Dead Reckoning posted:

Really, when you think about it, it was just property being damaged by symbolic fires when the Klan was burning crosses on folks' lawns. Hopefully you see how dumb that equivocation is now.

tentative8e8op posted:

https://twitter.com/shannonrwatts/status/908057513588695040

Jaxyon posted:

Yeah your equivocation is pretty dumb, I agree.

Jaxyon posted:

Basically like burning a cross on a black person's lawn.

Jaxyon posted:

Basically like burning a cross on a black person's lawn.

Dead Reckoning posted:

"Destroying property in order to intimidate people is OK when I agree with the message."

axeil posted:

I think this picture is more a condemnation of the media than anything else.

Grapplejack posted:

Left wing violence is usually thought of in similar ways to what the Soviet Union did when they were gaining power or funding rebel groups. Right wing groups and leaders tended to be US funded and supported, and you've got 60 years of this quiet association peppered into the social unconscious that affects people's views.

Fraction Jackson posted:

I mean, prior to the Russian Revolution, you still had, for example, violent strikebreakers being OK, but unions not, and heaven forbid a union man try to defend himself. Leftist organizing is always seen as scarier than the opposite, despite the nation being founded by revolution against colonialism and monarchy. Something in the culture is inherently distrustful of left-wing influence even when right-wing groups do far more damage to both lives and property, and while the Red Scare probably made this worse I don't think it started with that.

This is something that will take a long time to fix - and needs to be, for the long-term health of the country.

tentative8e8op posted:

https://twitter.com/shannonrwatts/status/908057513588695040

WaPo posted:

Trump, top Democrats agree to work on deal to save DACA

President Trump and top Democratic leaders late Wednesday agreed to work out an agreement that would protect the nation’s “dreamers” from deportation and enact border security measures that don’t include building a physical wall, according to people familiar with the meeting.

The president discussed the deal during a dinner at the White House with Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). The meal included Chinese food and chocolate pie.

In a statement, the White House described the meeting as “constructive” and that it focused on “tax reform, border security, DACA, infrastructure and trade.”

“The Administration looks forward to continuing these conversations with leadership on both sides of the aisle,” the statement added.

But aides familiar with the exchange said that Trump and the party leaders agreed to move quickly on legislation to protect the roughly 690,000 people protected under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program that is set to expire in June.

In a statement, Schumer and Pelosi said they had “a very productive meeting at the White House with the President. The discussion focused on DACA. We agreed to enshrine the protections of DACA into law quickly, and to work out a package of border security, excluding the wall, that’s acceptable to both sides.”

They said the dinner also focused on ensuring that the administration works to shore up the Affordable Care Act in the coming weeks.

Earlier Wednesday, Trump had told a bipartisan group of House lawmakers during a White House meeting that he wants to resolve the DACA issue “real soon,” according to Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Tex.), who attended.

Cuellar said that he told Trump the Dream Act has sufficient bipartisan support to pass and that the White House should be pushing for a vote.

Trump, Cuellar said, told the group: “Oh, it will be on the floor.”

Even if the president and Democratic leaders claim to cut a deal, it will need the support of GOP leaders, who are already wary of the spending agreement Trump brokered with them last week.

Pelosi and House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (D-Wis.) met earlier Wednesday to begin discussing the broad parameters of the forthcoming immigration debate. Ryan’s team signaled that despite the administration’s eagerness to quickly seal the deal, it will take awhile.

AshLee Strong, Ryan’s spokeswoman, said that regarding the plight of the dreamers, the speaker “reiterated that any solution needs to address border security and enforcement, which are the root causes of the problem. Discussions among the Republican conference will continue in the coming weeks.”

Jaxyon posted:

Yeah this is a country that is OK with peaceful groups of minorities being attacked with tanks and tear gas, and a large percentage of the population will call the victims "violent".

tentative8e8op posted:

https://twitter.com/shannonrwatts/status/908057513588695040

Trabisnikof posted:

That's why we need to wait 14 days after any mass shooting before discussing the American Gun Culture is allowed.

Jaxyon posted:

"Garbage cans on fire during an anti-captialist protest and threats to kill black people by racists who have done it and will again are basically the same"

I can do this all day you silly person.

Trabisnikof posted:

That's why we need to wait 14 days after any mass shooting before discussing the American Gun Culture is allowed.

