|
Dapper_Swindler posted:i sorta like JFK because at least he believed in diplomacy and empathy sorta. too bad about getting us deeper in vietnam and being a sexpest. Diplomacy is not "sending a country's refugees on a suicide mission to retake their homeland because you want to play James Bond", but on some other fronts fair enough Though JFK was an absolute disaster in the Middle East where he blew up all of Ike's work at keeping a tenuous peace between Egypt and Israel by snubbing Nasser and selling arms by the truckload to Israel, and knowing about South Africa and Israel's joint secret nuclear weapons program and shrugging. TulliusCicero fucked around with this message at 20:06 on Dec 29, 2018 |
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 19:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 05:39 |
|
|
The solution, you see, is to always make things worse for everybody. This is why I'm against voting rights for white men.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 19:54
|
|
|
Of all the actual free speech issues that exist; people losing their jobs because they support Palestine, people denied habius corpus in secret prisons, whistle blowers punished more harshly than the crime they brought to light, it galls me that letting people yell friend of the family is the pressing issue of the day. Hate speech is not free speech, and it stifles the expression of others and has no benefit to society. Defending hate speech as free speech is as reprehensible as defending rape as the right to free association.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 19:54
|
|
|
sexpig by night posted:Popehat is the kinda guy who spent most of his career latching his destiny onto the backs of nazis but he finds vulgarity personally distasteful because he's one of those super religious yet social libertarian types like Liz Bruening so every so often the mask slips and his fans get freaked out. Except instead of poo poo like Liz's 'actually the temperance movement was good and cool' weird poo poo he's just a white supremacist. This is from a few pages back, and I don't actually care about Liz Bruening, but the temperance movement really was a lot more morally complex than most modern people give it credit for. The temperance movement was heavily associated with and influenced by the feminist movement, and vice versa. At the time if a woman was married to an abusive alcoholic she didn't really have the option to leave since divorce was so heavily stigmatized. Also, since women weren't really allowed to have jobs (or at least not good paying jobs), if your husband decided to drink away all of your savings and not work then, welp, have fun living in poverty. https://daily.jstor.org/feminist-history-prohibition/ Space Cadet Omoly fucked around with this message at 20:19 on Dec 29, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 19:54
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:i think being a free speech absolutist (as i was years back) only works by ignoring the inequality in our society. Being a free speech absolutist is fairly easy when you think of free speech as the wholly negative right not to be arrested by your government simply for something you said/wrote. The problem in the United States is that free speech has been warped into a positive right for privileged people to access certain platforms and for corporations to openly bribe politicians.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 19:54
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I have argued that lawyers should treat Nazis differently, not the law as such. I stand by that. gently caress Nazis. Acting as if this is some terrible authoritarian regime I want to impose, as opposed to saying mean things online about lawyers who willingly defend Nazis, is hilarious. Having the technical right to something but being unable to exercise it is still denying someone those rights. And if you stop and think about it for a minute you'll realize why.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 19:55
|
|
|
TulliusCicero posted:Diplomacy is not "sending a country's refugees on a suicide mission to retake their homeland because you want to play James Bond", but on some other fronts fair enough oh yeah definitely. with bay of pigs, if i remember correctly Ike set it up with the military and then kennedy stupidly let them go along with it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 19:55
|
|
|
Xae posted:Having the technical right to something but being unable to exercise it is still denying someone those rights. Yes, yes it is, and lawyers should do so to Nazis - which is not the same as the law itself doing it. The difference between Nazis and [every other group of people we arbitrarily decide to poo poo on for who they are] is that Nazis choose to be genocidal asshats, and are inherently anti-social. Arguing that Nazis deserve the best possible defense in a society that routinely bludgeons the poor and marginalized with the legal system is reprehensible.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 19:57
|
|
|
TulliusCicero posted:The Kennedys actually all loving universally sucked (especially their loving shitheel of a father), besides Bobby who seems like their might have been a decent person underneath maybe Bobby worked on the McCarthy committee.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 19:58
|
|
|
Space Cadet Omoly posted:This is from a few pages back, and I don't actually care about Liz Bruening, but the temperance movement really was a lot more morally complex than most modern people give it credit for. Turns out that society not having a problem with drunken husbands beating the poo poo out of their wives might turn women against alcohol.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 19:58
|
|
|
Space Cadet Omoly posted:This is from a few pages back, and I don't actually care about Liz Bruening, but the temperance movement really was a lot more morally complex than most modern people give it credit for. yeah the whole temperance movement is fascinating because they had tons of good points and was filled with progressives and differing groups. the issue is it became stupidly draconian and nativist as it gained more and more steam.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 19:59
