All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[Tami]

And this explains why he was just ranting about Section 230. Because he lost his mind over a hashtag.
The President of the United States is losing his mind over a hashtag - as Hillary Clinton warned he would - and yet people are still saying they wanted four more years of this.

He’s so upset about #DiaperDon trending number 1, he wants to terminate Section 230 (attached if you, like me, had no clue what that was).

[Mister Mets]

Okay, now I vaguely remember when all of that was in the news. It seems like you are arguing that Democrats should, without hesitation, be willing to harm their own cause in the name of principle, regardless of any practical consideration. Because, while people legitimately are offended by blackface, and while you do in fact have many Democrats calling for Fairfax to just leave public office forever ... well, at the end of the day, having a Republican replace them would almost certainly be worse.

Not even in just a "tribal", reflexively-for-one-team kind of way ... you know, Republicans like to argue that black people vote for Democrats like reflexively and are then taken for granted, and on some level both are true, but the problem is that Republicans in office are just pretty consistently the worse option.

It's fair to say Democrats should be mindful of practical considerations. But that means it's hypocritical to ever blame Republicans for doing the same.

There is an insistence that Republicans of good character support the Democrat in a general election in which the Republican has a scandal, even if it means they're going to be less likely to get their policy objectives. It seems to be more about partisan gain than principal if Democrats are generally only willing to throw someone under the bus when it won't result in a Republican taking over.

As for Fairfax, there is more the party could do. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee warned that vendors and strategists who work for primary challengers of incumbents will be blacklisted. They could do the same for anyone who works for Fairfax. They choose not to, which shows their priorities.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019...democracy.html

There's push back because its addressed almost solely at women, including only single sentence saying over consuming is bad for men too, which makes it sound like those kinds of sexist advice pieces telling women to dress more moderately if they don't want to be raped.
Sometimes it's not what you say it's how you say it.

The pushback doesn't seem to be based on how it's sad. The articles go out of their way to say that giving women advice isn't the same as excusing the men, or blaming women if things go wrong. But the idea remains politically toxic within certain left-wing circles.

If someone thinks a policy is a good idea but it's phrased badly, there are ways to make that position clear. "I believe colleges should do this, but we have to be mindful not to leave the wrong impression that..."

I don't know if America deciding to go from "Arbiter of the Peace Process" to Blatant Sponsor of Israel's Hegemony qualifies as "the right thing". It certainly doesn't strengthen the moderate faction of the Palestinians, and it would only give the radical extreme faction there more arguments in their favor.

There have been several peace deals in the middle east recently.

It is also absurd to try to move a discussion on why the DeVos rules harm assault victims and help the perpetrators to how the victims contribute to their own assaults.

But that is SOP for you.

I responded to a point about preventative measures by noting one of several preventative measures colleges could take.

Yup, Emily Yoffe is SUCH a pinko commie lefty.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Yoffe

There is a broad spectrum between pinko commie lefty and someone voicing disgusting right-wing sentiments that would have remained dog whistles in the days before Trump, which is the goal post I was responding to.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

There have been several peace deals in the middle east recently.

If you mean the deals with UAE and Bahrain, those are bribes passed off as peace deals. Trivial and unimportant.

[The Cool Thatguy]

If you mean the deals with UAE and Bahrain, those are bribes passed off as peace deals. Trivial and unimportant.

They also were never at war with Israel, so...

[Revolutionary_Jack]

They also were never at war with Israel, so...

At best it puts pressure on drying up funding for Palestinian extremists. Not unimportant but knowing UAE and Bahrain, all this will do is sell more stuff under the table.

[Kirby101]

I

I responded to a point about preventative measures by noting one of several preventative measures colleges could take.

In an effort to divert the discussion on how the DeVos rules hurt victims. There is little opacity in your motives.

[Tami]

Screenshot_2020-11-27 Charlie Sykes on Twitter.jpg

Twitter Link

Is Trump going off the deep end? Or is he already under water?

[Joker]

I responded to a point about preventative measures by noting one of several preventative measures colleges could take.

"Don't drink to excess" is,

A) useless advice because everyone already knows you shouldn't.

B) It's not a "preventative measure" because it doesn't actually prevent anything.

C) It puts the onus on the women. Why isn't the advice, "dudes, don't fucking rape women. Ever. It doesn't matter how drunk she is." WHy is the conversation never about the actions of the actual rapists. It's like blaming the bank for having money in the building after they got robbed. 'Shouldn't have had so much cash on hand, financial institution.'

Wanna talk about absurd? the idea that "don't drink to excess" means, solves or prevents anything is absurd, and you sound like a rapist apologist trotting that garbage out with a straight face. You should legitimately be ashamed of yourself.

[Malvolio]

I don't know if America deciding to go from "Arbiter of the Peace Process" to Blatant Sponsor of Israel's Hegemony qualifies as "the right thing". It certainly doesn't strengthen the moderate faction of the Palestinians, and it would only give the radical extreme faction there more arguments in their favor.

It isn't. But it is the right thing to recognize a sovereign nation's right to place its capitol where it wants to place it. Not that that's the reason Trump did it, of course. That's why I said he did the right thing for the wrong reason.

[Gray Lensman]

It's fair to say Democrats should be mindful of practical considerations. But that means it's hypocritical to ever blame Republicans for doing the same.

There is an insistence that Republicans of good character support the Democrat in a general election in which the Republican has a scandal, even if it means they're going to be less likely to get their policy objectives. It seems to be more about partisan gain than principal if Democrats are generally only willing to throw someone under the bus when it won't result in a Republican taking over.

