|
Javes posted:Wouldn't any evidence obtained via a warrantless stingray be immediately thrown out in court? That's called fruit of the poisonous tree, and yes. However, all the police/prosecution has to do is explain a legal means by which they could have obtained that evidence and it's right the gently caress back in. edit: And I should stipulate that's entirely up to the judge.
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 17:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 09:22 |
|
|
Boon posted:I take particular offense to these types of posts because they are often breathless, lack any real understanding of the basics of how our Congress function, and have no real historical consistency. I imagien the thought process goes, 'this is a good idea, we should do this' and then quickly ramps up into 'anyone is stupid if they don't immediately recognize the superiority of this now'. In the business world strategy and implementation is an argument that occurs between people who want to put one before the other, when the real solution is that they are intertwined, that policy/strategy is the fun part but implementation is always a meticulous, boring slog. Many of our so-called 'leftists' do not seem to grasp that principle, or at least do not clearly articulate it. *holding the fetal position in post-apocalyptic building basement* trust the process. trust the process. trust the process
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 17:35
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:lmao, what? You know Mao may have been wrong about economics and how to run a society. But he was right about liberals. Mao posted:To indulge in personal attacks, pick quarrels, vent personal spite or seek revenge instead of entering into an argument and struggling against incorrect views for the sake of unity or progress or getting the work done properly. This is a fifth type (sic) of liberalism.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 17:35
|
|
|
i don't understand this argument
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 17:36
|
|
|
just reposting for the new page if anyone's interested in reading about how stingrays have been used: here https://theintercept.com/search/?s=stingray two titles include "Maryland Appellate Court Rebukes Police for Concealing Use of Stingrays" and "NYPD Attempts to Block Surveillance Transparency Law With Misinformation" plus there's a bunch of other goodies within the articles. Chilichimp posted:That's called fruit of the poisonous tree, and yes. yeah its pretty much this. they gather it illegally and work backwards to come up with a way it was legally gathered. or just call it confidential and talk with their buddy the judge who ok's it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 17:37
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:"i think the democrats should put all their weight behind supporting UHC. in addition they shouldn't put their thumb on the primary scale and should get rid of super delegates. finally, they should be as obtuse and obstinate in opposing all republican legislation as the republicans were during the democrats reign. the democrats should use the time before the 2018 and 2020 election to come up with a clear plan that emphasizes economic, racial, and social justices, firmly establishing themselves as the party of the people and doing everything they can to publicly shed their corrupt image." RaySmuckles posted:but that's the catch, i think they use it to find other evidence that they then bring to court. Seriously dude? You made some screed of a post and I attempted to tell you why I find the posting so empty personally and then you took a poo poo onto your keyboard with some third-person conversation and then attacked me. How do you not see the irony? Also, your post attempting to dispel the idea that those are solutions is an excellent example. What the hell is anyone supposed to take away from that other than 'yeah of course'? It's so completely lacking in any context and the realities of conflicting interests. There is a complete lacking of an understanding of externalities or acknowledgement of the challenges in doing so. How do you deal with Congressman who are nominally a part of your coalition but are from more conservative areas and who don't necessarily agree 100%? How do you deal with conflicting interests over any given bill? How do you handle counter-messaging and the marketing attempts of your opponents, business interests, and lobbying groups who may have more money and a wider reach? How do you make people who don't agree with you engage on the process? How does a minority party move their interests through the labyrinth of Congress without accepting concessions or having a seat at the table? Boon fucked around with this message at 17:42 on Sep 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 17:38
|
|
|
Rigel posted:OK, this is a whole new level of stupid. Do you think congress lacks security? Congratulations, you just got a whole lot of idealistic idiots arrested, and they are now facing horrifyingly stiff prison sentences. Meanwhile the media narrative has shifted towards the Dems being an unreasonable, unruly mob, opinion in middle America shifts from "oh my God Trump is horrible" to "geez, both sides are bad", and persuadable votes who could have helped sink this horrible, very real health care bill harden to voting yes to show they don't stand with the mob. That leads to tens of millions of Americans losing health insurance and tens of thousands needlessly dying every year. The justification you give here for opposing direct action could have been ripped straight from white moderates in 1963, who claimed to support equal rights in principle but condemned the civil rights movement in practice. In fact, there are famous articles from that era that say pretty much exactly that, although I think MLK's response is probably better-written than any response I can give, so let's have some excerpts from the Letter From A Birmingham Jail. quote:You deplore the demonstrations taking place In Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations. I am sure that none of you would want to rest content with the superficial kind of social analysis that deals merely with effects and does not grapple with underlying causes. It is unfortunate that demonstrations are taking place in Birmingham, but it is even more unfortunate that the city's white power structure left the Negro community with no alternative. quote:You may well ask: "Why direct action? Why sit-ins, marches and so forth? Isn't negotiation a better path?" You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent-resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word "tension." I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half-truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, we must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. quote:I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 17:38
