|
Eugene V. Dubstep posted:how many masks are we at now There wasn't a mask so much as people more interested in him owning libs than whether or not he was a white supremacist he's been pretty open about that for a long time.
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 21:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 11:28 |
|
|
Neurolimal posted:It's mainly that Greenwald discussion has already been segregated; there's this thread and there's the C-SPAM thread (I think at one point there was two C-SPAM threads?). Assange is a bit more of an untamed frontier, and there's plenty of solid meat there (as opposed to Greenwald, which is a lot of people intuiting motives negative/positive unto him, either because he Owns The Libs or because he spent Obama's administration making his supporters mad, and Trump's administration making russia-gaters mad) The wild thing to me is that everyone basically agrees that GG is bad with, at most, the caveat that he did good things at one point in the past but hasn't done anything of value lately. His crimes are broadcasting his lovely thoughts on every platform he has ever had and generally pursuing the spotlight to open his idiotic mouth on any and every topic. In contrast, we still have people defending Assange, who has done exactly one good thing EVER and even that might need an asterisk since he did it in a way that hung the actual leakers out to dry and didn't make any attempt to make even cursory redactions. He has been widely reviled by anyone who has ever come into contact with him, from the other people involved with WikiLeaks to the film-maker doing the documentary, to the people who had to deal with him in the embassy. He has committed multiple no-poo poo crimes like rape, and yet people are rolling in here trying to make some sort of "well the US prison system is a crime against humanity, so let's make sure this white male rapist doesn't have to deal with it". Why waste your breath on him, if you want to talk about prison reform then just talk about prison reform, you don't need to loop Assange into it as the poster child when there are literally millions of more sympathetic people. It's basically the affluenza argument. The only possible reason I can see for people to fall into this pattern of reflexive defense is because Assange has the legal assistance to stop him from sending out his own kneejerk tweets in the same pattern, so rather than getting the new "GG says some inflammatory poo poo" tweet thread you only see the bloodless news stories that come from sources you don't like to begin with and so you have to create your own spin for the motivations of all the actors, and since you pre-filled "America is doing fascist things because they always do" you are inclined to cast Assange as a victim, whereas when GG harasses someone on Twitter America has nothing to do with it, so you have to evaluate the situation based on what people actually do and say. Basically, because Assange committed huge crimes years ago, people don't get constant reminders about his shittiness, whereas GG bullies and slights people constantly without having a discrete event where he turned the corner, so you can always declare the new thing a bridge too far. Admitting that Assange is bad requires acknowledging that he was also bad in 2010 and it was a mistake to ever give him that leeway, because he hasn't meaningfully added to his list of bad poo poo since then (his support of Trump and Russia poo poo aside, it's probably not criminal and not an issue worth litigating). People don't want to re-inspect their priors about him because there aren't any new facts to weigh- it requires you to acknowledge that in the past you were okay minimizing the severity of the allegations or weighing his personal behavior against his political impact as though one could make up for the other. People have turned the corner on Greenwald because it doesn't require the same level of introspection- it's a lot easier to say "in light of new evidence, this dude sucks" than to say "I made the incorrect judgement on this topic in the past, and I am acknowledging that mistake so that I can make better judgments in the future"
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 21:32
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:There wasn't a mask so much as people more interested in him owning libs than whether or not he was a white supremacist so the latest mask he took off revealed he is a white supremacist? did he spout off about demographic shifts or white South African farmers or something?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 21:33
|
|
|
BougieBitch posted:The wild thing to me is that everyone basically agrees that GG is bad with, at most, the caveat that he did good things at one point in the past but hasn't done anything of value lately. are you aware of the existence of country called Brazil and/or recent political developments therein?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 21:34
|
|
|
