|
JeffersonClay posted:So we’re back to “senate investigations of sexual misconduct are misogyny”. Cool. Do you believe Bernie and Elizabeth Warren? because i’m defending their strategy here. If that's their strategy then they are wrong. It's funny when Clintonites assume everyone else's politics must be the unthinking cult of personality that theirs is, and winning a debate is just a matter of finding the right name to associate with what you want to do.
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 03:44 |
|
|
VitalSigns posted:If that's their strategy then they are wrong. The accusation, if you could be bothered to read the thread, was that I, as terrible neoliberal centrist scum, cannot be trusted to really want to dismantle the patriarchy. I asked if he believes Bernie and Warren are similarly untrustworthy, because I’m defending their position. NewForumSoftware posted:are we still pretending you can't do both? It’s been 3 or 4 pages since I explained the reasons why resign then investigate isn’t preferable (or likely) compared to investigate then resign or remove. No one has attempted to refute those arguments. Feel free to try.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 00:37
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:It’s been 3 or 4 pages since I explained the reasons why resign then investigate isn’t preferable (or likely) compared to investigate then resign or remove. No one has attempted to refute those arguments. Feel free to try. That's because the argument that more women won't come forward if he resigns is dumb, wrong and generally very "you"
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 00:41
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:How do you imagine that they forcibly remove Franken without an investigation? Expulsion vote using Franken's confession to expedite the process?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 00:43
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:The accusation, if you could be bothered to read the thread, was that I, as terrible neoliberal centrist scum, cannot be trusted to really want to dismantle the patriarchy. I asked if he believes Bernie and Warren are similarly untrustworthy, because I’m defending their position. it's been three or four pages since you vomited out some garbled bullshit about why Frankie the Sexual Assault Senator should stay in office, go gently caress yourself
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 01:03
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:The accusation, if you could be bothered to read the thread, was that I, as terrible neoliberal centrist scum, cannot be trusted to really want to dismantle the patriarchy. I asked if he believes Bernie and Warren are similarly untrustworthy, because I’m defending their position. I'm pretty sure neither Elizabeth Warren nor Bernie Sanders have specifically taken the position that "an investigation before a resignation is cool and good because it helps smash the patriarchy." Their position also has nothing to do with the rich irony in the most centrist of centrist posters on this forum proclaiming "no, I'm really serious here, my end goal is smashing the patriarchy!" I think Stone Cold has spoken sufficiently to the absurdity of linking "Republican led sexual harassment investigations" with "smashing the patriarchy (by indefinitely postponing the resignation of a sexual predator)." It's on you if you haven't thought through the practical ramifications of your dumb arguments and ignore those who have raised the serious issues they present.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:
The Democratic party could tell him they're going to withdraw all support from him, bombard him with negative media, gently caress with his committee appointments, support a primary challenger against him, etc, if he doesn't resign. If the Democratic leadership and the donor class actually wanted him to go they could threaten to rain hell down on his head. Presumably Franken hasn't resigned yet because he intuitively senses (or was quietly given assurances) that he can weather this storm, stay in the senate and preserve his political career.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 01:30
|
|
|
stone cold posted:survivors shouldn’t have to come forward I don't think JC actually genuinely believes most of what he argues in these posts. He just identified "Franken should resign immediately" as the main leftist opinion on this issue and decided to argue the opposing view that he should be investigated first as a result. I don't even know if it makes sense to identify him as a centrist or someone interested in preserving the status quo. It's like there's just this bizarre amoral imperative to take positions in contrast to those held by leftists, even if doing so results in arguing for really terrible things like sweatshops. Like, people are addressing him like he's one of the shitheads in the Trump thread who were genuinely arguing in defense of Franken, but I don't think that what's going on here. If leftists had started posting the things he's currently posting (that Franken shouldn't immediately resign and should be investigated first), he would be arguing in favor of immediate resignation. This isn't to say that he doesn't genuinely believe what he's posting right now; it's just that "do leftists believe this" is a key element that influences his opinions on issues.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 02:32
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I don't think JC actually genuinely believes most of what he argues in these posts. He just identified "Franken should resign immediately" as the main leftist opinion on this issue and decided to argue the opposing view that he should be investigated first as a result. once again, your overly wordy post can be condensed down into something far pithier in this case “no, the misogynist is okay because he doesn’t mean what he says”
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 03:09
