[Terez]

I haven't watched the last 3 debates, meaning from both sides (2 Dem and 1 GOP). I'm watching House of Cards, and I just watched the end of season 3 yesterday. Near the end there's a pre-Iowa Democratic primary debate. It's just a piece of one episode, but it took me over an hour to get through it. I kept pausing and checking social media, because it's even harder to watch a fake one right now.

PS: This is a good ad for Bernie in Chicago:

This post has been edited by Terez: 11 March 2016 - 10:48 AM

[HoosierDaddy]

Zoolanderis Derake, on 11 March 2016 - 03:46 AM, said:

Man. Jake Tapper asks Trump about the violence at his rallies, crowd actually cheers at the quotes of Trump egging it on, and then Trump goes w/ the passion excuse again. Tapper asks Cruz about it, and HE evokes passion and anger of the people as legitimate, blames Obama's apparent emperor complex, and then knocks Trump on the oath thing only. I dunno if either of them is a "Hitler" but they're definitely both cowards and creeps.

Edit: and all that after this: http://thinkprogress...orter-of-lying/

It's scary. That's it. It's fucking scary.

[worry]

It's intensely scary, but if it means the death knells of the Republican Party are starting to ring, it's also a sign of hope. The faster the party dissolves, the better off humanity in general is going to be.

Also checking in to say what Clinton said about the Reagans and HIV/AIDS was moronic and I'm glad she caught hell for it. It wasn't just a gaffe, it was like the exact opposite of the truth. You'd have more excuse to link Al Capone positively with Valentine's Day than you would the Reagans and fighting AIDS.

[Terez]

Zoolanderis Derake, on 11 March 2016 - 10:04 PM, said:

Also checking in to say what Clinton said about the Reagans and HIV/AIDS was moronic and I'm glad she caught hell for it. It wasn't just a gaffe, it was like the exact opposite of the truth. You'd have more excuse to link Al Capone positively with Valentine's Day than you would the Reagans and fighting AIDS.

I missed that, whatever it was. Now I have to check the Twitters to see what the punditsphere had to say about it.

Edit:




I love Twitter.

This post has been edited by Terez: 11 March 2016 - 10:30 PM

[worry]

Haha! Yup. I haven't checked the pundits yet though. But I mean, I understand going after the Reagan Democrats (a disastrous phenomenon that should embarrass anyone who fits this classification), but this was a uniquely terrible inroad: 1) it's completely factually wrong; 2) getting it wrong completely unveils the surface level operation of scrambling for votes; 3) aside from overt homophobes, fake liberals routinely sell out any and all vulnerable people for low taxes anyway; 4) a Dem candidate selling out one constituency for another is even more disgusting than when Reps do it.

[EmperorMagus]

The people protesting at Trump's rally are awesome.

It is interesting that the media (I just watched CNN for 5 mins today, so probably not all media) is talking about the protesters taking Trump's right to free speech away. Do these people have no idea that the right to free speech is just a guarantee that the government won't prevent people from expressing their opinions?

I have no obligation to let anybody else talk, and nothing is stopping me from yelling louder than you when you try to talk.

Also, I just remembered that the first time I participated in this thread was when Obama was campaigning against Romney. How fast the times go, eh?

[worry]

From what I'm hearing (since I don't have cable rn) all the news stations give Trump essentially free reign when he's talking -- and that (shamefully) includes MSNBC. And you'll probably see a lot of mediocre pundits saying this actually helps Trump. But I tell you what, I don't want to predict any simple outcome from this, but I agree with you the protesters are doing something awesome and if you want to feel actual, honest-to-God hope about this, you should.

[worry]

Also, since Trump's already lying about it: http://talkingpoints...ing-trump-event
Chicago Police Deny Advising Trump to Cancel Event

Earlier in the day Obama gave a speech at a fundraiser, and nailed what's happening:

[worry]

(For the Triple Lindy) And then there's this, which is exactly what it looks like: https://twitter.com/...494302142402560

[amphibian]

The problem with looking at this like Obama just expressed is that this is the deliberate result of a 10+ (maybe 15+ year) strategy in the GOP.

They neglect the national level politicians almost completely in order to capture the state legislatures and the state governorships. And their strategy has worked brilliantly.

Kansas is cratering. Louisiana is about to bite it extremely hard. These are the direct consequences of this successful Republican policy and focusing too heavily upon the shitshow that is the national level campaign is to ignore and encourage the less catchy actions of the GOP.

This post has been edited by amphibian: 12 March 2016 - 04:07 AM

[worry]

Well, I think I mischaracterized it as a "speech" cuz that's what people have been calling it -- it was more of a back and forth conversation (role is called the "keynote interactive speaker" rather than the more traditional "keynote speech" that Michelle Obama is giving). So lots of topics were covered briefly (and I've only read articles, not watched the whole thing). I do think he tried to cover some of that ground (in the fourth paragraph of the image), but yah it's largely a focus on Trump and not GOP in general. I do think over the years he could have confronted it more even while keeping his gravitas and shouldering all the (unfair) pressures of being the first black president, but on the other hand I recognize that's easier said than done. Ultimately though it's the GOP that's broken, that is poisoning everyone like a ruptured toxic waste barrel, but it takes a country that's willing to recognize that before it gets fixed (which, just to clarify, isn't a prediction by me that it ever will be fixed).

[EmperorMagus]

amphibian, on 12 March 2016 - 04:06 AM, said:

Kansas is cratering. Louisiana is about to bite it extremely hard. These are the direct consequences of this successful Republican policy and focusing too heavily upon the shitshow that is the national level campaign is to ignore and encourage the less catchy actions of the GOP.

