|
Shooting Blanks posted:One of the core purposes of a university president is to attract wealthy donors. Adversarial engagements like this aren't common whatsoever. It's still a massive oversight, don't get me wrong, but this falls pretty far outside of their normal responsibilities. Even when a big donor is adversarial, these presidents are usually talking with them one-on-one or in closed door meetings and that's probably much and closer to a real conversation.
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 02:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 15:22 |
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:After the recent Senate announcements and court rulings, 2024 is going to be a bizzaro version 2012 where Democrats actually have better than even odds of taking the House, are almost certainly going to get destroyed in the Senate, and have a 50/50 shot at the Presidency. 2024 Senate run was always going to be a tough year at best for D's. There are Sabato articles talking about it years ago as a near sure loser for D's almost no matter what. The electoral map this round is terrible. And yeah even in good years the Senate will be difficult for D's because the Senate is structurally biased in favor of R's right now. Only hope to change that is to either make more states that will vote in D's or wait for more R's to die off in large numbers so D's have a shot at winning a few of the previously R states.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 02:41
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:
It's impossible to tell when a fascist is actually offended because they never argue in good faith. They should have considered the implications of that when they abandoned their integrity in service of their reactionary nationalism. They don't deserve the same considerations as non-fascists because we should always assume they are lying. It's especially obvious in this context- none of these Republicans are actually offended by "from the river to the sea" and ceding any rhetorical ground to someone dedicated to destroying discourse itself is a huge error.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 02:55
|
|
|
PC LOAD LETTER posted:2024 Senate run was always going to be a tough year at best for D's. There are Sabato articles talking about it years ago as a near sure loser for D's almost no matter what. The electoral map this round is terrible. That was very true, but 10 months is a long time and a hell of a lot of things can happen that could swing it towards the Democrats. More overreach on abortion (see that poor woman in Texas), Trump getting convicted. Trump voters staying home. The economy 'feels' better for more people. Lots can happen. But you are right, structurally the senate favors the Republicans just due to the fact that so many states are empty compared to California and New York.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 03:43
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:This interpretation (and to an extent, the entire conversation) violates a basic tenet of progressive ideology: intent isn’t relevant, causing offense should be enough to warrant protective and corrective action. Which progressive ideology is it violating a basic tenet of, exactly? Because it's not one I or anyone I know subscribe to, all of which value intent a good deal. Is it a college thing?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 04:53
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:Which progressive ideology is it violating a basic tenet of, exactly? Because it's not one I or anyone I know subscribe to, all of which value intent a good deal. Is it a college thing? ymmv on whether that's "a basic tenet of progressive ideology" but it's an uncharitable interpretation of the Robin DiAngelo school of DEI trainings
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 05:22
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:This interpretation (and to an extent, the entire conversation) violates a basic tenet of progressive ideology: intent isn’t relevant, causing offense should be enough to warrant protective and corrective action. Especially in academic circles, this has played out countless times over the past few decades - academic speakers are protested into silence, words are cherry-picked for potentially offensive speech, etc. Micro-aggressions are violence, silence is violence, but in this particular case, it’s vitally important to ascertain whether they meant “intifada” or “river to the sea” in the genocidal way, or not. It’s absurd. Apartheid states don't deserve the protections of civil society, and since freeing Palestine isn't genocidal it's pretty important to ascertain if someone's trying to use it with genocidal intent, much like it's important to determine if they're saying anything with such intent. And, honestly, conservatives just can't cope with the fact that their speakers tend to be disgusting assholes who deserve to be shouted down.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 05:23
|
|
|
Kalit posted:I’m a little confused by your previous post and this one. Was this restaurant specifically targeted for protesting because of the owner or was it protested because it happened to be one of the boycotted businesses along a pre-determined protest route? https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/dec/08/michael-solomonov-philadelphia-restaurant-israel-antisemitic-protest quote:Since the 7 October attacks, Solomonov has publicly sought to caveat his support for Israel. “I personally believe in the right of Palestinians to have their own state, and the right for self-determination, and I don’t deny those things,” he said at an event last month in New Jersey, according to the Philadelphia Inquirer. “And I believe the Israeli government oftentimes does things that I would not do at all … and it can be quite damaging.” The former. This was what started everything.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 07:02
