|
111323_2 posted:patiently waiting today's Death to America speech by President Xi with the Golden Gate Bridge and some American flags in the background How many accounts do you have, dude?
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 17:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 10:32 |
|
|
mctesticle posted:Yup that's exactly what I said. Don't bother reading up thread to see that's its actually not what I said. Good job repeating some of the most bedrock military propaganda though. They are the only thing that keeps us safe. No one could possibly stand up in defense of themselves without a gang at their back. How exactly is an individual going to "stand up in defense of themselves" to an army invading with tanks, jet planes, artillery, and automatic rifles unless they have a military of their own?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 17:27
|
|
|
Historian and Journalist Jonathan Karl reports that Trump apparently tried to extort Kim Kardashian to get celebrity endorsements, threatened to not commute the sentences of federal prisoners if she didn't deliver, and then, after leaving office in 2021, declined to make statements in support of a criminal justice bill that he signed because Kim Kardashian voted for Joe Biden. The same book also reports that Trump thought there might be something to the conspiracy that he would be reinstated as President in 2021. Karl was in the room with Trump and had access to several Trump advisors while writing the book. A Trump spokesperson denies the Kim Kardashian story and says that Trump's talk about the validity of the conspiracy theory that he would be reinstated as President in August of 2021 were just "offhand musings" about the possibility and he didn't truly think it was going to happen or support it. Trump also reportedly refused to explain the theory to Karl and seemed to indicate that he did actually believe it. quote:“I’m not going to explain it to you, Jonathan, because you wouldn’t -- you wouldn’t either understand it or write it,” Trump replied. quote:Trump ‘demanded a straight-up quid pro quo’ from Kim Kardashian, later broke with her over Biden: Book https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/4306950-trump-kim-kardashian-biden-jonathan-karl/ Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 17:32 on Nov 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 17:29
|
|
|
Professor Beetus posted:Do you think that mctesticle made a literal claim and that you are going to refute it by taking the DSMV to each and every American service member? I do think that mctesticle made a literal claim, as we all should be doing if we are posting in good faith. As far as doing a formal study using the DSMV for each and every military personnel, that could be one way mctesticle could prove their point. However, there are other indications that can be used to be able to determine if someone is most likely a violent sociopath. However, mctesticle has thus far refused to provide any evidence at all to support their argument.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 17:32
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:How exactly is an individual going to "stand up in defense of themselves" to an army invading with tanks, jet planes, artillery, and automatic rifles unless they have a military of their own? Obviously we need to repeal the NFA and allow law-abiding Americans to personally buy all of these things themselves
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 17:32
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:How exactly is an individual going to "stand up in defense of themselves" to an army invading with tanks, jet planes, artillery, and automatic rifles unless they have a military of their own? Spoken like someone who is always on the side of the oppressors. You're right, it's literally impossible. Never before been done. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 17:32
|
|
|
Uglycat posted:will never forgive what he did to the kurds That one is bigger than it gets credit for too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 17:35
|
|
|
Papercut posted:There are thousands of civilians working for companies like Pratt or Boeing etc who are also working on the vehicles or playing support roles, are all of them violent sociopaths too? They are not violent sociopaths. They (probably) don’t go in every day thinking about how their work enables death and how that motivates them. Their work still enables death, though. You are responsible for the output of your labor and how it is used. If you make software the border patrol uses to detain migrants, even if it isn’t migrant-detaining software you have helped them run their concentration camps. This line of thinking makes people uncomfortable because they have little to no influence on who uses the outputs of their labor and how. The torment nexus doesn’t exist if nobody builds it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 17:39
|
|
|
Papercut posted:There are thousands of civilians working for companies like Pratt or Boeing etc who are also working on the vehicles or playing support roles, are all of them violent sociopaths too?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 17:46
|
|
|
World Famous W posted:if you work for the bomb making factory you probably suck poo poo Bad news: everyone in America works for the bomb making factory (I am not disagreeing with the quoted thesis)
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 17:49
|
|
|
World Famous W posted:if you work for the bomb making factory you probably suck poo poo Boeing doesn't make bombs. They just design airplane and helicopter parts and those parts go into all sorts of different airplanes/helicopters. The whole argument is pretty silly and destined to go around forever because there is no objective answer and you can technically tag every human being alive who isn't living in an unincorporated part of Somalia with culpability for anything their government does.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 17:49
|
|
|
Love to argue with someone named "mctesticle" (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 17:49
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Boeing doesn't make bombs. They just design airplane and helicopter parts and those parts go into all sorts of different airplanes/helicopters. And if you do live in an unincorporated part of Somalia you probably have to regularly engage in violence or at least give off the impression that you can just to continue doing so
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 17:51
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Boeing doesn't make bombs. They just design airplane and helicopter parts and those parts go into all sorts of different airplanes/helicopters.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 17:54
|
|
|
Yet your sandwiches feed those whose taxes fund bombs and kill innocents. Curious!
