|
Crossover from CA politics, but yowza: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-10-09/city-council-leaked-audio-nury-martinez-kevin-de-leon-gil-cedillo Several members of the LA city council & the LA county Federation of Labor president caught saying a whole bunch of insanely racist stuff on a hot mic, including about how this Black child of a White political opponent needs a beating. The council president resigned her presidency but not her seat.
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 15:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 22:12 |
|
|
cat botherer posted:Crossover from CA politics, but yowza: De Leon came close to primarying Diane Feinstein in 2018 too. The variety and... detail (?) of the remarks are pretty wild too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 15:16
|
|
|
Automata 10 Pack posted:when it comes to the youtube algorithm, isn't it owned by google? can't they just cross reference what videos the algorithm is feeding the people they've been datafarming for decades? "hey, let's look at the videos the algorithm is recommending to people who go to stormfront and google "phrenology" all the time." It is, but like most "why don't they just supervise it better" solutions, it neglects the scale of the problem. For every phrenology video you catch, there are a thousand you didn't catch, and a thousand relationships between topics you didn't think of checking. Only changing the algorithm so it doesn't do this in the first place can produce a lasting, universal solution, and this is counter to the profit motive so they aren't going to do it spontaneously without outside pressure haveblue fucked around with this message at 15:55 on Oct 11, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 15:35
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:I'm pretty sure ymb is making a pretty standard argument for The purpose of a system is what it does. The purpose of the Algorithm is to sell suicide kits because that's what it does. It does this because that makes the owners of the system more profit. What you and ymb are claiming is not POSIWID; that is not what the theory means or is intended to be used for. The entire point of of POSIWID is to remove intent from a systems theory analysis of an issue, not to ascribe it as you are doing. POSIWID doesn't state the intended purpose of a system is what it does, it deliberately jettisons intent as a way to approach a problem without being biased by what a system is supposed to do. You cannot then turn around and add back "well if that's the purpose then that's what the designer intended". You're abusing the theory as a thought-terminating cliche so you can avoid addressing the actual difficult question of intent, and then shoe-horn the intent back in on the backside as whatever suits your rhetorical position. POSIWID states the designers intent is irrelevant to a systems-based analysis, not that it doesn't exist, and it's a concept that very specifically relevant to an amoral functional analysis. It is not at all applicable to a analysis of designer's intent.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 15:42
|
|
|
Dubar posted:Surprising no one Just continually baffled that you can make all these dire intonations that use the word “wokeness” and not get laughed out of the room, let alone get taken seriously.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 16:01
|
|
|
9/11, Yemen, and secretly working with Pakistan to transfer nuclear secrets weren't enough to damage the U.S. relationship with Saudi Arabia. But, siding with Russia and trying to raise oil prices 50% apparently is. Biden says the U.S. will "re-evaluate" its relationship with KSA. - They have cancelled a joint security meeting and all future security cooperation meetings. Considering cancelling them permanently. - They already scaled back military sales to just defensive items and are considering stopping all of them. - They already stopped providing intelligence assistance to KSA in Yemen last year and are considering not assisting in any areas now. - They are considering stripping OPEC of its anti-trust exemption so American companies and governments can sue them. https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1579846373054509058
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 16:16
|
|
|
Staluigi posted:Virtually every time a candidate is accused of being a russian asset it's incredibly dumb but people like gabbard make you have to stop and think about it first even though the connections to modi/rss hindu hypernationalism make more sense As a council member in Honolulu, she was ahead of the curve with both suppressing the first amendment and abusing the unhoused (in fairness, this bill, in its majestic equality, forbade rich and poor alike to leave their property on public sidewalks overnight). Around the same time, she walked back the wild homophobia she entered Hawaii Politics espousing: quote:“To try to act as if there is a difference between ‘civil unions’ and same-sex marriage is dishonest, cowardly and extremely disrespectful to the people of Hawaii who have already made overwhelmingly clear our position on this issue… As Democrats we should be representing the views of the people, not a small number of homosexual extremists.” quote:The contrast between our society and those in the Middle East made me realize that the difference—the reason those societies are so oppressive—is that they are essentially theocracies where the government and government leaders wield the power to both define and then enforce "morality." The rampant Islamophobia, of course, being somewhat of a calling card for her in her career. Checking in with noted piece of poo poo Mike Flynn and his views on her assertions on Fox that it was "mindboggling" Obama was refusing to use quote:“[Gabbard] has taken a very courageous stand in a party that just refuses to face reality,” quote:“I think that what’s important is we look at some of these messages and some of these threats that are being posed by different groups…by identifying the single common element amongst them…groups who are fueled by this radical Islamic ideology then once that’s identified, we understand it, then we can come up with a winning strategy to defeat it both militarily as well as ideologically.” Of course, her advocacy that we continue bombing the gently caress out of the Middle East (except the lion Assad) wasn't