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:This interpretation (and to an extent, the entire conversation) violates a basic tenet of progressive ideology: intent isn’t relevant, causing offense should be enough to warrant protective and corrective action. Especially in academic circles, this has played out countless times over the past few decades - academic speakers are protested into silence, words are cherry-picked for potentially offensive speech, etc. Micro-aggressions are violence, silence is violence, but in this particular case, it’s vitally important to ascertain whether they meant “intifada” or “river to the sea” in the genocidal way, or not. It’s absurd. Can you give some examples, maybe following up on how their newfound silence equates to violence as you theorize? I'm not very familiar with academia.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 07:10
|
|
|
In Florida GOP news; https://www.heraldtribune.com/story/news/politics/2023/12/12/christian-ziegler-invokes-donald-trump-as-he-seeks-to-save-job/71884152007/ Bridget Ziegler (his wife) has been a very very lovely school board member in Sarasota county for a long time (who homeschooled and didn’t have kids in the public system). She’s a cofounder of Mom’s for Liberty.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 08:05
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:This interpretation (and to an extent, the entire conversation) violates a basic tenet of progressive ideology: intent isn’t relevant, causing offense should be enough to warrant protective and corrective action. Especially in academic circles, this has played out countless times over the past few decades - academic speakers are protested into silence, words are cherry-picked for potentially offensive speech, etc. Micro-aggressions are violence, silence is violence, but in this particular case, it’s vitally important to ascertain whether they meant “intifada” or “river to the sea” in the genocidal way, or not. It’s absurd.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 08:31
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:In Florida GOP news; Apparently that’s been fracturing moms for Liberty hard with chapters changing names and or breaking off because of it, probably hasn’t helped with them getting crushed this year. They won’t go away probably but I do the elections and this were a bad one two punch.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 12:28
|
|
|
Spoke Lee posted:https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/dec/08/michael-solomonov-philadelphia-restaurant-israel-antisemitic-protest Thanks for the article. However, to the point of my question, it does clearly state that it wasn’t a preplanned target and just happened to be along the protest route: quote:On 3 December, the Free Palestine Coalition led hundreds of protesters in an evening of marches around Philadelphia to renew calls for a ceasefire. Starting from Rittenhouse Square in Philly’s Center City neighborhood, the march took a wrong turn, which brought it past Goldie, says Abulhawa. The encounter with the falafel restaurant wasn’t planned, she says, “but we ran with it”. quote:Some marchers have acknowledged how the clip, taken out of context, could have been misinterpreted. “I’d say in hindsight, maybe [the organizers] should have spent another minute explaining why we were stopping there,” says Joe Piette, a photographer who joined the protest. “It would have been better to explain some of the details of the owner of that restaurant. Our mistake was not explaining it on the spot.” So with regards to my question, it seems unknown if they would have done this same thing at any of the other boycotted businesses if they had happened to be along the protest route. I am kind of confused about the original claim about smashed windows in this post though: Dapper_Swindler posted:yeah, that feels dumb. I reminds me of those protesters who were protesting that falafle resturant in philly and then someone in the crowd smashed some windows. its like a random jewish resuraunt , its not helping glass gaza. Go protest shaprios or fettermans house or whatever. smashing some jewish owned resturant is a bad loving look. Like i agree with the anger but some of it is sadly misplaced or redirected by real stupid and lovely people. That article doesn’t say anything about it and I can’t find anything about it with a quick google search. Unless Dapper_Swindler meant smashing windows elsewhere in that same protest EVVVVVV: Ahh gotcha, thanks for the explanation Kalit fucked around with this message at 13:00 on Dec 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 12:28
|
|
|
Kalit posted:Thanks for the article. However, to the point of my question, it does clearly state that it wasn’t a preplanned target and just happened to be along the protest route: I heard it on the local news story from a week ago, so it’s probably bullshit. Sorry
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 12:40
|
|
|