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:I did respond to your argument, but like usual it was 13th dimensional chess, incomprehensible to the rubes itt, so I’ll unpack it. That's a ton of words for what I already said your argument was: The correct number of accusers is always N+1. To play your argument forward: The correct thing to do is to find serial sexual abusers and put them in positions of power and keep them there until every victim has come forward. Hell, in interest of getting as many to come forward as possible, make sure he keeps abusing more women. Obviously each new one helps the next come forward  Harik fucked around with this message at 03:47 on Nov 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 03:44
|
|
|
JeffersonClay has an uncanny ability to always be wrong no matter what. He would do better just flipping a coin to decide his opinions. It's practically supernatural.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 03:45
|
|
|
Harik posted:That's a ton of words for what I already said your argument was: The correct number of accusers is always N+1. Don't just dismiss this because you don't like where your argument led: Demonstrate exactly where your proposal of perpetual investigation without resignation diverges from my proposal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 03:48
|
|
|
MooselanderII posted:I'm pretty sure neither Elizabeth Warren nor Bernie Sanders have specifically taken the position that "an investigation before a resignation is cool and good because it helps smash the patriarchy." Their position also has nothing to do with the rich irony in the most centrist of centrist posters on this forum proclaiming "no, I'm really serious here, my end goal is smashing the patriarchy!" If Stone Cold has made a coherent argument about the futility of senate investigations please link it because I haven't seen it. Both Bernie and Warren want an investigation and haven't called for Franken to resign. Do you think that's because: Helsing posted:Presumably Franken hasn't resigned yet because he intuitively senses (or was quietly given assurances) that he can weather this storm, stay in the senate and preserve his political career. Y'all are in fact arguing that Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are part of a conspiracy in the democratic leadership to shield Franken from any consequences of his actions. I think it's more likely that they both believe a senate investigation is a better idea than Franken resigning three weeks ago. Harik posted:That's a ton of words for what I already said your argument was: The correct number of accusers is always N+1. My argument, which you and others have a curious inability to read and or comprehend, is that investigating Franken in the Senate is a good idea because, among other reasons, it will cause more victims to come forward than would if Franken resigns before that investigation occurs. Ytlaya posted:I don't think JC actually genuinely believes most of what he argues in these posts. He just identified "Franken should resign immediately" as the main leftist opinion on this issue and decided to argue the opposing view that he should be investigated first as a result. I tend to find issues where I can defend Bernie Sanders from attacks from his left interesting to make, it's true. botany posted:it's been three or four pages since you vomited out some garbled bullshit about why Frankie the Sexual Assault Senator should stay in office, go gently caress yourself Lol quote me saying this or politely apologize.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 04:15
|
|
|
That's a lot of words just to say you don't mind sex offenders holding elected positions
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 04:19
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Both Bernie and Warren want an investigation and haven't called for Franken to resign. Do you think that's because: Yes, yes, we are because Franken should loving resign. Bernie and Liz can be wrong, we don't worship them as perfect idols. Not like you do with Hillary.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 04:21
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Yes, yes, we are because Franken should loving resign. Bernie and Liz can be wrong, we don't worship them as perfect idols. Not like you do with Hillary. There's a difference between being wrong about the consequences of doing a senate investigation before pressuring Franken to resign and being part of a conspiracy to protect the perpetrators of sexual assault from any and all consequences forever. Bernie and Warren and the rest of the democrats in the Senate are, at worst, the former. NewForumSoftware posted:That's a lot of words It all starts looking like 13th dimensional chess after the first paragraph, I'm sure. JeffersonClay fucked around with this message at 04:26 on Nov 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 04:23
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:If Stone Cold has made a coherent argument about the futility of senate investigations please link it because I haven't seen it. why do you want more victims to come forward JC? so they can be slutshamed by your liberal friends and then ignored? you've already got 3 on franken, and he's already admitted to sexual assault, so i dunno why it's important to you that more women come forward and have their lives and motives put under a microscope? is it what gets you off? seeing women have to suffer more beyond the sexual assault they already have to deal with?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 04:24
|
|
|
i'm kidding, i do know why you're pushing for more women to come forward. cause you don't want franken to resign at all, and are in fact quite fine with him sexually assaulting women that's what makes you a rape apologist
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 04:27
|
|
|
Condiv posted:why do you want more victims to come forward JC? Jesus christ, back to "you just want victims of sexual assault to come forward so you can jerk it to their stories". Is #metoo being mercilessly mocked on leftist twitter or something? Did chapo do a funny bit about it with democrat voice?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 04:28