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/MaxKennerly/status/1078784653899845642
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 19:59
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I have argued that lawyers should treat Nazis differently, not the law as such. I stand by that. gently caress Nazis. Acting as if this is some terrible authoritarian regime I want to impose, as opposed to saying mean things online about lawyers who willingly defend Nazis, is hilarious. No you argued they should only get a court appointed attorney then when you were called out on it you changed changed your argument.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:00
|
|
|
jase1 posted:No you argued they should only get a court appointed attorney then when you were called out on it you changed changed your argument. The entire argument was originally about the ethics of lawyers’ actions and how we should judge them. They should only get a court appointed attorney because attorneys refuse to voluntarily take their case and we should judge the gently caress out of lawyers who do it voluntarily.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:02
|
|
|
Let's list the many things throughout American history that yts don't give a gently caress about hurting black people and other minorities until they realize it is or could happen to a white person. I'll start: drug addiction and the opiod epidemic.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:03
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Yes, yes it is, and lawyers should do so to Nazis - which is not the same as the law itself doing it. The difference between Nazis and [every other group of people we arbitrarily decide to poo poo on for who they are] is that Nazis choose to be genocidal asshats, and are inherently anti-social. There are plenty of people who argue leftists are "genocidal asshats" as well. Who gets to decide what ideologies deny people their rights? How do you make this determination? What criteria are used? What mechanisms are there for appeal? Should leftists be denied the right to a good defense? Don't even type an answer to that, just think on it. Are you starting to see the problem? The justice system isn't in the job of deciding who is "truly" a good or bad person. It is looking at the law. quote:Arguing that Nazis deserve the best possible defense in a society that routinely bludgeons the poor and marginalized with the legal system is reprehensible. Everyone should have a right to the best possible defense. No one has said the current system is good. But dealing with the massive, structural problems in the system is a different thing than denying people rights based on their political beliefs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:03
|
|
|
Koalas Massacre posted:Let's list the many things throughout American history that yts don't give a gently caress about hurting black people and other minorities until they realize it is or could happen to a white person. I'll start: drug addiction and the opiod epidemic. Human trafficking.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:03
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:The entire argument was originally about the ethics of lawyers’ actions and how we should judge them. They should only get a court appointed attorney because attorneys refuse to voluntarily take their case and we should judge the gently caress out of lawyers who do it voluntarily. I have no problem with that then. It just sucks greed and lovely people will never allow that to happen. There will always be a lawyer willing to represent any piece of poo poo not matter how horrible they are.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:04
|
|
|
Ague Proof posted:Bobby worked on the McCarthy committee.  Did not know that. Mostly knew him for the later civil rights stuff (which he took a lot of from Johnson) and the mafia crackdowns. Jesus
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:05
|
|
|
Lol was this specific tweet posted? https://twitter.com/Bre_payton/status/1074720827705356288 The thread is hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:07
|
|
|
I just want to express, in the case that Trump begins drone strikes in the United States, that I am against using robots in the extrajudicial murder of any civilians, regardless of their race.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:07
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Lol was this specific tweet posted? Quiznos still exists?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:10
|
|
|
jase1 posted:I have no problem with that then. It just sucks greed and lovely people will never allow that to happen. There will always be a lawyer willing to represent any piece of poo poo not matter how horrible they are. A good solution would be to outlaw private legal practices and absorb lawyers into a vastly improved public system (much like healthcare, education, and pretty much everything else that should be more equitable and available for everyone in our society) but lol capitalism
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:10
|
|
|
TulliusCicero posted:
Never saw the Hoffa movie, huh? Because bobbo certainly tried to make organized labor = communism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:11
|
|
|
Neo_Crimson posted:Quiznos still exists? She doesn't.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:13
|
|
|
Neo_Crimson posted:Quiznos still exists? yes and it has BLOOD ON ITS HANDS
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:15
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Ocasio2018/status/1079091161715871744
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:15
|
|
|