Shooting Blanks posted:One of the core purposes of a university president is to attract wealthy donors. Adversarial engagements like this aren't common whatsoever. It's still a massive oversight, don't get me wrong, but this falls pretty far outside of their normal responsibilities. I’m sure this wasn’t the first time they were put on the spot regarding their univrsity’s stance on antisemitism, they’ve probably fielded hundreds of inquiries from concerned (and possibly hostile) donors since 10/7. That they didn’t have a canned response ready to any gotcha-type questions boggles the mind. I think they should all be fired, not for the alleged antisemitic practices, but for their disgraceful performances. How can you lead a top-tier academic institution after getting verbally obliterated by the female heir to Premium Plywood Products? If they had any shame, they would resign. E: Eric Cantonese posted:Even when a big donor is adversarial, these presidents are usually talking with them one-on-one or in closed door meetings and that's probably much and closer to a real conversation. The talking points they use would be the same, even if they’re delivered in a friendly manner. They fumbled this hearing real bad. The Top G fucked around with this message at 12:49 on Dec 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 12:46
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:Can you give some examples, maybe following up on how their newfound silence equates to violence as you theorize? I'm not very familiar with academia. I can only think of total freaks like that nazi guy who got kicked out of his gym, Charles Murray, Milo Yiannopolis, etc who come to universities specifically to cause problems and get the heckler’s veto in return. Academia is pretty conservative and pretty bourgeois as a rule—they’re all pals and don’t want to cause each other trouble outside of cases where somebody’s a sexual predator or faking data or stealing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 13:41
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:In Florida GOP news; The head of the Florida GOP is being accused of rape by a woman who had previously been involved in a bisexual threesome with him and his wife. Allegedly she met up with the husband and she was on drugs while he had non-consensual sex with her. There are also reports that he taped the whole thing and that the cops may have a copy of it now. DeSantis had asked Ziegler to resign from his job and he has refused.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 13:58
|
|
|
The Top G posted:I’m sure this wasn’t the first time they were put on the spot regarding their univrsity’s stance on antisemitism, they’ve probably fielded hundreds of inquiries from concerned (and possibly hostile) donors since 10/7. That they didn’t have a canned response ready to any gotcha-type questions boggles the mind. A university president is not a PR flack. Their job is not "talking points." It's embarrassing that they got publicly owned, and part of the job of a president is not embarrassing the university, but successfully answering gotcha questions to avoid bad soundbites in a Congressional hearing is not among the skills typically required for the job.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 15:11
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Let’s not bury the lede here. The version I read about was that they had a threesome at some point and then the husband wanted another. The wife (Bridget Ziegler) didn't want to or couldn't be there (or the Christian Ziegler set up it up without her knowledge), so the husband went to the victims house, stalked her until she came outside to walk her dog, then basically forced/conned his way inside, leading to the SA. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/02/rape-accusation-florida-republican-party-chair-ziegler-00129753 Trigger warning for this quote for SA stuff. It's some gross, slimy poo poo. quote:On the day of the alleged assault, the woman had initially agreed to meet because she thought Bridget Ziegler would be joining them. She canceled when she learned Bridget Ziegler wouldn’t be there, saying she had only agreed to the encounter because she wanted her there. I have absolutely zero confidence in the Sarasota PD to do anything about this unless there's intense outside pressure. The entire county is a hotbed of boomer MAGA retirees. It's why they so intensely focused on New College.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 15:47
|
|
|
Hunter Biden has appeared at the U.S. Capitol today after he was subpoenaed to have a private deposition with House Republicans for their impeachment inquiry. However, he is partially defying the subpoena and insisting that he will only testify in public. It's unclear what the House Republicans will do, but it seems likely they will not have the private deposition or a public hearing today and will instead attempt to hold him in contempt. https://twitter.com/mviser/status/1734948529913647513 https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1734951081484878145 quote:After weeks of back and forth and a threat to hold him in contempt of Congress, Hunter Biden briefly appeared in the Capitol complex on Wednesday, making a public statement outside the building instead of showing for his scheduled deposition following a subpoena from House Republicans.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 16:06
|
|
|
Google Jeb Bush posted:Asylum officers are good, immigration judges under and hired by a D administration are good-ish, more border officers are... well, I'm open to persuasion but it seems like a tolerable trade. In the quote he said he was willing to do change policy, not just hire folks. In light of the new details, would you still call this a tolerable trade, and is it what you expected? Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:CBS might have answered your question almost as soon as you asked it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 16:11
|
|
|
"For six years, the unrelenting Trump machine has been asking: Where is Hunter Biden? This is Hunter Biden speaking. I am the man who loves his life..."