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:There's a difference between being wrong about the consequences of doing a senate investigation before pressuring Franken to resign and being part of a conspiracy to protect the perpetrators of sexual assault from any and all consequences forever. No poo poo, you feckless loving idiot. I legit do think if we had circled the wagons around Fraken, you would be calling for his resignation, just like Ylata said. You're just a lovely contrarian.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 04:31
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:No poo poo, you feckless loving idiot. Ah bloo bloo bloo somebody is suggesting Bernie Sanders is not part of a misogynist conspiracy to protect sex criminals.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 04:36
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Ah bloo bloo bloo somebody is suggesting Bernie Sanders is not part of a misogynist conspiracy to protect sex criminals. What broke in your brain?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 05:41
|
|
|
This is it. This is the hottest take on that stupid NYT "Nazis are just like you and me" article: https://twitter.com/smartflexin/status/934965886431133696
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 06:02
|
|
|
excellent meltdown
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 06:17
|
|
|
I like this thread because it's basically just a hundred people saying "Don't tilt at that windmill bro" and then JC charges the windmill, gets knocked off his horse, and yells "Fuckin' Bernie!" ITT we are all Sancho Panda. Rent-A-Cop fucked around with this message at 06:22 on Nov 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 06:20
|
|
|
The windmill is JC, ffs why does anyone earnestly respond to him at all at this point
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 07:57
|
|
|
Filipino Freakout posted:The windmill is JC, ffs why does anyone earnestly respond to him at all at this point
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 08:04
|
|
|
'The patriarchy' really has become an utterly meaningless term. If it can't refer to powerful, wealthy politicians with a history of abusing women without recourse, what the hell DOES it mean?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 08:27
|
|
|
stone cold posted:once again, your overly wordy post can be condensed down into something far pithier I'm pretty sure what he's actually saying is that Jefferson Clay is so disingenuous that it's actually wrapped back round to being horrifyingly sincere, because his distaste for left wing positions is baked into his perception and conception of the world on such a fundamental level that he has to take the opposite (usually terrible) position, no matter what that position is. So ultimately he doesn't have a moral compass at all, or any consistent ideological position on social or economic justice, just a burning hatred for anyone and anything left wing, and that's what informs everything he says. And I don't think that Ytlaya is defending JC in any way, just trying to make sense of what could make a person behave like this and put forth the views that he does, so I don't know where you're getting "no, the misogynist is okay because he doesn't mean what he says" from.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 15:10
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:the best part is there's not even any of the usual chickenshit pragmatic reasons to avoid doing the right thing
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I don't even know if it makes sense to identify him as a centrist or someone interested in preserving the status quo. It's like there's just this bizarre amoral imperative to take positions in contrast to those held by leftists, even if doing so results in arguing for really terrible things like sweatshops. People do the same thing back to him though, just coming up with ridiculous interpretations of what he is saying so they can fit him into the troll bogeyman box they made for him, rather than realizing that he is a complex person full of genuine feelings and ideas as well as a ridiculous troll. All he said was that an investigation is good and everybody is freaking out like he's saying the harassment was good. "you fantasize about women confronting their assaulters a court of law" smh
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
stone cold posted:once again, your overly wordy post can be condensed down into something far pithier Uh, not sure how in the world you got "this is okay" from what I posted. Like, that is the most hilariously over the top negative way to interpret that post that I could imagine. It was just saying "it is bad in a somewhat different (and arguably worse) way than you guys are thinking." Like, making arguments that are effectively misogynist from an amoral/detached perspective is at least as bad as making it from a perspective of legitimate misogyny. A Spherical Sponge posted:I'm pretty sure what he's actually saying is that Jefferson Clay is so disingenuous that it's actually wrapped back round to being horrifyingly sincere, because his distaste for left wing positions is baked into his perception and conception of the world on such a fundamental level that he has to take the opposite (usually terrible) position, no matter what that position is. So ultimately he doesn't have a moral compass at all, or any consistent ideological position on social or economic justice, just a burning hatred for anyone and anything left wing, and that's what informs everything he says. And I don't think that Ytlaya is defending JC in any way, just trying to make sense of what could make a person behave like this and put forth the views that he does, so I don't know where you're getting "no, the misogynist is okay because he doesn't mean what he says" from. Basically this, yeah, though I'm not sure if I would describe his opinion of the left as "burning hatred" so much as "irritated/annoyed to the point of obsession."