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 18:02
|
|
|
In actual news and not insane rambling about the military, a clean continuing resolution in the house won't get sufficient support (if only GOP votes are used): https://twitter.com/haleytalbotcnn/status/1724083076915978604
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 18:04
|
|
|
World Famous W posted:yeah, i also suck poo poo as an american, but i make sandwiches for a living not death machines But you perpetuate the heinous factory farm industry that causes untold torture to animals and massively contributes to global warming which is right now killing children in Timor-Leste. You post on a computer that contains elements extracted from Congolese mines worked by impoverished exploited populations. And so on. We all live on a mountain of skulls. This argument has been done a thousand times and it's beyond tedious that we have to rehash it yet again whenever someone decides to post two sentences about how righteous they are because they recognize some of the manifest injustice in the world, which I guess they'll solve by posting about it on the internet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 18:19
|
|
|
"no ethical consumption under capitalism" I say, as I go to punch the clock at the violence factory and get back to making puppy kicking boots
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 18:29
|
|
|
Magic Underwear posted:But you perpetuate the heinous factory farm industry that causes untold torture to animals and massively contributes to global warming which is right now killing children in Timor-Leste. You post on a computer that contains elements extracted from Congolese mines worked by impoverished exploited populations. And so on. We all live on a mountain of skulls.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 18:30
|
|
|
I mean, I do always wonder if the same considerations for poverty/lack of options/etc are extended to the Russian soldiers currently invading Ukraine, or the Israeli, Confederate or Nazi armies.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 18:31
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Wait, did you not fight the balrog and get your special sword? Haha look at this guy he didn't get his special sword or kill the balrog. This is not a joke, this was a real sales pitch for the marines https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62tnJtLBQzQ
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 18:33
|
|
|
Professor Beetus posted:"no ethical consumption under capitalism" I say, as I go to punch the clock at the violence factory and get back to making puppy kicking boots You realize that every remotely successful socialist revolution was thanks to the military supporting it right? "Red Army" has the word "army" in it. The point about "no ethical consumption under capitalism" is to avoid these sorts of unproductive conversations that don't actually advance any goals of material positive changes. Because there is no job that you can do that doesn't ultimately up hol ld capitalisms power structures outside of sustinence living off the land off the grid. The difference between being an infantry, or a doctor, or a computer toucher or a farmer or a factory worker means nothing on a macro level because they all contribute to capital.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 18:53
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:. If hot takes and dunks aren't productive then I have bad news for the "information economy" the bad news is that Twitter may be in trouble!
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 19:03
|
|
|
Byzantine posted:I mean, I do always wonder if the same considerations for poverty/lack of options/etc are extended to the Russian soldiers currently invading Ukraine, or the Israeli, Confederate or Nazi armies. All of the militaries you listed use or used conscription, rather than relying entirely on volunteers. That makes it a very different conversation, though it still doesn't entirely absolve soldiers of personal responsibility for atrocities and war crimes they personally committed, nor does it absolve the country's political establishment and military leadership for the part they play in ordering injustices or refusing to rein them in.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 19:04
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/AndrewJTobias/status/1724087749664210989 Ohio GOP lawmakers have decided to combine their two largest electoral liabilities into one easy to vote against package. "Being drafted by legislative council" is a world away from "becoming law" so we'll see what happens.  I wonder if the Ohio state supreme court is willing to abrogate its entire function to the legislature. Let's find out. zoux fucked around with this message at 19:16 on Nov 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 19:12
|
|
|
Voters hate it! Circumvent separation of powers with this one weird trick.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 19:31
|
|
|
zoux posted:https://twitter.com/AndrewJTobias/status/1724087749664210989 I don't think they could more thoroughly violate the court's due process rights/area of responsibility if you gave them a hundred rewrites, good lord.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 19:32
|
|
|
Nervous posted:I don't think they could more thoroughly violate the court's due process rights/area of responsibility if you gave them a hundred rewrites, good lord. Like, their own judicial self-regard will override any pro-life commitments they have! Also, this fact about that bill author may shock you quote:During her tenure in the state House, she has been a leading supporter of anti-vaccine legislation. She also believes the Ohio referendum only succeeded because of "foreign election interference" zoux fucked around with this message at 19:38 on Nov 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 19:35
|
|
|