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 16:15
|
|
|
BRAKE FOR MOOSE posted:A university president is not a PR flack. Their job is not "talking points." It's embarrassing that they got publicly owned, and part of the job of a president is not embarrassing the university, but successfully answering gotcha questions to avoid bad soundbites in a Congressional hearing is not among the skills typically required for the job. This. Each of those people should have met with a media relations expert prior to the hearing (and maybe they did!) to understand the dynamic of that specific meeting, but it falls pretty far outside of the norm. Going back a couple years, it reminds me of how much time Anthony Fauci spent on the news, and how garbled a lot of COVID messaging was because he clearly was not used to answering questions publicly in a clear and concise manner. Completely different subject matter of course, but there was a lot of very valid criticism about the messaging coming from the US government, especially in the early days of COVID.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 16:59
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:CBS might have answered your question almost as soon as you asked it. This feels like what CIA slush funds are for.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 17:39
|
|
|
Gort posted:This feels like what CIA slush funds are for. There is a CIA black budget, but it is only for covert operations and research. Ukraine is basically the opposite of a covert operation. Also, most of the aid we are giving to Ukraine is not actually money - even though it says things like "$35 billion aid package" when describing them. Most of the aid is us selling at a discount, loaning, or donating older American munitions, vehicles, etc. The dollar value is just calculated based on GAO accounting to determine the relative cost of the item to procure for the U.S. government that is being "lost" as an asset on the balance sheet. You can't just give away U.S. government assets that are accounted for via executive order. Even if you could, things like missiles, tanks, and other manufactured items would take a while to build and transport. That is why they give away existing stock that just has to be transported. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 17:56 on Dec 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 17:53
|
|
|
Not surprisingly, the House Oversight Committee will not take Hunter Biden up on his offer to testify publicly and are initiating proceedings to charge him with contempt of congress for defying the subpoena. https://twitter.com/GOPoversight/status/1734979363261608303
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 18:02
|
|
|
FLIPADELPHIA posted:It's impossible to tell when a fascist is actually offended because they never argue in good faith. They should have considered the implications of that when they abandoned their integrity in service of their reactionary nationalism. They don't deserve the same considerations as non-fascists because we should always assume they are lying. It's especially obvious in this context- none of these Republicans are actually offended by "from the river to the sea" and ceding any rhetorical ground to someone dedicated to destroying discourse itself is a huge error. Then don't respond in good faith, answer the question that you want to be asked instead. You don't need to waffle on what the definition of genocide is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 18:23
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Not surprisingly, the House Oversight Committee will not take Hunter Biden up on his offer to testify publicly and are initiating proceedings to charge him with contempt of congress for defying the subpoena. Cool, let's ask Mr Jordan what the penalty for contempt of congress is for defying a subpoena. How does he expect anyone to take this seriously?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 18:34
|
|
|
karthun posted:Then don't respond in good faith, answer the question that you want to be asked instead. You don't need to waffle on what the definition of genocide is. That also would have ended up being the wrong answer. I don't think someone can reasonably media coach themselves out of a kangaroo court. They shouldn't have agreed to the hearings but once in front of them even the perfect answers would have been turned into outrage by the right.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 18:40
|
|
|
The goal of an answering better isn't to prevent right wing outrage, its to prevent it from getting traction with those who arent right wingers
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 18:44
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:The goal of an answering better isn't to prevent right wing outrage, its to prevent it from getting traction with those who arent right wingers Yeah they basically answered the questions in a way that looks bad to anyone who isn't used to the sort of academic meandering answer they gave, which is to say, the vast majority of people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 18:47
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:The goal of an answering better isn't to prevent right wing outrage, its to prevent it from getting traction with those who arent right wingers Right, there's no combination of words that would get them that once they made the decision to walk into a sham.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 18:53