it's the 9th largest economy in the world. a fascist recently won the presidential election there because his leftist opponent was jailed by a corrupt judge. it might surprise you to know whose reporting exposed the corruption of said judge and led to the leftist presidential candidate being cleared and freed from prison just in the last few days
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 21:39
|
|
|
Oh we're doing that thing where you didn't read the thread and just are going off. Cool.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 21:41
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Oh we're doing that thing where you didn't read the thread and just are going off. I word searched the word 'white' and found you taking a journalist's appearance on Tucker Carlson to be evidence of their white supremacist convictions. I guess I thought the metaphor 'taking the mask off' would refer to a more direct statement of belief in white supremacy, or at least an appeal to common white supremacist shibboleths like, as I suggested, demographic shifts or white South African farmers
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 21:44
|
|
|
Eugene V. Dubstep posted:I word searched the word 'white' and found you taking a journalist's appearance on Tucker Carlson to be evidence of their white supremacist convictions. I guess I thought the metaphor 'taking the mask off' would refer to a more direct statement of belief in white supremacy, or at least an appeal to common white supremacist shibboleths like, as I suggested, demographic shifts or white South African farmers Like even the first page of the thread I beg of you
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 21:49
|
|
|
especially since we're talking about a gay Jew living in Brazil and married to an equally gay, Latino congressman for the Socialism and Liberty Party, I thought there must be some sort of smoking gun. that is, I thought in order to accuse him of being a white supremacist, you must be in possession of some overwhelming contrary evidence that this gay Jew who moved to a minority-white country, married a nonwhite Latino socialist, and has lived in that country under mortal threat from fascist gangs is himself a white supremacist. was I wrong about that?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 21:51
|
|
|
Eugene V. Dubstep posted:especially since we're talking about a gay Jew living in Brazil and married to an equally gay, Latino congressman for the Socialism and Liberty Party, I thought there must be some sort of smoking gun. that is, I thought in order to accuse him of being a white supremacist, you must be in possession of some overwhelming contrary evidence that this gay Jew who moved to a minority-white country, married a nonwhite Latino socialist, and has lived in that country under mortal threat from fascist gangs is himself a white supremacist. was I wrong about that? why yes, there is https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1372172963408183298
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 21:52
|
|
|
Eugene V. Dubstep posted:how many masks are we at now As was suggested earlier, he used to be for the most part pretty good about keeping his loving mouth shut about his awful and idiotic opinions, and just focus on owning the libs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 21:52
|
|
|
Eugene V. Dubstep posted:are you aware of the existence of country called Brazil and/or recent political developments therein? Considering the job he was working when that happened is no longer his X-Present line on his resume, have you considered that maybe you are less up-to-date on this than you think you are? Or did I miss when he crusaded from his Substack page and Twitter to successfully fight the injustices of the Brazilian government in between his anti-trans posts and peddling conspiracy theories that were too extreme and unsubstaniated for the people at the paper HE STARTED. Edit: it's almost like someone being gay and married to someone of another race doesn't insulate them from being a piece of poo poo! Just because JEB! has a Latina wife doesn't make him magically incapable of being racist towards the Latinx community, much less the broader non-white community, so if this is the best you've got in defense then you should quit while you are only a little behind. Don't even get me started on how irrelevant being gay is to whether or not you are racist - "no fats, no femmes, no asians" is practically Grindr's slogan BougieBitch fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Mar 18, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 21:53
|
|
|
Eugene V. Dubstep posted:especially since we're talking about a gay Jew living in Brazil and married to an equally gay, Latino congressman for the Socialism and Liberty Party, I thought there must be some sort of smoking gun. that is, I thought in order to accuse him of being a white supremacist, you must be in possession of some overwhelming contrary evidence that this gay Jew who moved to a minority-white country, married a nonwhite Latino socialist, and has lived in that country under mortal threat from fascist gangs is himself a white supremacist. was I wrong about that? I have a lot of black friends it doesn't matter what I write I can't be racist!