zoux posted:Like, their own judicial self-regard will override any pro-life commitments they have! It's also seems so blatantly unconstitutional to the due process rights of any current litigants with the outright dismissal of all current or pending litigation on the matter that even the current SCOTUS would knock this poo poo down, but IANAL.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 19:40
|
|
|
zoux posted:https://twitter.com/AndrewJTobias/status/1724087749664210989 This looks like a messaging/show bill. They would need a constitutional amendment for some of the changes. The impeachment passage she suggests modifying in section 3 is redundant and the rest of section 3 is explicitly unconstitutional. It doesn't even really require any deep dive. The Ohio state constitution is pretty clear on that. While checking out the Ohio state constitution, I also learned that the constitution has an entire section in article two devoted to banning the legislature from dissolving marriages via vote in the legislature against the will of the married couple. I'm sure there is an interesting story for why that happened, but also kind of hilarious that roughly 4% of the entire section on the powers of the legislature in the Ohio state constitution is devoted to not letting congress divorce people and it has its own section. It was implemented in 1851 and is still law today. https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-constitution
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 19:44
|
|
|
They rewrote their entire constitution in 1851 so it may not have been in response to something. I found a single cite about it but it's a locked journal article.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 19:56
|
|
|
zoux posted:They rewrote their entire constitution in 1851 so it may not have been in response to something. I found a single cite about it but it's a locked journal article. Even if it was added during a constitutional convention where they were doing a huge revamp, there has got to be SOME reason it is included and given a weird level of prominence. I don't have every state constitution memorized, but I know that I haven't seen one with a weirdly explicit constitutional prohibition enshrined to prevent the legislature from forcefully divorcing you via a majority vote. I'm sure there is an interesting reason or story behind why it was included. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 20:02 on Nov 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 19:59
|
|
|
That section would be so much more based if they didn't also have Article XV, Section 11 in 2004quote:Only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this state and its political subdivisions. This state and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance or effect of marriage.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 20:01
|
|
|
Dude, don't piss off your local congressman, they'll haul your rear end in and force you to leave your wife. Only Ohio is safe.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 20:04
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Even if it was added during a constitutional convention where they were doing a huge revamp, there has got to be SOME reason it is included and given a weird level of prominence. I've found and am reading the official report of that convention now. edit: it goes back further in time, here's what happened in 1851:  The pre-1851 section text is at the top. The section appears to have stuck around as a general matter of separation of powers. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 20:11 on Nov 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 20:07
|
|
|
Politicians have had lovely opinions on who should marry who for a long time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 20:07
|
|
|
According to this paper from Cleveland State University, part of the main drive for the constitutional convention in 1851 was the immense power the state legislature had and corruption. They wanted to strip the legislature of a lot of powers and more forcefully define the separation of powers in the state government. They explicitly sought to enshrine limitations in the constitution to prevent major problems they had recently run in to with the state legislature. They took away most of the appointment powers from the legislature and made all statewide offices - including judges - elected directly or appointed by the Governor, they prevented the legislature from issuing debt higher than $750,000, banned the legislature from forcibly divorcing people with a majority vote, banned them from targeting taxes at individuals, gave the Governor veto power, and banned retroactive laws to prevent the legislature from retaliating. Not a lot of specifics, but apparently the state legislature trying to forcefully divorce people via majority vote really was a problem in Ohio prior to 1851. Sounds like the legislature in Ohio was up to some wild stuff in the years between 1803 and 1851. https://www.law.csuohio.edu/sites/default/files/lawlibrary/ohioconlaw/pdf22.pdf Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 20:13 on Nov 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 20:11
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:I've found and am reading the official report of that convention now. From that same record (p. 234)   Sounds like it was a scheme involving widows divorcing their long-dead husbands for some pecuniary benefit zoux fucked around with this message at 20:14 on Nov 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 20:12
|
|
|
zoux posted:From that same record (p. 234) That's an unrelated amendment, though. The constitutional ban on the legislature divorcing people seems to have predated the 1851 convention.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 20:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 10:32 |
|
|
Was a special bill in the legislature the only way ti get a divorce at the time? I believe at some point historically in Britain divorce required a literal act of parliament. Edit: https://www.parliament.uk/about/liv...20a%20marriage.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2023 20:21
|
|