all that far from party orthodoxy (even if insisting it's because they're Muslims is a bit mask off). She was, though, one of the few Dems in congress not to sign on to a letter asking Trump to reverse Bannon's appointment. No word on if her opposition was because she promotes the same xenophobic bullshit the letter calls Bannon out for or was some form of returning the favor after press stories dropped about the bigot liking her immigration stances. Which are, to be clear, horrific even by the abysmal standards of American Politics. She displayed great bipartisanship by joining with Republican allies to vote in favor of the SAFE act, requiring “the secretary of Homeland Security, the head of the FBI and the director of national intelligence to sign off on every individual refugee from Iraq and Syria, affirming he or she is not a threat.” To be fair, this is actually a moderation of her earlier stance, proposing legislation that removed any country that had Islamic terrorists from the visa waiver program entirely. Also, delightfully, did not merely vote against but actively opposed a resolution calling for India to "protect the rights and freedoms of religious minorities". Now, I know what you're saying. How can someone who sincerely denounced their own past virulent antichoice and homophobic advocacy based on a newfound belief in religious freedom oppose a resolution in favor of religious freedom. And the answer is either that she changed her political stances out of expediency rather than belief, or that she couldn't abide a resolution calling for the protection of muslims from harassment, discrimination, and mass lynchings. Or, I suppose, it could be both. Frankly the question is less "is she a Russian asset?" (Obviously no), or even "Is she somehow nefariously controlled by Modi?" (Also obviously no), and more "how did such an outright and unrepentant bigot develop so sterling a progressive reputation as to be endorsed by some of the largest leftwing political movements and candidates in the country?" and, as followup, "Why did such a blatant piece of poo poo have a position with the DNC to resign from (e:in Feb of 2016) in the first place?" Paracaidas fucked around with this message at 20:06 on Oct 11, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 16:21
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:9/11, Yemen, and secretly working with Pakistan to transfer nuclear secrets weren't enough to damage the U.S. relationship with Saudi Arabia. But, siding with Russia and trying to raise oil prices 50% apparently is. I am totally down with this. Course we could be doing a speed run of the 70s with the incredibly corrupt president then gas lines and stagflation but hey, we had great legos.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 16:25
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:Frankly the question is less "is she a Russian asset?" (Obviously no), or even "Is she somehow nefariously controlled by Modi?" (Also obviously no), and more "how did such an outright and unrepentant bigot develop so sterling a progressive reputation as to be endorsed by some of the largest leftwing political movements and candidates in the country?" She backed Bernie in 2016 and largely copied his platform in 2020. There were others who did that too though so I think the more significant thing was that she leaned hard on anti-war rhetoric. quote:and, as followup, "Why did such a blatant piece of poo poo have a position with the DNC to resign from in the first place?" Don't know the answer to this one but typically when something like this happens the answer is they can fundraise and the party doesn't really care what you do as long as you can do that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 16:30
|
|
|
Elon Musk spoke to Putin before tweeting his very dumb idea on how to 'end' the Russian aggression in Ukraine. You can uh, form your own conclusions as to why. https://www.vice.com/en/article/ake44z/elon-musk-vladimir-putin-ukraine quote:According to Bremmer, Musk said Putin told him these goals would be accomplished “no matter what,” including the potential of a nuclear strike if Ukraine invaded Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014. Bremmer wrote that Musk told him that “everything needed to be done to avoid that outcome.”
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 17:21
|
|
|
Can he just nuke Elon instead
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 17:26
|
|
|
I don't know whether its funnier to me for Elon to call Putin or vice versa. Both seem silly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 17:28
|
|
|
So uh, isn't he flirting with Logan Act issues there? Not that rich people ever see consequences for their actions or anything.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 17:42
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:So uh, isn't he flirting with Logan Act issues there? Not that rich people ever see consequences for their actions or anything. Yes. He was also shilling for China re: Taiwan on the same day, lol. Apparently he really needs new investors.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 17:44
|
|
|
projecthalaxy posted:I don't know whether its funnier to me for Elon to call Putin or vice versa. Both seem silly. He's just Trump with a tech-bro pallette swap, so he probably tried to call Putin multiple times, pathetically trying to fawn on him before a representative finally told him what his orders were if he wanted any "investment" in the future.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 17:45
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:So uh, isn't he flirting with Logan Act issues there? Not that rich people ever see consequences for their actions or anything. skylined! posted:Yes. He was also shilling for China re: Taiwan on the same day, lol. Apparently he really needs new investors. If what is quoted is all that he said, then he didn't violate the Logan Act. Telling someone that you have a good idea isn't a violation. The Logan Act is so broad and vague that only two people have ever been successfully prosecuted under it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 17:48
|
|
|
Dubar posted:Surprising no one Other than the anti-white bullshit, she's 100% correct. Edit* Never mind, she's wrong. Democrats aren't hostile to people of faith, don't want to defund the police, and don't want open borders. 