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 21:53
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:why yes, there is ah well, somebody posted the Stares Tuckerly meme at him. case closed (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 21:55
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:why yes, there is It's hard to tell at times because of how much contrarianism and sarcasm Greenwald steeps himself in, but I think his point is less "white supremacy isnt a problem" and more that maybe there's more to the rise of anti-China violence than just "the bad guys are doing it", see: https://twitter.com/isgoodrum/status/1372203410297032716?s=20 I'd have to wade into more of his tweets to be certain though, might check later. "Liberals are hypocritical and cause a lot of problems" has been his bread & butter for at least a decade, though. Neurolimal fucked around with this message at 21:59 on Mar 18, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 21:56
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Whistleblowing good. And yeah, he should not be extradited to the US for it. This goolian assange seems real bad OP. It was her time! (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 21:58
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:It's hard to tell at times because of how much contrarianism and sarcasm Greenwald steeps himself in, but I think his point is less "white supremacy isnt a problem" and more that maybe there's more to the rise of anti-China violence than just "the bad guys are doing it", see: What exactly is gained by being the "Glenn Greenwald" explainer here? The whole reason this thread exists is because he has so frequently said abhorrent poo poo that it became a more frequent USPOL derail than food chat, do you really want to go back and defend the other 5 lovely things he has said since the start of the year, much less the stuff going back all the way to 2005? At a certain point a pattern of behavior becomes an ethos or personality trait, trying to redirect it as "he's not a white supremacist, he just says racist things by accident" doesn't work if people have 15 years of receipts BougieBitch fucked around with this message at 22:05 on Mar 18, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 22:03
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:The contrast between the mostly sane Greenwald chat The Greenwald chat appears to have been people calling him everything under the sun with little to no pushback. That's not really a chat. BougieBitch posted:Considering the job he was working when that happened is no longer his X-Present line on his resume, But... Lula got cleared this year.. like 2 weeks ago. Does him not working at the Intercept anymore erase that? He was an important part!
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 22:04
|
|
|
Quotey posted:The Greenwald chat appears to have been people calling him everything under the sun with little to no pushback. That's not really a chat. "this chat on evolution didn't mention intelligent design once! for shame, you call this a discussion?????"
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 22:05
|
|
|
BougieBitch posted:What exactly is gained by being the "Glenn Greenwald" explainer here? Presumably, to debate and discuss him, rather than go "I heard he smells of butts, and freebases The Jewish Question". You're free to post things here to discuss them. Seems weird to threaten to post Greenwald tweets in the Greenwald thread.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 22:06
|
|
|
here is the long-form explainer for "gee it sounds like glenn is just asking questions, just like he innocently does on the tucker carlson show while calling carlson the true socialists???" https://twitter.com/michaelharriot/status/1372245031172636677
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 22:09
|
|
|
Quotey posted:The Greenwald chat appears to have been people calling him everything under the sun with little to no pushback. That's not really a chat. The keyword there is "was", he's been busy speedrunning the "worst twitter ratio" records since then and even contemporaneously with his Brazil reporting he was appearing on Tucker Carlson to carry water for Trump. You don't get to claim every positive outcome that flows from your initial action anyway, the story is not "Greenwald breaks down prison door, rescues Lula", it is "Greenwald reports on Brazilian govt corruption, investigation proceeds, courts overturn previous decision", and even if you remove Greenwald from that chain of events there's not any way to prove someone else wouldn't have done the same reporting and just got scooped by GG Neurolimal posted:Presumably, to debate and discuss him, rather than go "I heard he smells of butts, and freebases The Jewish Question". The reason this thread exists is because someone said "So I notice GG having a lot of poo poo takes lately and also people generally spit on the floor immediately after saying his name, what's the timeline" and people have been providing that. There's nothing to be gained defending his honor here, because he has none and the thread is like 4 pages of people laying out the reasoning and now about 2 pages of people posting weak "drunk driving is dangerous, but also it gets people to work on time" takes about him as though getting famous and making money off his reporting is somehow so virtuous that it erases him being an enormous sexist bigot. Yeah, there exist worse people in the reporting industry, he's got marginally better success rates than a stopped clock, but you should still treat anything he posts as extremely suspect because he's thrown his lot in with Tucker Carlson and that's not a thing that a reasonable person would do, nevermind the fact that he pushed so hard to publish an unsourced story that his own paper let him go BougieBitch fucked around with this message at 22:22 on Mar 18, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 22:11
|
|
|
BougieBitch posted:The reason this thread exists is because someone said "So I notice GG having a lot of poo poo takes lately and also people generally spit on the floor immediately after saying his name, what's the timeline" and people have been providing that. There's nothing to be gained defending his honor here, because he has none and the thread is like 4 pages of people laying out the reasoning and now about 2 pages of people posting weak "drunk driving is dangerous, but also it gets people to work on time" takes about him as though getting famous and making money off his reporting is somehow so virtuous that it erases him being an enormous sexist bigot. I don't necessarily disagree with the rest of your post, but let's try to avoid making unfair comparisons like the part in bold, if we can help it. TIA!
