- 169 Posts
- 356 Comments
4·21 hours agoYeah, I’ve been posting paywalled articles as rehosted by MSN. It seems better than posting the paywalled version, meaning people either can’t read it at all, or dodge the paywall and no one gets paid. I’m open for suggestions about other ways of doing it, though.
Borg borg borg
You can combine it with a FUSE mount of the Google Drive, I’m not sure if that works but I don’t see why it wouldn’t.
2·1 day agoLet me have my comically unrealistic scenario, please. The alternative is that he’ll keep killing with American weapons until hundreds of thousands more are dead, and all Palestine is a blasted wasteland, and no one will stop him.
Maybe “He’s getting people on all sides killed because he is a depraved and criminal liar with no regard for human life, let’s bring him to justice” will be the single rallying cry that finally forms the nucleus of peace and understanding in the Mideast.
Not true, they also care about how they can redirect dollars from the “defense” budget to go to their friends at Raytheon.
Almost all of them, yes.
If you’ll look, he pretty much never talks about starting wars, but instead pulling out of or avoiding wars. But he only does that when it resonates w/ his base, such as withdrawing support for Ukraine. He even says we should consider abandoning Taiwan instead of getting in a war with China, despite heavy rhetoric against China (esp. tariffs). His base would surely support a militarily aggressive stance against China, yet he doesn’t take that stance. Likewise for Iran. He could totally score some points with his base if he took an aggressive stance against either Iran or China, yet he doesn’t.
https://www.vox.com/23677654/trump-foreign-policy-revisionist-history-dove-anti-imperial
TL;DR: He assassinated an Iranian general. He killed about 13,000 civilians in Iraq and Syria, as in directly, not this “he didn’t stop our ally from doing it,” but he did drone strikes that created a little mini-Gaza of his own using US forces. He attacked Syria and Somalia. His war ambitions are different from the standard US imperialist model, but mostly just because they are dumber and less directed. He’s fine with war. If you want to talk about what he talked about doing, he threatened North Korea, China, Venezuela, Iran, and Russia.
As for the ballot boxes, it seems the investigation is still ongoing and details are few. However, I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s one person (they have a singular suspect car identified), again, likely with some kind of mental illness or unhealthy obsession w/ the election.
So you think it’s entirely coincidental that Trump talks all the time about what he talks about, and there’s all this explosion of violence in our politics?
What about January 6th? Was that 10,000 individual people with some kind of mental illness or unhealthy obsession w/ the election?
This is what I’m talking about, why I am making a big deal of disagreeing with you about this even if I agree that this source is shady. It’s Trump. It’s always been Trump, and it’s a problem. It’s not someone with a random mental illness.
That certainly doesn’t help. Yes, there’s a fascist element on the right, and there’s also a communist element on the left.
Come the fuck off it.
But if we actually call Trump a fascist without strong evidence, that just discredits the person pointing the finger.
There is evidence. Want me to find some sources that are experts in fascism? Who would you put trust in?
That really depends on the circumstances. Are there visible flames, gunshots, etc?
Yes. Both. I talked about some of the flames and some of the gunshots, although not all. There are also some visible bodies that are the result of the problem. Want to ask them about the circumstances, if there is visible indication yet that it is a big deal?
I’m not saying to panic. But I’m saying to treat it as a big deal and start yelling. That’s not “emotion,” that is the appropriate reaction.
I don’t even really disagree with you about this source being maybe hyperbolic garbage, and the importance of focusing on reality in this campaign. I still think you’re being way, way too nice to Trump, using “not freaking out” as a reason to cut him slack he doesn’t deserve.
I honestly don’t know what Trump’s views on war and war hawks are (seems generally opposed?), and it’s certainly clear he’s jumping on something to win some political points for his base.
No he isn’t. His base loves war and war hawks, when he and his people are the hawks. He’s jumping on the opportunity to talk about shooting one of his opponents. Just like he did for Milley, and Mike Pence, and how his supporters talked about doing for Biden. It’s time to stop pretending that his coded language can be taken at face value. If Liz Cheney does something visibly anti-Trump, and he starts talking about her getting shot and having rifles in her face, I think it’s time to start treating that as the stochastic threat that it is, maybe even freaking out about it a little.