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:That also would have ended up being the wrong answer. I don't think someone can reasonably media coach themselves out of a kangaroo court. They shouldn't have agreed to the hearings but once in front of them even the perfect answers would have been turned into outrage by the right. I think this is ultimately the answer to why the hearing was a shitshow; anyone smart enough to realize it was a trap, knew not to go.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 19:00
|
|
|
karthun posted:Then don't respond in good faith, answer the question that you want to be asked instead. You don't need to waffle on what the definition of genocide is. Have you watched the footage? The deans attempted to do this, over and over. Stefanik would simply cut them off as soon as they started talking and start shouting at them, demanding they answer with only "Yes or No" and nothing else. This went on for five hours. Somebody was gonna slip up eventually. You can see in the footage that Magill, in particular, was really getting sick of it. She starts to show a bit of a contemptuous smirk, like "you loving idiot, i can't believe i have to take this poo poo seriously":  IMO that expression really helped do her in. She really hosed up with that. But I still feel that by focusing on Gay & Magill & co for not being clear enough, we're essentially letting Stefanik off the hook for intentionally baiting and harassing them until they fell into her trap, then twisting their words to fit her spin. We do this all too often with Republicans. We take it as unavoidable that all these assholes are gonna just be assholes, and instead of rightfully saying "Stefanik is a piece of poo poo for badgering them and twisting their words to justify an attack on higher education", we push the blame onto the left for not stopping them. And who benefits? Stefanik gets exactly what she wants, and the press doesn't call her out on her bad behavior, because we don't demand anything better from the right. If we don't demand anything better from the right, as if we have accepted that this is just who they are and they'll never change, then what's even the point of class struggle?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 19:00
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:There is a CIA black budget, but it is only for covert operations and research. Ukraine is basically the opposite of a covert operation. the dollar amount simply being an accounting convention led to the humorous episode of the pentagon realizing that they were double counting some "expenses" and over $6 billion in "funding" magically reappearing on the balance sheets https://apnews.com/article/ukraine-russia-war-weapons-surplus-funding-72eeb6119439146f1939d5b1973a44ef
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 19:07
|
|
|
Have there been any congressional hearings that weren't weird political theater though? I don't fault anybody for loving one of those up because even the best politicians who do this all the time get caught in a gaffe eventually, just kinda a lovely part of the system.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 19:08
|
|
|
WarpedLichen posted:Have there been any congressional hearings that weren't weird political theater though? I don't fault anybody for loving one of those up because even the best politicians who do this all the time get caught in a gaffe eventually, just kinda a lovely part of the system. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKy7ljRr0AA
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 19:10
|
|
|
XboxPants posted:We do this all too often with Republicans. We take it as unavoidable that all these assholes are gonna just be assholes, and instead of rightfully saying "Stefanik is a piece of poo poo for badgering them and twisting their words to justify an attack on higher education", we push the blame onto the left for not stopping them. And who benefits? Stefanik gets exactly what she wants, and the press doesn't call her out on her bad behavior, because we don't demand anything better from the right. The fundamental problem with debating with a fascist is that all too often a point is quickly reached where the only appropriate responses are to either walk away or break their nose. One of those responses is frowned upon in civil society and the other doesn't result in any camera footage.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 19:12
|
|
|
WarpedLichen posted:Have there been any congressional hearings that weren't weird political theater though? I don't fault anybody for loving one of those up because even the best politicians who do this all the time get caught in a gaffe eventually, just kinda a lovely part of the system. The 9/11 Commission, Watergate hearings, Iran-Contra hearings, the financial crisis hearings in 2010, the McCarthy hearings, MLB doping hearings, the Church committee, the tobacco hearings in the 90's, the Whitewater hearings, the Jack Abramoff hearings, the GSA corruption hearings, the hearings into Secret Service conduct, and the music rating system hearings were all hearings that directly produced major changes in history or policy (for good and bad). A very large percentage of political hearings are basically boring briefings on policy or political theater, though. They have 2-4 a week and there are probably 1 to 2 per year that anyone even remembers. Edit: This is a great example too. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 19:26 on Dec 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 19:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 15:22 |
|
|
The MLB steroid hearings were absolutely theater. It was just entertaining theater.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2023 19:50
|
|