|
|
|
AriadneThread posted:i don't understand this argument liberals mad they are being attacked from the left leftists mad at liberals for still chasing a fantasy of centrism individual variations on the theme exist, but that's most of it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 17:40
|
|
|
Boon posted:Seriously dude? You made some screed of a post and I attempted to tell you why I find the posting so empty personally and then you took a poo poo onto your keyboard with some third-person conversation and then attacked me. How do you not see the irony? whatever boon. i've been reading your trash posts for years. go back to describing missile systems or whatever it is you think you know about. it is within this moment that i realize i have no interest in arguing with you because after reading years of your posts i realize its not worth the energy and never has been. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 17:40
|
|
|
Incredibly wealthy 1st world county
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:whatever boon. I take this passive-aggressive dismissal as a distinct inability to engage on a serious level. So why are you here? I don't expect you to have answers to those questions I listed, but they're pertinent questions to any discussion about USPOL or really any organization attempting to do anything. Boon fucked around with this message at 17:47 on Sep 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
AriadneThread posted:i don't understand this argument a bunch of stupid loving jackassess that can't keep the leftist/liberal slapfight contained to the designated leftist/liberal slapfight thread
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 17:44
|
|
|
You dumb motherufkcing commies just need to trust the loving process goddamnit. Step 1: Trust the process Step 2: Good poo poo happens, INCREMENTALLY Step 3: Poor people die at a slightly lower rate
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 17:44
|
|
|
ruangaucho just close the thread for a few hours please
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
Boon posted:I take this as a distinct inability to engage on a serious level. So why are you here? well, first i posted in frustration of seeing the exact same dynamic of the last 2 years playing out once again with the "in-crowd" of liberals trying to remove people who dissent with them by appealing to mods and ops then i responded to a personal attack then i remembered fully who you are and realize that trying to respond to "well then why haven't you solved all the world's problems yet" is not going to be constructive or beneficial in any way. i don't need to prove myself to you in any way and can post wherever i drat please. for instance, actual articles about stingray on this very page.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 17:47
|
|
|
Well, this is just the bad thread now
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 17:48
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:Well, this is just the bad thread now i thought the stingray conversation was relevant and interesting 
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:well, first i posted in frustration of seeing the exact same dynamic of the last 2 years playing out once again with the "in-crowd" of liberals trying to remove people who dissent with them by appealing to mods and ops I'm not sure who the 'in-crowd' is, there isn't some kind of chat thread for some cabal of goons that I'm aware - these are it. I went back and re-read my original quote of your post and I don't see any personal attacks either, and didn't until you got super pissy and wanted to call me out specifically. None of the questions I listed are 'solving the worlds problems' they're very specific procedural questions that account for every day USPOL disucssion. It's cool not to have answers to them, none of us do, if we did Congress would have a 100% approval rating. But as it turns out, they don't, we don't, and here we are - but the problem I have with 75% of you, Ze Pollack, Condiv, and others is that when you post about one news update or another it is in the vein of 'Democrats bad' without ever trying to understand the wider context or implications and the questions I listed. How can you effectively advocate for any kind of policy change without understanding just why it is Democratic leaders might negotiate with Trump on DACA, or why they might be willing to make a concession on one policy for a win in another? Often time when I post it's not that I'm necessarily even in disagreement about the larger point, but I might be in disagreement with how the conclusion was reached. You might say that Democrats should make no concessions ever, and that'd be fine to justify your position, but what is the wider implication of that? If no one is willing to continue to be an adult in the room and try to hold the process together, what does that mean for US society at large? At what point does the US itself begin to unravel to an unrecoverable point? Why do we think that the country as it exists today is and will continue to be whole? Boon fucked around with this message at 17:58 on Sep 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 17:51
|
|
|
Boon posted:If no one is willing to continue to be an adult in the room and try to hold the process together, what does that mean for US society at large? At what point does the US itself begin to unravel to an unrecoverable point? Why do we think that the country as it exists today is and will continue to be whole? what a goddamn drama queen you are yeah I'm sure society will fall apart and people will regress into an ape-like existence if the dems find a spine and some vaguely leftist policies
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:00