As for Fairfax, there is more the party could do. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee warned that vendors and strategists who work for primary challengers of incumbents will be blacklisted. They could do the same for anyone who works for Fairfax. They choose not to, which shows their priorities.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019...democracy.html

The pushback doesn't seem to be based on how it's sad. The articles go out of their way to say that giving women advice isn't the same as excusing the men, or blaming women if things go wrong. But the idea remains politically toxic within certain left-wing circles.

If someone thinks a policy is a good idea but it's phrased badly, there are ways to make that position clear. "I believe colleges should do this, but we have to be mindful not to leave the wrong impression that..."

There have been several peace deals in the middle east recently.

I responded to a point about preventative measures by noting one of several preventative measures colleges could take.

There is a broad spectrum between pinko commie lefty and someone voicing disgusting right-wing sentiments that would have remained dog whistles in the days before Trump, which is the goal post I was responding to.

You aren't coming across the way you think - its less "Democrats are more cynical than you admit" and more "Because I can find an instance or two where Democrats fall short of their standards that means Republicans shouldn't be held to any standards of any kind, ever."

[Malvolio]

Right wing media is really weird.

Like really weird.

I've seen it's love of conspiracy theories before but this latest one really tickled me, the "Great Reset" conspiracy is just pure crazy town and even the saner of the Rightwing talking heads are playing into it and Ingram's quote about it just makes me laugh as she describes it like this in an apocalyptic tone, " His handlers, who are basically all old Obama staffers, believe in something called the Great Reset of capitalism.It’s a plan to force a more equitable distribution of global resources.”

A more equitable distribution of resources is scary?

I don't get it.

When you're used to having the whole pie and you pat yourself on the back for letting the rest of us eat the crumbs that fall off your plate, having to give up an entire slice of that pie does feel scary.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Screenshot_2020-11-27 Charlie Sykes on Twitter.jpg

Twitter Link

Is Trump going off the deep end? Or is he already under water?

The way I see it, each day done brings Trump one day closer to his trial in New York that could send him to prison if convicted, and the strain has unhinged him. As for Republicans and that exit strategy, there ISN’T one, it’s ride AND die with Trump because they need his supporters for upcoming elections, which is why they won’t invoke the 25th amendment, even though Trump is stark raving bonkers.

[Jack Dracula]

It's fair to say Democrats should be mindful of practical considerations. But that means it's hypocritical to ever blame Republicans for doing the same.

There is an insistence that Republicans of good character support the Democrat in a general election in which the Republican has a scandal, even if it means they're going to be less likely to get their policy objectives. It seems to be more about partisan gain than principal if Democrats are generally only willing to throw someone under the bus when it won't result in a Republican taking over.

I think it has more to do with the policy objectives in question.
Is it better to support a flawed candidate who'll ultimately support socially positive legislation or a flawed candidate who pushes socially negative legislation?
When you're not clouding the issue by trying to make both sides seem just as bad the answer becomes clear.

[Tami]

New rule could allow gas, firing squads for US executions

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department is quietly amending its execution protocols, no longer requiring federal death sentences to be carried out by lethal injection and clearing the way to use other methods like firing squads and poison gas.

The amended rule, published Friday in the Federal Register, allows the U.S. government to conduct executions by lethal injection or use “any other manner prescribed by the law of the state in which the sentence was imposed.” A number of states allow other methods of execution, including electrocution, inhaling nitrogen gas or death by firing squad.

FILE - This Aug. 28, 2020, file photo shows the federal prison complex in Terre Haute, Ind. The Justice Department is quietly amending its execution protocols, no longer requiring federal death sentences to be carried out by lethal injection and clearing the way for other methods like firing squads and poison gas. The amended rule, published Friday, Nov. 27, in the Federal Register, allows the U.S. government to conduct executions by lethal injection or use “any other manner prescribed by the law of the state in which the sentence was imposed.” (AP Photo/Michael Conroy, File)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department is quietly amending its execution protocols, no longer requiring federal death sentences to be carried out by lethal injection and clearing the way to use other methods like firing squads and poison gas.

The amended rule, published Friday in the Federal Register, allows the U.S. government to conduct executions by lethal injection or use “any other manner prescribed by the law of the state in which the sentence was imposed.” A number of states allow other methods of execution, including electrocution, inhaling nitrogen gas or death by firing squad.
ADVERTISEMENT

It remains unclear whether the Justice Department will seek to use any methods other than lethal injection for executions in the future. The rule – which goes into effect on Dec. 24 – comes as the Justice Department has scheduled five executions during the lame-duck period, including three just days before President-elect Joe Biden takes office.

A Justice Department official said the change was made to account for the fact the Federal Death Penalty Act requires sentences be carried out in the “in the manner prescribed by the law of the state in which the sentence is imposed,″ and some of those states use methods other than lethal injection.

The official said two executions scheduled in December would be done by lethal injection but didn’t provide information about three others scheduled in January. The official spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity in order to discuss the internal department protocols.

The change is likely to set off intense criticism from Democrats and anti-death penalty advocates, as the Trump administration tries to push through a number of rule changes before Trump leaves office. A spokesperson for Biden told the AP earlier this month that the president-elect “opposes the death penalty now and in the future” and would work to end its use. But he did not say whether executions would be paused immediately once Biden takes office.

[Robotman]

And this explains why he was just ranting about Section 230. Because he lost his mind over a hashtag.
The President of the United States is losing his mind over a hashtag - as Hillary Clinton warned he would - and yet people are still saying they wanted four more years of this.

He’s so upset about #DiaperDon trending number 1, he wants to terminate Section 230 (attached if you, like me, had no clue what that was).

As others on that Twitter thread pointed out, it’s scary that this clearly unhinged lunatic is president but even scarier that 74 million Americans wanted him to have a second term. Thankfully 80 million said hell no!