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 22:29
|
|
|
BougieBitch posted:if you remove Greenwald from that chain of events there's not any way to prove someone else wouldn't have done the same reporting and just got scooped by GG This is true. I wouldn't have done it, so if we want to get close to answering that we can knock one guy off. quote:The reason this thread exists is because someone said "So I notice GG having a lot of poo poo takes lately and also people generally spit on the floor immediately after saying his name, what's the timeline" and people have been providing that. There's nothing to be gained defending his honor here, because he has none and the thread is like 4 pages of people laying out the reasoning No, it's not. Other than the one tweet thread calling him out about the white supremacy stuff, it'll all just Glenn's Bad. Like, what the gently caress is this? quote:he went to full weird "actually an openly fascist US would be cool and good and nazis are my allies". quote:he didn't like a different flavor of Nazi running things in Brazil. And then even your thing about quote:nevermind the fact that he pushed so hard to publish an unsourced story that his own paper let him go What is this? The story wasn't unsourced. He wasn't fired. What's the point of a thread where it's just people making assertive statements they'll never back up and hoping people will believe them, because that's the orthodoxy or whatever?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 22:35
|
|
|
Quotey posted:
Glenn gave them an ultimatum of "let me publish this story or I quit" and they said "bye bitch", which fits my definition of "let him go", not sure what you are working off of here. https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/2020/10/29/glenn-greenwald-intercept-resigns/ https://theintercept.com/2020/10/29/glenn-greenwald-resigns-the-intercept/ Your argument about "unsourced" relies on the same logic as a kid turning in a paper with "wikipedia" as the only thing in the works cited page - if you are stating things as facts without trackable sources, it's unsourced, period. If "wrote an article that didn't meet the standards of sourcing for a paper that he cofounded, and then quit in outrage over 'censorship', then published the article on his personal blog, proving that actually it was just straight up lies and slander" sounds better to you then we can say that, but if anything I think it sounds WORSE - his sources are the political enemies of the subject's father, it would be MORE ethical to write something completely unsourced than to publish an embellished hit piece and treat it as fact https://greenwald.substack.com/p/article-on-joe-and-hunter-biden-censored Let's take it from the very top - who is able to corroborate that the emails were from Hunter Biden's laptop? Last I heard, the source of that is Guiliani and some "laptop repair guy" who has no receipts, and yet the very first sentence of his article states that as if it were an undisputed fact. It's honestly so much more damning when you look closely at it, like a fractal of unjustified outrage and low standards. Is your complaint here actually just that you might have to Google a phrase like "Glenn Greenwald blog 2005" to find the specific things people are talking about, because the majority of people making posts here are USPOL thread regulars who have already gone through this revolving door like 5 times and saying "okay do it again but slower" is just not interesting. BougieBitch fucked around with this message at 23:02 on Mar 18, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 22:46
|
|
|
BougieBitch posted:Let's take it from the very top - who is able to corroborate that the emails were from Hunter Biden's laptop? Last I heard, the source of that is Guiliani and some "laptop repair guy" who has no receipts, and yet the very first sentence of his article states that as if it were an undisputed fact. Yeah the Laptop repair guy basically got blown out of the water as either making poo poo up or actually being fed straight up Russian disinformation, kinda like how Nunes was just popped as funneling disinfo directly from a known Russian owned Ukrainian asset.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 23:02
|
|
|
Thanks. This is something to actually talk about.BougieBitch posted:Glenn gave them an ultimatum of "let me publish this story or I quit" and they said "bye bitch", which fits my definition of "let him go", not sure what you are working off of here. You can read the correspondance between Glenn and his editor here. This is the email the editor sends after Glenn disagrees with what she wants to do to the article, in his typically frosty and rude manner: quote:Our intention in sending the memo was for you to revise the story for publication. However, it's clear from your response this morning that you are unwilling to engage in a productive editorial process on this article, as we had hoped. This isn't calling a bluff on a threat to resign he never made. There's certainly an air of "I'm gone" by Glenn's second email I suppose. quote:Your argument about "unsourced" relies on the same logic as a kid turning in a paper with "wikipedia" as the only thing in the works cited page - if you are stating things as facts without trackable sources, it's unsourced, period. If "wrote an article that didn't meet the standards of sourcing for a paper that he cofounded, and then quit in outrage over 'censorship', then published the article on his personal blog, proving that actually it was just straight up lies and slander" sounds better to you then we can say that, but if anything I think it sounds WORSE - his sources are the political enemies of the subject's father, it would be MORE ethical to write something completely unsourced than to publish an embellished hit piece and treat it as fact The article is here. What are the untrackable sources? There are direct twitter statements, interviews, articles. The issues that the editor had with his work weren't issues at all (see the email where he responds point by point). If your problem is that the sources are NYT, Fox- that's the point of the article, that mainstream sources are mostly ignoring whatever was released. The authenticity of the documents wasn't questioned, and at least some were confirmed (see the article, which makes this point).