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:Well, this is just the bad thread now At least people are calling out racism and the like now. I remember when black posters had to come in and explain an inordinate amount of poo poo and we'd always get shat on for calling out microaggressions and dog whistles. People forget that the whole reason USPol closed was because of abuse hurled at black posters (as well as unfair moderation - a racist would start an argument and not get probated but the black poster telling them to gently caress off would get like a 3 day ban) and Exmarx was too busy to keep up with it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:00
|
|
|
Barbe Rouge posted:what a goddamn drama queen you are Wrong thread.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
Boon posted:You might say that Democrats should make no concessions ever, and that'd be fine to justify your position, but what is the wider implication of that? If no one is willing to continue to be an adult in the room and try to hold the process together, what does that mean for US society at large? It seems to me that gridlock would be the outcome, which is infinitely preferable to getting any significant portion of the Trump/GOP agenda passed into law. Again, I think you're still operating under the assumption that the Democrats can successfully appeal to voters by being the adults in the room. Recent history has kind of undermined that hypothesis, don't you think?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
This thread is incredible.RaySmuckles posted:its just amazing to see the same bullshit of the last 2 years still going on. Best post in the thread.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
Majorian posted:It seems to me that gridlock would be the outcome, which is infinitely preferable to getting any significant portion of the Trump/GOP agenda passed into law. Again, I think you're still operating under the assumption that the Democrats can successfully appeal to voters by being the adults in the room. Recent history has kind of undermined that hypothesis, don't you think? I think gridlock is largely what we have now. A Congress in which both parties engage in the same tactics that the GOP did in the last six years of the Obama presidency (which is mostly unprecedented) - stonewalling SCOTUS noms for increasing lengths of time, no ground given, no discussion with the other side or else you'll be primaried, using policies which are largely ideological acceptable as political weapons against he opposition is a complete failure of the Congress. Anyone posting in these threads should know, it's been discussed often enough, that the GOP is the party of the two who went hard right. The Dems have relatively maintained their ideological position over the years. Should the Dems do what Smuckles advocates and go hard right, there is no recourse. How do you mend that gap? Which country through history has overcome such a political divide without a major external kick? In my opinion, once we hit that level of unwillingness to engage we're at potential civil war levels. The difference between the Civil War era and now is that the geographic lines aren't as clear. It's cities vs rural as opposed to north vs. south. Boon fucked around with this message at 18:09 on Sep 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:04
|
|
|
If you want to argue Leftists vs Liberals/Democrats take it to the loving Dem thread. Don't make me bother the other mods and admins to shut you dummies up. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:05
|
|
|
Majorian posted:It seems to me that gridlock would be the outcome, which is infinitely preferable to getting any significant portion of the Trump/GOP agenda passed into law. Again, I think you're still operating under the assumption that the Democrats can successfully appeal to voters by being the adults in the room. Recent history has kind of undermined that hypothesis, don't you think? Gridlock IS the plan, once we get past the reconciliation bill that the Democrats aren't strong enough to block. My proposal was that ONE of the things they might be doing is not targeting voters, but rather specifically targeting John McCain. I'm not sure that's what they're doing, but anything that secures his opposition to this new bill is good IF it was political theater only. They might also have been trying to give them 1% of their agenda in order to not have something apocalyptic like Graham-Cassidy passed. I'm not convinced that's what they're doing, either, and I'm also not convinced that's a very good plan. But if you're seriously staring down the barrel of one of the worst serious repeal proposals it might seem smart to dodge it at the time. theflyingorc fucked around with this message at 18:11 on Sep 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:05
|
|
|
Boon posted:You might say that Democrats should make no concessions ever, and that'd be fine to justify your position, but what is the wider implication of that? If no one is willing to continue to be an adult in the room and try to hold the process together, what does that mean for US society at large? At what point does the US itself begin to unravel to an unrecoverable point? Why do we think that the country as it exists today is and will continue to be whole? welcome to the genuine problem you have spent so long trying to avoid. there is a fundamental fault in the structure of American democracy, and it is a Republican Party that refuses to govern. our question to you is what makes you think that continuing to compromise with them will cause them to change their minds. or, to put it a little more plainly, how many rights, laws, and human lives are you willing to sacrifice to get to be the Adult In The Room for letting Republicans run the country.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:07
|
|
|
It occurs to me that it is not clear who the leftists and who the centrists or liberals are supposed to be. I'm also given pause in that now the word I heard being used by Rush Limbaugh growing up as a catch all for The Bad People is being used unironically in the same way in this thread. May I suggest people consider exactly what their point is?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:08
|
|
|
Boon posted:Losing power after an 8 year President isn't particularly noteworthy in history. *Loses every branch of government, including presidency to the most hated, unpopular, and unqualified candidate in American history. *Loses following Congressional races, including the most expensive race in history where the candidate underperformed compared to an empty suit. "I don't see how this is noteworthy. You sir have NO idea how Congress works. So don't complain and leave Washington to us experts."