Koalas Massacre posted:Put a little thought into what you are asking. Like there was literally a great movie that came out this year about a black sales person who climbs up the corporate ladder thanks to his "white voice". Sorry To Bother You, and there is actually a LOT more to that movie but lol Everyone should watch "Sorry to Bother You", one of the best movies of the year and this year had some pretty amazing movies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:16
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:“Not treating Nazis better than most of the population will lead to a leftist police state” - A Take. This is not what anyone is saying. You said nazis should not be given equal treatment under the law. No one has said nazis should have better treatment. Just equal. And no one, to my understanding, is saying that denying nazis fair treatment under the law (however that works, I've asked you a few times) leads to a "leftist police state". The problem is that pointing a finger at someone and saying "YOU don't get treated like everyone else" because reasons, despite how good those reasons are, does not end well. And it doesn't end well for people who aren't the nazis. No one likes nazis here, but half the posters in this thread are now having to defend the concept of free speech and fair trails to alleged leftists. loving hell. And no one is defending the loving "justice" system in this country. But if you want "A Take" giving that broken lovely system another tool to gently caress people over is certainly one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:19
|
|
|
The GOP got what it wanted and then some, but found out that allowing a total dipshit to get his cult of personality and hands on the economy by loving things up with a single tweet, now want to walk back their stolen election 2 years in. Or at least pretend to make the waves for that if they actually have to do this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:20
|
|
|
A little late but the use of the term 'codeswitch' reminded me of the really cool and good NPR podcast by the same name. They explore issues of race and racial identity in a really good, nuanced way. The most recent episode I heard was about DNA tests and how people respond to their results. https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/ They also have a larger website to explore with lots of interesting articles that don't necessarily show up on the radio. Definitely worth a browse if you're interested in learning something/checking out a resource that can be used to educate others.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:20
|
|
|
If the Constitution provides for basic lawyer representation in a court of law regardless of professed ideology, then the Constitution needs to be loving amended to fix that (just like the dozen or so other glaring issues it has). Race, gender, sexuality, and place of birth are not choices. Ideology is. There should be a punishment and reward system in place to encourage socially beneficial ideologies and discourage regressive ones. If you made the choice to be a loving Nazi and then get into poo poo, then no, you shouldn't get the perk of compelled defense from the progressive system you decided you wanted to undermine and are now at the mercy of. Choices and viewpionts have consequences, rear end in a top hat.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:20
|
|
|
Koalas Massacre posted:Let's list the many things throughout American history that yts don't give a gently caress about hurting black people and other minorities until they realize it is or could happen to a white person. I'll start: drug addiction and the opiod epidemic. Poverty in general.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:20
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:Someone told him that dead kids at the border makes him look bad. Honestly, I don't think the people Donny is playing to think it looks bad. His base is probably split between bloodlust and "very serious" people who think dead kids on the border will work as a deterrent.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:21
|
|
|
Xae posted:Whataboutism - A mods tale. Having an expensive lawyer accept your money is not a right. I mean if they want to reverse the gay cake decision, we can do that. EDIT: Also just to beat the analogy to the punch, Nazis would gleefully deny other groups the ability to have even state appointed defense attorneys while gay people have no such agenda.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:21
|
|
|
Maybe legal defense shouldn't be a function of wealth.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:23
|
|
|
Prohibition had a huge element of anti-black and ant-immigrant racism behind it. So of course early white feminists loved it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:23
|
|
|
Chimp_On_Stilts posted:Honestly, I don't think the people Donny is playing to think it looks bad. They will settle with "They shouldn't have used their children as political tools" like they did when it was just one kid, while the next Nazi march they will probably force their kids to hold their torches with no hint of irony.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:24
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:Having an expensive lawyer accept your money is not a right. Did't the gay cake nazi win his case though?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 05:39 |
|
|
Kerning Chameleon posted:If the Constitution provides for basic lawyer representation in a court of law regardless of professed ideology, then the Constitution needs to be loving amended to fix that (just like the dozen or so other glaring issues it has). The problem I see with this is that you then need a legal definition of Nazism, and that once you have that Nazis will just use different words the way they do now when sponsorship deals are withdrawn. Culture changes and ideologies mutate over time. Imagine a legal code that had to be updated with hate speech examples as fast as Pepe memes get churned out by Russians and 14 year olds in parasocial relationships with dapper fascists.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 20:25
|
|