Dead Reckoning posted:

Yes, because trash cans are the only thing anti-captialist protesters have ever damaged. If you want to argue that it's wrong to throw a brick through the front window of a store because it's owned by black people but cool and good to throw a brick through the window of a store because it's owned by a large corporation whose policies you disagree with, that's fine, but I'm not seeing a justification other than "it's OK when I agree with the message" or "it's OK to victimize people who can afford to pay for the damage.""

tentative8e8op posted:

https://twitter.com/shannonrwatts/status/908057513588695040

Scent of Worf posted:

Oh, my bad. It's just that there are a whole lot of supposedly leftist goons running around who concern troll leftism nonstop

Pembroke Fuse posted:

Don't try to politicize it by talking about guns, gun culture, NRA extremism, mental health, social assistance, welfare, spousal abuse or anything really... violent crime happens in a vacuum. There are people, guns and bullets, and sometimes the universe, via quantum jesus mechanics, rearranges them in such a way that a bunch of kids die.

Jaxyon posted:

Also noticing you you've moved from "antifascists literally defending clergy with their bodies"

Jaxyon posted:

This is who Wong's article is written for. People who legitimately think defending against fascists is like KKK burning crosses. The dead end of "both sides bad" moronic thought.

Dead Reckoning posted:

¿Que?

Stripped to its core, your whole argument is that violence is excusable as long as the right ideology is motivating it. Busting up a Chick-fil-A isn't defending yourself against fascists.

Dead Reckoning posted:

¿Que?

Stripped to its core, your whole argument is that violence is excusable as long as the right ideology is motivating it. Busting up a Chick-fil-A isn't defending yourself against fascists.

tentative8e8op posted:

Avoiding such a discussion, in the national sense, makes me so frustrated. I really hope passing real and effective gun control legislation becomes another priority after healthcare.

Lemming posted:

If being hypocritical produced energy your complaining about people excusing violence would be a nuclear loving bomb

tentative8e8op posted:

Avoiding such a discussion, in the national sense, makes me so frustrated. I really hope passing real and effective gun control legislation becomes another priority after healthcare.

shrike82 posted:

What’s Dead Reckoning's gimmick?

tentative8e8op posted:

Avoiding such a discussion, in the national sense, makes me so frustrated. I really hope passing real and effective gun control legislation becomes another priority after healthcare.

Jazerus posted:

fighting poverty would help our society to stop producing hopeless aggressive young males and reduce mass shootings a lot more than any gun control policy that could ever pass on a federal level

america's mass shooting problem is tied to our society not guns themselves

Dead Reckoning posted:

What would that even look like to you? Because nothing being put forward by Democratic leadership is going to reduce the homicide rate. For example, the enactment and subsequent sunset of the 1994 assault weapons ban had no measurable impact on the national homicide rate.

exploded mummy posted:

Pembroke Fuse posted:

Racism is a boring thing that white people love? :p

Dead Reckoning posted:

¿Que?

Stripped to its core, your whole argument is that violence is excusable as long as the right ideology is motivating it. Busting up a Chick-fil-A isn't defending yourself against fascists.

Pembroke Fuse posted:

Yeah. I've pretty much given up on the idea that any politician is going to be able to go up against the gun lobby/culture and win. It would also require a radically different culture, like Australia, where many citizens gladly gave up their guns.

Basically the only way to reduce gun violence in America is to increase education, mental health care and reduce poverty. I find those much more feasible than any kind of meaningful gun legislation at this point. Maybe in a 100 years we will stop fellating our guns long enough to enact something worthwhile.

Dead Reckoning posted:

Stripped to its core, your whole argument is that violence is excusable as long as the right ideology is motivating it. Busting up a Chick-fil-A isn't defending yourself against fascists.

Dead Reckoning posted:

This poo poo right here is why I can't take a lot of the more militant UHC advocates seriously. "Beep boop, just take. all the F-35 money and use it to buy healthcare. So simple." The F-35 program is our only option to recapitalize our fighter fleet at this point, as well as that of several major allies, and canceling it would cause grave damage to our national security. You need to make that hard isolationist sell that we should withdraw from our foreign military commitments and leave Europe and Asia to the wolves. Add to that, canceling the program would result in paying incredibly expensive penalties, because Lockheed wasn't stupid enough to massively stake their company on a program that large without a hedge against shifting political winds. (I'm sure someone is warming up a "hold the MIC leeches over a barrel if they want future contracts" response, to which I would respond that the US government deciding not to pay its debts when it's inconvenient is one of the crises we are trying to avoid at the moment.)

I'm amazed at the stones it takes to describe taxes that need to raise a trillion or so dollars as "modest."