His statement isn’t a call to action, but a thought experiment of what she would do if she had to be personally involved in the actual fighting
No it isn’t. It’s a call to action.
That’s not the literal meaning of his words, because he’s a sneaky orange weasel who’s accustomed to avoiding the strictures of law enforcement for decades now, but he doesn’t talk this way about any war hawks that haven’t crossed him personally, and he does talk exactly this way about people of all different levels of war-hawk-ishness that have crossed him personally. It’s a constant refrain of his, and every month that goes by, the more his supporters start to get on board with it. Have you noticed that they’re shooting actual bullets at Harris campaign headquarters? Setting actual ballot boxes on fire? Roaming the hills with actual rifles looking for FEMA people? It’s not a fucking joke. It’s a call to action.
The spin this election is absolutely insane. The left is trying to paint the right as fascists
No. Scholars of fascism are painting the right as fascists. The Democrats and the media haven’t been doing nearly enough to paint the right as the fascists they are, although they’ve started doing it a lot more in the last month or two. I think that’s a good thing, because it provides some motivation for people to start to freak out about it a little bit.
You sound like the guy in the apartment building saying that we need to relax, the fire alarms are going off but we don’t want to disrupt the party or cause a panic. No. It’s time to talk about leaving the fucking building. Anything else is grossly irresponsible.
But Trump made no statements about what he wants to do, other than stay out of the middle east.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/01/politics/donald-trump-liz-cheney-war-hawk-battle/index.html
Your thinking is that Trump doesn’t like war hawks? As opposed to him being upset that Liz Cheney defied him?
“She’s a radical war hawk. Let’s put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her, OK?” the former president said at a campaign event in Glendale with former Fox News host Tucker Carlson. “Let’s see how she feels about it, you know, when the guns are trained on her face.”
That’s pretty straightforward, to me. I think CNN is sanewashing it and the more hyperbolic response is actually the right one, in this case. It’s nuts that a lot of the media seems to think this is perfectly normal stuff to say.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/oct/15/trump-democrats-cows-windows
That’s for the cows and windows quotes.
But this website has terrible spin and you shouldn’t trust anything it says because it takes things way out of proportion and doesn’t even link/host the original content. Look for yourselves, the actual content is taken way out of context here.
I don’t think it is. I think this extremist website is keeping in mind the very clear context of what Trump has said he wants to do, as opposed to adding in a big helping of assuming he can’t possibly mean that, and must mean something more benign, instead.
I have no idea if this web site is a trustworthy source in general. But, this seems like a pretty solid and sound way to respond, and the calm benefit-of-the-doubt way is the nutty response.
More profitable as long as it doesn’t go too far. Once it reaches Trump/Hitler levels, with half the country on fire, profits WAY down in the other half, and anyone who tries to change course getting thrown in prison, they all wind up looking around clueless, in “We’re all looking for the guys that did this” mode.
Kristallnacht? Night of the Long Knives will probably also happen too, but I think Kristallnacht is what you mean.
251·2 days agoSevering all the bridges and hiding in an echo chamber
Top kek
The purpose is not for merit. The purpose is to punish. His power to do that is limited to this nuisance right now, hopefully permanently, although we’ll see.
Most of the people on the receiving end of the missiles are not in either of those groups, I am sad to say. I think you should cheer for Netanyahu to go to the Hague and the rest of the adults to figure out a workable solution.
A lot of them are. It’s painfully obvious that the strategy is simply to show their “MAGA” badge and scream in the other person’s face, “I am above the law!”
And you know what? It might work. We’ll have to see how things play out. Rudy might have fallen too far behind the Trump Train at this point, to be sacrificed to the wolves even if Trump does squeak his way in, but it also might work completely, and he might wind up free and clear and someone go physically violent against the election workers.
That’s why it is important that Trump doesn’t win.
2·3 days agoActually: I changed my mind. I’m going to give this a real response.
