

Well I feel like calling me "mcbigski user" is a way to dehumanize me and make violence against me acceptable. 

You did write this:

On 9/5/2021 at 9:41 PM, mcbigski said:

So to the extent Biden has a mandate, it's for more white supremacy. 

But hey, calls for more white supremacy on Rosh Hashanah. What could be problematic about that? 

[DMC]

36 minutes ago, mcbigski said:

Though speaking of minorities, what's the Black unemployment rate trend these days?

Please stop with this idiotic horseshit ignoring the impact of covid.  But, hell, even if we want to take your brainless and blatantly misleading tack here, you're still wrong.  Black unemployment was 12.8% a year ago under Trump.  It is now 8.8% under Biden.  Clearly, the black unemployment trends under Biden are far superior than under Trump!

[DireWolfSpirit]

2 hours ago, ThinkerX said:

from what I have seen, Conservatives are motivated by fear.  Almost all of their articles and propaganda pieces I see on FB and elsewhere are rooted in an overriding fear of dang near everything.  Hence

They need to surround themselves with walls of guns and ammo.

[Ivan Tsarevich]

16 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Your directionality is wrong though. I agree both sides shouldn't be at each other's throats, but the liberals are not the side hoarding guns and sinking into violent fascism. That's the conservatives, and there's no denying this, both here in America and in many parts of Europe as @Arakan has correctly pointed out. There's a reason why various agencies have said that the biggest threat of terrorism is coming from right wing white nationalist organizations, just like the ones that attacked the Capitol on 1/6. You can't compare anything the left has done to that.

My directionality was what it was for the simple reason that I expect most of those who witness this to lean left. As I have said before:

Quote

I have at no point said that the Republicans don't also engage in the common-enemy identity politics. But I'm not talking with Republicans here, am I?

You can see a change in direction in my last post which you quote, where I address practically everyone involved, as there also seems to be right-wingers around.

As for the threat of white nationalism, yes, I happen to share that view.

16 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Moreover, your approach is just wrong. It often boils down to you arguing that the abussor's thoughts and feelings need to be considered too. Since Rosh Hashanah beings today let's use Jews and Neo-Nazis as an example. Do you seriously believe that a Jewish person should have to do the heavily lifting on extending empathy to a Nazi while expecting nothing in return from the other side, because that's basically what you've written the entire time? In your words it's been constantly that the left needs to understand the right without even attempting to argue the reverse.

The abussor's thoughts and feelings do exist, and so they matter, for merely practical reasons if nothing else. And no, I don't think the victims should do the heavy lifting. I would hope they would try to refrain from worsening the situation, though.

For not arguing in reverse, see above.

16 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

In the very post you linked you said as much, that you were not going to do what you were specifically asking others to do and called their actions bad faith.

Yes, not my best moment. What can I say? That I actually expect good faith, when I really don't take it for granted? I posted because I had something to say.

And I have seen what you and some others have said.

6 hours ago, Arakan said:

This thread gives you a perfect example of the modus operandi of intelligent fascist extremists and it shows that you cannot „win“ such a discussion.

In case I happen to be a subject in question: you guys keep giving me alerts, some of which I choose to reply, as well as some things I also happen to see, such as this. Another way to end the discussion is stop talking to me.

[Week]

5 hours ago, mcbigski said:

Though speaking of minorities, what's the Black unemployment rate trend these days?  Trump did more for the working class than Biden ever will (save perhaps Russian pipeline construction workers).  Do you really think the bottom quartile of workers, regardless of race, are doing better now than they were 3 years ago?  

Apparently where we differ most is that I think Biden is a fantastic example of how DC is so corrupt, but you seem to still have loyalty to your team, regardless.

Was it the $2T in tax cuts that predominantly went to the rich? Or the random tariffs used as a cudgel against foreign leaders he didn't like? Or the mismanagement and cutting of the CDC which hamstrung the pandemic making lockdowns and death worse? The corrupted PPP payout that we're still finding out more about - <2% to black owned businesses but millions to connected donors (not even getting into the Kushner's PPE debacle). 

What specific policy or law had a discrete impact on the bottom quartile? What benefitted people other than the ongoing economic recovery in line with the previous 10 years? 

As for Biden, if you think this board is overly rosy and supportive then you need to read this thread without beer goggles. He's been a disappointment this far, though at least a reprieve from the gross incompetence of the previous WH. Corruption? After the blatant self dealing over the previous four years?? I can't imagine what you'd think if Hunter Biden worked in the WH, he was given a security clearance against recommendations, and then proceeded to deal with corrupt foreign powers. You know, the Jared/Ivanka method. Or have you so quickly forgotten?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 hours ago, Week said:

I can't imagine what you'd think if Hunter Biden worked in the WH, he was given a security clearance against recommendations, and then proceeded to deal with corrupt foreign powers. You know, the Jared/Ivanka method. Or have you so quickly forgotten?

Let's just revisit 666.

[gruff one]

59 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Let's just revisit 666.

 

59 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

 

Shady shit going on there. I don't think anyone on this board would deny it. There does seem to be a bit of don't look look at our shady shit (Hunter Biden).

[Zorral]

This is politics and how it works, when the rubber meets the road instead of in the realm of fantasy --

"The disastrous voyage of Satoshi, the world’s first cryptocurrency cruise ship
Last year, three cryptocurrency enthusiasts bought a cruise ship. They named it the Satoshi, and dreamed of starting a floating libertarian utopia. It didn’t work out"

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2021/sep/07/disastrous-voyage-satoshi-cryptocurrency-cruise-ship-seassteading

Quote

 

Politics would be rewritten. The beauty of seasteading was that it offered its inhabitants total freedom and choice ...