I don't know what you mean by this.
Is it just their fiscal policy or it something more going to "crater" these states?

[Tsundoku]

http://www.news.com....b2d8cb496faab66

Interesting quote from a Drumpf supporter, about vocal opponents:

“These people deal in absolutes. They are right, and whatever means they must take to achieve their ends, they will do it. They will not stop themselves from violence or censorship. They will do it, and they will call hell down upon you if anyone dare does upon them the same.”

Funny, I would have said pretty much the same about any right-wing whackjob.

They did have an interesting point in the previous paragraph about dissent on campuses though:

“I feel a sense of utter dread and hopelessness for what is becoming of the youth in this country, particularly those of the regressive (interesting choice of words - Tsundoku) left. So polarised has political opinion become, that dissenting thoughts on college campuses are now seen as hateful."

I've read a few Atlantic pieces on the subject, but wasn't there a time in the not-so-distant past where right-wing students shut down civil activists?

Anyhoo, apologies on jumping around with my subject matter, one bit sort of followed on from the last. A fun rabbit-hole excursion, but I'd rather not find out where it leads for real.

[Silencer]

Tsundoku, on 12 March 2016 - 11:48 AM, said:

http://www.news.com....b2d8cb496faab66

Interesting quote from a Drumpf supporter, about vocal opponents:

“These people deal in absolutes. They are right, and whatever means they must take to achieve their ends, they will do it. They will not stop themselves from violence or censorship. They will do it, and they will call hell down upon you if anyone dare does upon them the same.”

Funny, I would have said pretty much the same about any right-wing whackjob.

They did have an interesting point in the previous paragraph about dissent on campuses though:

“I feel a sense of utter dread and hopelessness for what is becoming of the youth in this country, particularly those of the regressive (interesting choice of words - Tsundoku) left. So polarised has political opinion become, that dissenting thoughts on college campuses are now seen as hateful."

I've read a few Atlantic pieces on the subject, but wasn't there a time in the not-so-distant past where right-wing students shut down civil activists?

Anyhoo, apologies on jumping around with my subject matter, one bit sort of followed on from the last. A fun rabbit-hole excursion, but I'd rather not find out where it leads for real.

It has always interested me, perhaps mainly from a philosophical perspective, as to how people with an absolute world view can complain about people who have a relative world view, as if the people who are endorsing openness and relativism are the ones attempting to prevent freedom/having a dissenting point of view.

Aside from completely missing the fact that the entirety of history has been dominated by absolutist bigots (and therefore complaining about being the victim of oppression is rich in irony from those who espouse "traditional" views), this stance ignores the issue that any attempt to shut down opposing viewpoints as oppressive is the height of hypocrisy when that is exactly what you are complaining about happening to you.

More broadly, I guess what I am still trying to figure out is if a morally relativistic position (or at least one that is open to embracing differences of opinion and being) can ever truly be open to the existence of an absolutist position. (E.g. if your position is that all cultures are equally valid and should have their beliefs respected; can you hold to this position of tolerance in the face of a culture that is absolutist in its intolerance? If you believe that your neighbouring state has a right to its beliefs and practices, but those beliefs and practices result in it trying to conquer and destroy you; can you both fight back and maintain that the other culture is technically in the right?).

In this case, I think its mainly just a bit sad and concerning that people can be so upset that their hateful views are no longer openly tolerated, and pretty fucking hypocritical that those same people are complaining that their lack of tolerance for others should be tolerated, but still...

[Tsundoku]

I go with:

All cultures have their flaws. Some just have a metric fuckton more than others.

All cultures have their virtues. Some have a minimal amount and make them very, very difficult to find.

On tolerating intolerance, or intolerance of intolerance ... meh, my head hurts.

This post has been edited by Tsundoku: 12 March 2016 - 12:32 PM

[worry]

Here are Clinton's and Sanders's responses to the Trump Rally. See if you can predict which one is a blatant attempt to blame everybody, and which is an accurate depiction of the facts:
A]

B]

[Terez]

Hillary is getting a lot of heat today for resurrecting her stupid claims that Bernie was nowhere to be found in the health care reform effort in the early 90s. Video on this tweet, of the rally today and then of Bernie standing behind Hillary during a speech about health care reform in the early 90s:

https://twitter.com/...776725644189697

So that's going around. I found a longer version of the 90s clip here:

http://www.c-span.or...ie-sanders-1993

As it goes on, she makes clear that she's particularly pleased that the other guy on the stage (not Bernie) actually endorsed her plan. I wish that whoever had made the video hadn't cut it off before she got to that point, because it shows Bernie standing up for his principles. He supported her efforts toward health care reform, but he didn't endorse her plan because it was written by the Big Four or the Big Five (depending on perspective) insurance giants and it was written to benefit them. That's why the HIAA, a group of smaller insurance companies, spent millions on the Harry and Louise ads against Hillarycare. It was going to put them out of business. Hillary touts this—the fact that "the insurance companies" spent millions against Hillarycare—as evidence that she "took on" the insurance companies.

This woman really knows how to spin a web of lies.

[Gnaw]

8 pages since I've been in rehab. I'm not certain whether I'm glad or sad about missing all the wonk talk.

This place is full of Trump voters.

[Terez]

I was wondering what had happened to you.

[worry]

Terez: Joined 16-January 07. Avoiding the Inn since ???????

Anyway, if you're into politics AND you're into fantasy, here's the Trump/Vox Day connection you've been waiting for:
http://thinkprogress...spiracy-theory/