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
So the brilliant argument y’all are going with is “senate investigations into sexual misconduct are naked defenses of power, part of a patriarchical conspiracy to shield sex criminals from any and all consequences forever” I tend to think Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are not calling for an investigation as part of a cynical attempt to strengthen the patriarchy and punish women, but it’s possible! Still, it’s probably better than “you only want victims of sexual assault to come forward so you can jerk off to their stories” but that’s a pretty low bar. twodot posted:it's really important that we not immediately remove men who have sexually assaulted people from power. Hey, this is approaching something coherent, kudos! So we’re faced with a trade off between immediacy and thoroughness. We can get rid of Franken right now, and that will send a signal about our priorities, or we can get rid of Franken after an investigation, and that will send a different signal about our priorities, but will also maintain media focus and promote more victims coming forward which a resignation is designed to mitigate. That debate is actually interesting! Perhaps too 13th dimensional for the median poster itt, but let’s give it a try. Why do you think immediacy outweighs those other benefits if we posit that Franken loses his job in both scenarios? Ytlaya posted:Basically this, yeah, though I'm not sure if I would describe his opinion of the left as "burning hatred" so much as "irritated/annoyed to the point of obsession." My opinion of the left is “good people with good ideas”. My opinion of the tiny fraction of the left that’s primarily concerned with the perfidious Democratic Party is less positive. JeffersonClay fucked around with this message at 17:59 on Nov 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 17:55
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:People do the same thing back to him though, just coming up with ridiculous interpretations of what he is saying so they can fit him into the troll bogeyman box they made for him, rather than realizing that he is a complex person full of genuine feelings and ideas as well as a ridiculous troll. Citation needed for this part, please. JeffersonClay posted:So the brilliant argument y’all are going with is “senate investigations into sexual misconduct are naked defenses of power, part of a patriarchical conspiracy to shield sex criminals from any and all consequences forever” I tend to think Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are not calling for an investigation as part of a cynical attempt to strengthen the patriarchy and punish women, but it’s possible! No, the argument is "Franken should resign, ASAP" and you've twisted it into this weird thing because you're you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 17:56
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Citation needed for this part, please. I've been watching him rile yall up for years. I consider myself an authority.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 18:00
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:I've been watching him rile yall up for years. I consider myself an authority. You're literally like 90% indistinguishable from him, you realize? You end up defending him in many many cases, but at least are sane enough to realize when he's gone too far, like defending slavery. See, to me, when someone does something as awful as defending slavery, sweatshops, rape, etc, I don't wait around for them to have a stopped clock moment where they're technically right about something and go "Wow, what a smart post!" I just write them off as a total rear end in a top hat. It's really fun how JC posts like none of us know his post history.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:People do the same thing back to him though, just coming up with ridiculous interpretations of what he is saying...  it's just sad when I see you stoop to defend rape apologists, you just keep disappointing
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 18:04
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:See, to me, when someone does something as awful as defending slavery, sweatshops, rape, etc, I don't wait around for them to have a stopped clock moment where they're technically right about something and go "Wow, what a smart post!" I just write them off as a total rear end in a top hat. It's really fun how JC posts like none of us know his post history. Maybe, and this is going to sound pretty crazy so bear with me, the red text people buy on the something awful for com forums is not always 100% accurate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 18:07
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Maybe, and this is going to sound pretty crazy so bear with me, the red text people buy on the something awful for com forums is not always 100% accurate. Dude, I've read your posts. You absolutely defended Hillary's use of slaves in the governor's mansion. You absolutely defended the use of sweatshops. You can't gaslight a forum where there's a "Post History" button under every single post you make. Like, do you legit have no memory of making those posts and us arguing with you about how bad they were? It was literally less than a year ago. Are you unable to recognize usernames?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 03:44 |
|
|
don't forget blaming the sexism of black men for hillary's loss
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 18:09
|
|