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 23:06
|
|
|
Quotey posted:Thanks. This is something to actually talk about. They confirmed that Hunter was actually in the photos, (which were speculated to be taken from a hack of his iCloud). What they absolutely did NOT confirm was the existence of an actual "Hunter Biden laptop" which was a whole-cloth lie told to give the hacked photos the veneer of legitimacy since publishing things obtained through criminal means is a no-no Edit: I challenge you to find any further corroboration of a laptop owned by Hunter Biden that was dropped off at a laptop repair shop. You will not find it, because it does not exist. If you admit that literally the first sentence of the GG article contains an unsourced assertion stated as fact then I really shouldn't need to walk you through it line by line to find the next several times he confidently states things without any evidence BougieBitch fucked around with this message at 23:14 on Mar 18, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 23:10
|
|
|
Sorry, I deleted the post halfway through and write slowly so didn't see your edit. I think it covers it though. Although the 2005 article is pretty funny, and kind of emblematic of this immediate judjing of people who are outside of the like- orthodoxy I guess? Do you think Glenn agrees with that article now? It's like when people blame him for supporting the Iraq war- yeah that's bad, but it's 20 years later and he documented his change of opinion. I don't understand the quick to judge, slow to forgive mindset.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 23:11
|
|
|
BougieBitch posted:They confirmed that Hunter was actually in the photos, (which were speculated to be taken from a hack of his iCloud). What they absolutely did NOT confirm was the existence of an actual "Hunter Biden laptop" which was a whole-cloth lie told to give the hacked photos the veneer of legitimacy since publishing things obtained through criminal means is a no-no This is your issue? That there wasn't a laptop? People publish things acquired through criminal means all the time. In fact, I can think of one large cache of documents shared illegally by an Edward Snowden that was pretty significant. There's also things like the Pentagon Papers, Sony emails, DNC/Podesta emails- all reported on in mainstream press.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 23:16
|
|
|
Quotey posted:No, it's not. Other than the one tweet thread calling him out about the white supremacy stuff, it'll all just Glenn's Bad. Like, what the gently caress is this? Do you regular read and participate in D&D? He's disliked so goddamn much the mere mention of him derails entire conversation. In fact, I think this is the 2nd GG Thread. There was another a few years back.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 23:16
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:Do you regular read and participate in D&D? He's disliked so goddamn much the mere mention of him derails entire conversation. In fact, I think this is the 2nd GG Thread. There was another a few years back. I understand that, but the OP is asking what he's done and "What are some of his best hits that make so many people hate him?" Then the only things that get linked is the thread on twitter about white supremacy and an article he wrote from 2005. The rest of it is just circlejerky call and response poo poo. The only good short response was the one along the lines of "he's a civil libertarian who takes it to extreme lengths" IMO. I read the shipping and tech threads, probably one or two others occasionally. Other than that it's just seeing what the latest stuff from the leper's colony is.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 23:19
|
|
|
Quotey posted:This is your issue? That there wasn't a laptop? People publish things acquired through criminal means all the time. In fact, I can think of one large cache of documents shared illegally by an Edward Snowden that was pretty significant. You are going to absolutely need to cite your sources on him changing opinion on immigration, cuz appearing on Tucker Carlson is pretty consistent with the same degree of white nationalism as that blog post about "hordes" preventing the "preservation of any national identity" Quotey posted:This is your issue? That there wasn't a laptop? People publish things acquired through criminal means all the time. In fact, I can think of one large cache of documents shared illegally by an Edward Snowden that was pretty significant. No, you are misreading me, when people report on the Pentagon Papers or Sony emails they call them that, not "documents and emails found on a laptop left abandoned at a repair shop". If he had taken even the bare minimum effort to use the word "allegedly" in that paragraph or say "a laptop that Guiliani claimed to possess" or otherwise give some sort of source for this thing he has stated then that would be fine. Similarly, you can say "we have obtained photos of Hunter Biden that we have independently confirmed to be real" and that's fine, but when you say "also here's some emails found in the same laptop" then you are relying on this fiction of a laptop actually existing, and your entire point falls apart if it doesn't - it's not some casual mistake, it's actually the ONLY reason to believe that anything is real other than the photos, and it DOESN'T EXIST BougieBitch fucked around with this message at 23:25 on Mar 18, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 23:19