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
Koalas March posted:If you want to argue Leftists vs Liberals/Democrats take it to the loving Dem thread. Hamilton is LMM's most weakest work. Also the flint thing is why I seriously support bringing back branding.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:May I suggest people consider exactly what their point is? everyone but me is wong and i can prove it 
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:*Loses every branch of government, including presidency to the most hated, unpopular, and unqualified candidate in American history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_party_strength_in_U.S._states You'll see what you want to see. But what I see here is a historical trend of wide shifts that take years to form and take years to swing. We're at the apogee of a conservative swing so it shouldn't be all that surprising. For my part, was I dismayed that Clinton lost? Yeah, absolutely. Was I surprised - not really. Boon fucked around with this message at 18:14 on Sep 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
i see no reason the dems should make concessions with the republicans since the republicans refuse to do the same. if the dems are the adults in the room and the only party willing to compromise then anything short of moderate conservative policy is already out the window by definition. sure they may be "holding the process together" but to what end? it only serves to further the conservative agenda since only one party is willing to compromise. all concessions will by nature only benefit the republicans. instead the democrats should be appealing directly to the people. they should ignore the desires of the donors and instead try to offer the american people things that will objectively make their lives better. incrementalism and capitulation to the republicans has gotten the democrats no success and has alienated their base the example that stands out to me is something i heard on chapo. the republicans put something like 200 amendments into the ACA and still, still, the ACA receive ZERO republican votes. now maybe that's not 100% accurate but the point stands that the democrats just let the republicans walk all over them thinking "this time they'll have to play ball." but the republicans never do, so its just the democrats watering down their own legislation and undermining their own positions for literally no gain. what purpose does "being the adult" serve if its a) losing you elections, b) never being reciprocated, c) only serving to benefit the other party?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:Gridlock IS the plan, once we get past the reconciliation bill that the Democrats aren't strong enough to block. I mean, I acknowledge that that's a possibility, and I hope you're right. But look at how the Democrats in Congress have performed over the past decade or so. You can understand why people on the left might be bracing themselves for the Democratic leaders giving up too much in a vain attempt to appeal to Republican reason and better angels, right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:15
|
|
|
Majorian posted:The degree to which Democrats are out of power is pretty unprecedented in modern U.S. political history. Acting like people didn't have to massively gently caress up to bring about this state of affairs is nothing if not myopic. By what definition are you making this claim? It's barely been a decade since the last time the GOP controlled House/Senate/Presidency. SCOTUS-wise you had O'Connor getting replaced by Alito in 2006 which was definitely a loss, but it's not like the court was a liberal bastion before then. RuanGacho posted:It occurs to me that it is not clear who the leftists and who the centrists or liberals are supposed to be. The Leftists are the people that agree with me. The centrists or liberals are the ones that don't agree with me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:15
|
|
|
Hillary Clinton. Discuss. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:16
|
|
|
I'll make this short: Despite being the most hated presidential candidate in American history by a long shot, Trump and his party still won. The only way this could have happened is if the Democratic candidate and party, were also wildly unpopular. Therefore the Democratic establishment is doing something very wrong to lose to the most unpopular candidate in American history and arguably the most unpopular party as well. It isn't merely being "out of power", but the context in terms of who the Democrats are out of power to and the reasoning of that. punk rebel ecks fucked around with this message at 18:18 on Sep 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:16
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:what purpose does "being the adult" serve if its a) losing you elections, b) never being reciprocated, c) only serving to benefit the other party? I think where you and I diverge is that I sincerely, truly, do not believe that the US can exist as a country if the Democrats do not attempt to maintain the order and the laws of our institutions and instead shift to a hyper-partisan mentality. If you grant me that, then the question becomes what is better between a complete societal breakdown and what we have now. If we continue on this way, is there the chance that the pendulum swings back to a more orderly Congress? While John McCain is an utter poo poo, his speech to Congress before voting down the last healthcare bill was at least a moment of self-awareness - even if it isn't to be trusted to translate to policy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:16
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:The only way this could have happened is if the Democratic candidate and party, were also wildly unpopular. or, the electoral college is weird and does not elect the most popular candidate don't let me interrupt what i'm sure is a fascinating and well sourced rant about how liberals are ruining america though which i definitely will not read
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 09:22 |
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Hillary Clinton. I heard she won a primary for once.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 18:18
|
|