FlapYoJacks fucked around with this message at 18:51 on Oct 11, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 17:49
|
|
|
FlapYoJacks posted:Other than the anti-white bullshit, she's 100% correct. you think the Democrats are run by a cabal of (((woke ideologues))) who are hostile to people of faith, want to defund the police, and want open borders?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 17:55
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:
I remember even back earlier in her career whenever she was brought up it was always in the context of "she's a Democrat solely because Republicans cannot win races in Hawaii". I distinctly remember those stories early on which is why I was always surprised when she tried to play herself up as a lefty darling after hitting the national spotlight. As to the last two questions, the answer is that left wing political orgs are just as susceptible to corruption and payola as centrist ones. Plenty of less than honorable political consultants and orgs who will advertise you as the lefty / Bernie / whatever candidate if you pay them enough. You can completely launder your reputation for enough money. Don't really want to say too much more about it for doxing reasons, but trust that I've seen it first hand. For profit political consulting is a big part of why we can't have nice things and why I'm entirely jaded from my time in political volunteering.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 18:03
|
|
|
FlapYoJacks posted:Other than the anti-white bullshit, she's 100% correct. What rights, given by God, are the Democrats undermining?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 18:19
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:you think the Democrats are run by a cabal of (((woke ideologues))) who are hostile to people of faith, want to defund the police, and want open borders? I wish they were.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 18:27
|
|
|
It's been said before but it bears repeating: it sure would be nice if the Democrats aspired to be even half as leftist the GOP regularly accuses them of.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 18:31
|
|
|
The mention of "elites" tells me she's probably trying to do a Trump, but I don't think it's going to work. You can't out-Trump true believers, and DeSantis is far ahead of her on building a reputation of "standing up to the liberal conspiracy and triggering the leftists." Also, this is far from harmless. The dishonesty about "a cabal of liberals coming for your rights!" that her sort of rhetoric relies on has a cost, namely the people now sitting in bunkers, filling their basement with weapons and rations, ready to take innocent lives in a war against these "elites." Billionaires are definitely the main problem, but it's not that they're coming for our faith or our guns - they're coming for our purchasing power. This difference matters, especially when some guy shoots up a college or synagogue because he decided liberals or Jews, not billionaires, were the problem.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 18:38
|
|
|
They've dropped charges against Adnan Syed.quote:Baltimore prosecutors on Tuesday dropped the charges against Adnan Syed, the man whose legal saga rose to international renown because of the hit podcast “Serial.”
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 18:44
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:you think the Democrats are run by a cabal of (((woke ideologues))) who are hostile to people of faith, want to defund the police, and want open borders? Yeah, you are right. I wish they where. She is wrong.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 18:50
|
|
|
Fart Amplifier posted:What rights, given by God, are the Democrats undermining? Well, they are proposing to give America’s violent, racist, unaccountable police even more money despite it being the most well-funded police state in human history 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 18:58
|
|
|
Gabbard spent the beginning of her career attacking gay people, repented and tried to make a good name for herself to climb the political ladder, and the second that the 2020 election was over pivoted to attacking trans people. To be clear, she is not just sending some dog whistles with that BS, but teamed up with Republicans to ban trans athletes and supported the Don't Say Gay Bill. Gabbard is a charlatan. You never have to hand it to her because anything she happens to say in a given moment can't be trusted to be authentic.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 19:00
|
|
|
is pepsi ok posted:She backed Bernie in 2016 and largely copied his platform in 2020. There were others who did that too though so I think the more significant thing was that she leaned hard on anti-war rhetoric. There seems to be some confusion - as far as I can tell she was not a dnc member in 2022, although it's actually pretty feasible to crowbar someone in if they have support from the state level party. Strictly speaking all you need is a majority (or plurality) vote in the state convention, and in many cases not even that, in TX there are a bunch of caucus specific dnc slots. She was a vice chair in *2016* before it was nationally obvious how awful she was.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 19:06
|
|
|
It's a really good idea to watch the live stream of the LA city council right now. NSFW language of course: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9N_JZXBQGFA&hd=1
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 19:25
|
|
|
I will believe we are truly reevaluating our relationship with KSA when I see warrants for the multiple KSA intelligence officials we knew supported the 9/11 highjackers, and when we start giving KSA leadership the Lumumba treatment.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 19:49