Their vision was utopian, if your idea of utopia is a floating crypto-community in the Caribbean Sea. No longer was seasteading a futuristic ideal; it was, said Romundt, “an actual ship”. The Satoshi also offered a chance to marry two movements, of crypto-devotees and seasteaders, united by their desire for freedom – from convention, regulation, tax. Freedom from the state in all its forms. But converting a cruise ship into a new society proved more challenging than envisaged. The high seas, while appearing borderless and free, are, in fact, some of the most tightly regulated places on Earth. The cruise ship industry in particular is bound by intricate rules. As Romundt put it: “We were like, ‘This is just so hard.’” ....

 

 

[Week]

1 hour ago, gruff one said:

Shady shit going on there. I don't think anyone on this board would deny it. There does seem to be a bit of don't look look at our shady shit (Hunter Biden).

What is Hunter's current role at the WH or anywhere in US government? 

What oversight role should the US government plan in first families and their adjacents? Current there is none beyond the regular laws that govern private citizens. I'm sympathetic to the idea and discussion that there should be more restrictions and oversight -- that coming as a response to the last debacle and to avoid any in the future.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, gruff one said:

 

Shady shit going on there. I don't think anyone on this board would deny it. There does seem to be a bit of don't look look at our shady shit (Hunter Biden).

Plenty of people here have said some of Hunter Biden’s business deals don’t look above board, but there’s nothing yet that’s been shown to be criminal as far as I’ve seen. And sorry, it’s not a surprise that the son of a rich and powerful person has a ton of connections most of us would never have.

[Larry of the Lawn]

 

Reducing the $ in campaigns is going to be very difficult while Citizens United is still a thing.  I'm not sure that legislation could realistically do much to reduce money in politics.

On a tangential form of corruption,I think it was Barbara Lee who proposed not allowing MOC's or their immediate families to own any publicly traded stocks?  Seems like it couldn't hurt.  

 

[DMC]

13 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

Reducing the $ in campaigns is going to be very difficult while Citizens United is still a thing.  I'm not sure that legislation could realistically do much to reduce money in politics.

Well, theoretically this isn't true.  Legislation could be passed that circumvents/neutralizes Citizens United and/or further regulates Super PACs.  Practically, though?  Yeah that ain't happening.

[DireWolfSpirit]

1 hour ago, Zorral said:

As Romundt put it: “We were like, ‘This is just so hard.’” ....

How old were these guys?

That sounds like something a first year worker says while doing "hands on" for the first time.

[Mlle. Zabzie]

1 hour ago, larrytheimp said:

 

Reducing the $ in campaigns is going to be very difficult while Citizens United is still a thing.  I'm not sure that legislation could realistically do much to reduce money in politics.

On a tangential form of corruption,I think it was Barbara Lee who proposed not allowing MOC's or their immediate families to own any publicly traded stocks?  Seems like it couldn't hurt.  

 

Can’t see that as a realistic or effective proposal.  Law firms and investment banks deal with this all the time.  I own plenty of stocks - I have one account over which I do not have trading authority (I set parameters, etc., but don’t pick stocks and don’t direct activity).  I own a few individual stocks outside that account for reasons, and if I want to do anything with them, I have to get sign-off from our internal ethics board, to affirm, among other things, that we (as a firm, not just me) do not have MNPI  with respect to such stock.  Even mutual funds and commodities funds can be problematic and are subject to this rule - and same for Congresspersons - Congress knows stuff with respect to them too.  Heck, currencies (ditto), etc. etc.  So, you know, it’s totally do-able to put something in place if the political will existed.  But to ban ownership?  Seems shortsighted - where could a congressperson put their money that government doesn’t touch?  It’s already not that great of a job, why make it even more punitive?

[Kalbear]

3 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Plenty of people here have said some of Hunter Biden’s business deals don’t look above board, but there’s nothing yet that’s been shown to be criminal as far as I’ve seen. And sorry, it’s not a surprise that the son of a rich and powerful person has a ton of connections most of us would never have.

That's it I'm never voting for Hunter Biden again

[mormont]

I understand the Texas governor has a plan to ensure the state's new laws don't force women to carry their rapist's baby to term.

He's going to eliminate rape.

Why did no-one think of this plan before? Brilliant in its simplicity.

https://www.businessinsider.com/abbott-says-he-will-eliminate-rape-texas-abortion-law-2021-9?r=US&IR=T

[Zorral]

Abbot's going to eliminate all rapists from the streets.  What about in the bedrooms, bars, workplaces, etc?

This clown knows as much about rape as he does about reproduction -- like all those clowns know nothing of these matters and don't care to know -- and don't want women to know either -- no teaching of sex education in the schools by golly.

[DMC]

57 minutes ago, Kaligator said:

That's it I'm never voting for Hunter Biden again

Been wondering why the fuck we're talking about Hunter Biden so I googled.  Apparently House Republicans want to probe his art dealings and...his daughter Naomi just got engaged.  Her fiance interned for Hillary's 2016 campaign.  Let's check the emails and get to the bottom of this!

[Varysblackfyre321]

24 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Abbot's going to eliminate all rapists from the streets.  What about in the bedrooms, bars, workplaces, etc?

The problem is that would acknowledge the fact that the vast majority of sexual assault including do not happen between strangers, but people who’ve a pre-established relationship. A woman is twice as nearly twice as likely to be raped by their husband or boyfriend than a scary stranger prowling the streets.