|
|
|
BougieBitch posted:Glenn gave them an ultimatum of "let me publish this story or I quit" and they said "bye bitch", which fits my definition of "let him go", not sure what you are working off of here. Quotey posted:There's also things like the Pentagon Papers, Sony emails, DNC/Podesta emails- all reported on in mainstream press. Weird how you'd omit the Panama Papers from this list 
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 23:23
|
|
|
Quotey posted:This is your issue? That there wasn't a laptop? People publish things acquired through criminal means all the time. In fact, I can think of one large cache of documents shared illegally by an Edward Snowden that was pretty significant. the reason that people are skeptical about the emails is nobody has seen the emails, they've just seen pictures of an "email." many news agencies asked for copies of the actual emails so they could verify that they are real (which is trivially easy to do) and the trump campaign has refused. in snowden's case, for example, you could verify the legitimacy of the NSA files both from the source (someone who worked for the NSA) and the files themselves. personally, and this is just me, but i don't really place a lot of value in what steve bannon and rudy guilliani claim.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 23:25
|
|
|
Quotey posted:I understand that, but the OP is asking what he's done and "What are some of his best hits that make so many people hate him?" Then the only things that get linked is the thread on twitter about white supremacy and an article he wrote from 2005. The rest of it is just circlejerky call and response poo poo. The only good short response was the one along the lines of "he's a civil libertarian who takes it to extreme lengths" IMO. From the very first few posts, he thinks Democrats are the real racists and the GOP socialists. Dude sucks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 23:27
|
|
|
BougieBitch posted:You are going to absolutely need to cite your sources on him changing opinion on immigration, cuz appearing on Tucker Carlson is pretty consistent with the same degree of white nationalism as that blog post about "hordes" preventing the "preservation of any national identity" Sure quote:@sahar_shafqat That was a 6 yrs ago: 3 weeks after I began blogging, when I had zero readers. I've discussed many times before how there were many uninformed things I believed back then, before I focused on politics full-time - due to uncritically ingesting conventional wisdom, propaganda, etc. I've written many times since then about how immigrants are exploited by the Right for fear-mongering purposes. I'm 100% in favor of amnesty, think defeat of the DREAM Act was an act of evil, etc. That said, I do think illegal immigration is a serious problem: having millions of people live without legal rights; having a legal scheme that is so pervasively disregarded breeds contempt for the rule of law; virtually every country - not just the U.S. insists on border control because having a manageable immigration process is vital on multiple levels. But that post is something I wrote literally a few weeks after I began blogging when nobody was reading my blog; it was anything but thoughtful, contemplative, and informed, and - like so many things I thought were true then - has nothing to do with what I believe now. Very catty. I suppose he also posts on twitter about all the fracas at the border but IDK, I don't follow him. The "legal scheme that is so pervasively disregarded breeds contempt for the rule of law;" thing is an issue (if it means what I think it means, unclear, but the rest is reasonable growth.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 23:28
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:From the very first few posts, he thinks Democrats are the real racists and the GOP socialists. lets talk specifics: - his horrible comments about transmen - his recent interview in which he claimed tucker and donald trump were the real socialists - two days ago when he claimed that a mass shooting that targeted asians actually wasn't about racism - the fact that keeps appearing on tucker carlson to yell about cancel culture - the fact that twenty years ago he virulently defended a literal nazi and smeared his accusers (who were upset that said nazi was inspiring murderers) - etc. etc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 23:29
|
|
|
have some new glenn tweets. https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1372645953434423300 https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1372648131473575937 what sad little man.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 23:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 11:28 |
|
|
lol, there you go
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2021 23:32
|
|