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:There seems to be some confusion - as far as I can tell she was not a dnc member in 2022, although it's actually pretty feasible to crowbar someone in if they have support from the state level party. Strictly speaking all you need is a majority (or plurality) vote in the state convention, and in many cases not even that, in TX there are a bunch of caucus specific dnc slots. She was a vice chair in *2016* before it was nationally obvious how awful she was. As we chat timeline, though, the only thing in my post that hadn't happened by the time she resigned her vicechairship (and/or received the endorsements) was the Bannon bit. The rest was knowable to the point it should have been known, even if not nationally obvious.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 20:05
|
|
|
Zinkovich posted:The mention of "elites" tells me she's probably trying to do a Trump, but I don't think it's going to work. You can't out-Trump true believers, and DeSantis is far ahead of her on building a reputation of "standing up to the liberal conspiracy and triggering the leftists." It's weird watching so many people try to do the trump 'thing' just with the word association stuff, and not the bizarrely hypnotic conman charisma. They always end up just feeling like soulless robots.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 21:36
|
|
|
E: how on earth did I double post like THAT but yeah I agree that a cursory review of her history should have disqualified her from vice chair, at least in the absence of a whole rear end public apology never mind her hindutva fash ties
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 21:58
|
|
|
Dr Christmas posted:Just continually baffled that you can make all these dire intonations that use the word “wokeness” and not get laughed out of the room, let alone get taken seriously. Agreed, we need a different word that means performative progressivism as a tool of control and power.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 22:11
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:Agreed, we need a different word that means performative progressivism as a tool of control and power. was what happened to Roy Moore cancellation by the woke mob
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 22:23
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:was what happened to Roy Moore cancellation by the woke mob I can’t speak to TDD’s implications but it’s safe to say that how seriously a rape accusation against a powerful person is taken is a political decision , and not a moral one to our elites. Everybody was still hanging with Jeff and Ghislaine knowing full well what they were and what they’d done and continued to do. Every corporation in America will change their social media avatars into rainbow versions; none would support programs that actually work to change the imposed class conditions being trans comes with. Or just look at the words of the ostensible allies on the LA city council when they’re just being honest! Words are easy which is why they’re the vast majority of efforts when it comes to social equality issues. You can’t have true social equality without class equality and no amount of token rich trans or gay or black people saying whatever bullshit Jay-Z recently spouted off about will change that. selec fucked around with this message at 22:35 on Oct 11, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 22:30
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:Gabbard spent the beginning of her career attacking gay people, repented and tried to make a good name for herself to climb the political ladder, and the second that the 2020 election was over pivoted to attacking trans people. To be clear, she is not just sending some dog whistles with that BS, but teamed up with Republicans to ban trans athletes and supported the Don't Say Gay Bill. This is the same story we've seen with Sinema, though Sinema has not yet felt compelled to completely burn her state support for the sake of Twitter accolades. Our government is absolutely filled with charlatans at this point, it's frankly embarrassing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 22:59
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:This is the same story we've seen with Sinema, though Sinema has not yet felt compelled to completely burn her state support for the sake of Twitter accolades. Our government is absolutely filled with charlatans at this point, it's frankly embarrassing. I can count on two hands the number of people in Congress that aren't just there to get wealthier or oppress others.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 23:01
|
|
|
Staluigi posted:Virtually every time a candidate is accused of being a russian asset it's incredibly dumb but people like gabbard make you have to stop and think about it first even though the connections to modi/rss hindu hypernationalism make more sense There's also Mitch McConnel. When people were calling him "Moscow Mitch" for a short time he got oddly, intensely uncomfortable. That could be just latent the Cold Warrior in him since he's been around so long, but with McConnel I always prefer to chose the less charitable/more evil option. It's generally more accurate.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 23:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 22:12 |
|
|
I mean we have a bunch of examples that show that Russia has tried to gain assets or use people in US politics including the Mueller investigation, and we've had some reps who were super duper big on promoting Russia issues for some reason. (Rohrbachre) But people try to minimize it as liberal nonsense. Now, was russia actually influential in US politics, or is it kind of sideshow and we're doing fine with fascism all on our own? That's where the real discussion is. I'd say that it's mostly we're doing it on our own but not for lack of trying on Putin's part.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2022 23:29
|
|