I didn’t treat you like a child. I explained what was going on, and you seem to have a mentality where someone who’s explaining something to you that you don’t know is “treating you like a child” or “being a pedantic asshole.”
That’s entirely on you. Most people, once they reach adulthood, are able to listen to something even if they don’t already know it, able to learn from the world. I was a little bit snarky talking to you initially, but then I felt bad when I realized you just didn’t know how Wikipedia worked, and were operating on some bad assumptions, but what you were thinking made actually perfect logical sense. Go back and read my “Got it, that does make sense” message. I read your message, I got where you were coming from, and like I said, I realized you just didn’t know something, and I tried to help you understand it.
You have to let go of that mentality where someone who’s telling you something you didn’t already know is offensive, and you have to try to seize the upper hand and try to explain something back to them, or decide they’re being a jerk or something or it needs to be a hostile interaction. That’s going to make it impossible for you to learn. It also makes a lot of interactions more stressful than they need to be.
I realize that this whole message is explaining more stuff to you, which you probably won’t react well to. But like I said, that’s on you. If you were willing to absorb this, it would help you.
Yes!
I said plenty, you just can’t hear it. Oh well. I tried.
Huh? I count exactly two questions (only one of which wasn’t rhetorical) and I think I responded to both?
You said Biden was to the right of Reagan. I brought up some examples which make him, to me, the furthest-left president we’ve had since LBJ. You ignored that and simply allowed as how he might not be to the right of Reagan, and started talking about what right-wing things he did in the 90s, instead of addressing or talking further about anything I said.
You did answer the question, that part is fair. But, you didn’t really address the point, you just found a way to circle it back around to the same conclusion you’d already reached, without a substantive discussion about why to consider him a far-right president or not.
Harris sucks as a candidate, Trump sucks as a candidate. Both are unelectable
What on earth are you talking about? Harris is the most popular Democrat since Obama. The fact that it’s a dead heat has nothing to do with her being bad, it’s just that our media is so terrible that a lot of people think either that she’s awful, or that Trump is good.
https://today.yougov.com/ratings/politics/popularity/politicians/all
I don’t even really have a good idea of Harris’s policies. I can talk about Biden’s because he has some kind of a track record, which she doesn’t have in the same way, but like I said, it basically doesn’t even matter. Trump wants to blow up the world, and I don’t want that to happen, so I voted for Harris. I’m fine talking with you about aspects of her policy, but it’s definitely not relevant to the decision of who to vote for.
This whole framing of her being unpopular, or unelectable, is an absolutely textbook right-wing framing of the election. It’s not true, but even that aside, it’s just not any kind of relevant analysis. It’s just a way to try to hook the groupthink in people’s brains to make them think she’s not worth voting for without focusing on any kind of policy.
Huh? They were bombing Lebanese and Palestinians no?
You’re completely right.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/10/us/politics/biden-reagan-israel.html
There was a whole separate incident, touched on in that article, where Israel bombed an Iraqi nuclear plant and Reagan delayed the shipment of four F-16s as a response. I didn’t know about the second incident with bombing Lebanon and Reagan’s reaction.
And, looking at:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_casualties_of_war
The big thing that I see is that the pace of the killing has exploded, and of course we haven’t done anything about it.
The whole reason that I posted this article, and what I keep saying, is that Biden’s enabling of that whole operation is disgusting. He’s not doing it, but you can certainly hold him accountable for not stopping it. I just don’t think that Kamala Harris is “doing that” in the same way, and of course, it is relevant that Trump is several times worse, as hard as that might be to believe on this one particular issue.
Yes! That is an extremely productive attitude when someone tries to explain to you how Wikipedia works, and then when you seem to miss the point, gets a little more pointed about it in hopes that you will pick it up and realize that you missed something, and learn a useful nugget of information relevant to our current discussion.
It seems you’re happy with how much you already know, in life, because you are committed to not learning anything else beyond your present level of achievement. Congratulations! I hope this approach serves you well, and I look forward to seeing how much and how far you can get with it.
Kamala Harris is the fourth most popular politician out of the whole spectrum, as of right now.