Page 201 of 218

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2018 1:35 am UTC
by CorruptUser
The Great Hippo wrote:I sincerely hope you're wrong. Otherwise, it sounds like the problem here is that people in Maine don't understand 1) How moving works, 2) How poverty works, or 3) How Medicaid works.

Or what "Greyhound Therapy" even refers to, for that matter.


That's how Paul LePage thinks, not necessarily the people of Maine. I should probably mention that the people of Maine actually voted for the Medicaid expansion via referendum (only state to do so), but LePage vetoed it for the reasons I mentioned. Keep in mind that this is the LePage who is mostly known for thinking that black people only exist to sell drugs and impregnate white girls. Seriously, I just googled his name just now to find a link for this post, and now he has a new thing regarding almost exactly that.

As for Greyhound Therapy, LePage doesn't refer to it as such, I just used it as it's the same principle. If you want to give me a euphemism for "sending your poor/unwanted Somewhere Else", I'm all ears.

ObsessoMom wrote:Um, perhaps because leaving Syria's Kurds to be slaughtered -- and leaving all of our other allies to wonder when we'll screw them over, too -- is not very conducive to peace, in either the short or long terms?


As far as I understand, most of the slaughtering of Kurds will be at the hands of Turkey and Turkey's proxies, as ISIS can't face them directly and the Kurds have an informal agreement with both the rebels and Assad that they'll back whichever of the two comes out on top (obviously, I could be wrong, and of course, agreements in the Mid-East don't last). We haven't been willing to stand up to the Turks regardless of all the horrible shit they've pulled, such as bombing the Kurds whenever they came close to a victory against ISIS. I'm not really sure what we were actually planning on accomplishing by letting Turkey call our shots in the first place.

While I personally believe there should've been a Kurdistan and view the Kurds as the least awful major group in the region, I hold no illusions about the Kurds being some super-nice force of brotherly love and justice; there are not-illegitimate claims that the Kurds themselves have been ethnically cleansing others...

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2018 4:04 am UTC
by iamspen
There's also the fact that a guy who is really anxious to build towers in both Turkey and Russia is doing both of those countries a major solid by pulling out US forces, while essentially leaving the door open for them to glass the entire Syrian Kurdish region, which is something all the other combatants in this war would be more than happy to do, while we shrug our shoulders and become the new enemy of the last moderate collective entity in the entire Middle East.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2018 4:13 am UTC
by The Great Hippo
CorruptUser wrote:As for Greyhound Therapy, LePage doesn't refer to it as such, I just used it as it's the same principle. If you want to give me a euphemism for "sending your poor/unwanted Somewhere Else", I'm all ears.
That's just it; no state is going to say, "oh, Maine has Medicaid? Let's ship all our sick people who can't afford healthcare over there!". And even if a state *would* do that, each state has its own eligibility requirements for Medicaid -- I sincerely doubt Maine's consists of "show up at a hospital and ask for it". You probably need to have been a legal resident for some period of time (which is pretty hard to do when you're poor and in desperate need of medical attention).

I guess what I'm saying is that people who legitimately believe this probably just really hate poor people.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2018 8:18 am UTC
by ijuin
Nah, they just really hate having to pay the bills for somebody else. Whether that somebody else is wealthy or poor is secondary.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2018 12:36 pm UTC
by CorruptUser
Yes, LePage sincerely hates the poor. You wouldnt expect that from the guy who grew up in poverty with an alcoholic and abusive father, ran away as a teen, had to live in stables and strip clubs and work in dangerous under the table jobs, didnt even speak English as a first language, yet here we are.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2018 5:50 am UTC
by gd1
CorruptUser wrote:Yes, LePage sincerely hates the poor. You wouldnt expect that from the guy who grew up in poverty with an alcoholic and abusive father, ran away as a teen, had to live in stables and strip clubs and work in dangerous under the table jobs, didnt even speak English as a first language, yet here we are.


Might make him lack compassion for others who won't "pull themselves up by their bootstraps". A common misunderstanding by those people is how to approach compassion as what they've seen necessarily influences their world view (as it does with everyone really). Such a world view can unfortunately overlook various things in others and paint with a broad brush.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2018 3:52 pm UTC
by pogrmman
While I’m sure everyone knows this, I’m putting it down for the future. The government is now in the midst of a partial shut down for the third time this year. Basically, Trump is not gonna sign any funding into law that doesn’t include funding for the wall, and Congress (especially the Senate) ain’t gonna pass such a thing. The Senate already unanimously passed a funding resolution with no money for the wall.

Just 11 days ago, Trump said that he’d be “proud” to shutdown the government over the wall, yet now he’s blaming Democrats.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2018 7:57 pm UTC
by duodecimus
Why would the budget need to have the wall in it?

Mexico is paying for it, duh. :lol:

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2018 10:54 am UTC
by gd1
Let us not forget:
Trump had a meeting with Russian diplomats that was closed door with no witnesses.

Trump had a closed door meeting with Putin. And then he did it again at Helsinki.

Maybe they were talking about adoptions and holding these meeting while being investigated for collusion is just unfortunate timing. Maybe he's just boisterous and doesn't care what the optics of these meetings are in the face of an investigation. We have information that says he gave classified information to the Russian Diplomats. I had forgotten to mention all of this stuff when I was making my case that Trump is deliberately betraying the United States to weaken or possibly destroy it so that he can get Oligarch status in Russia and finally have banks forced to loan to him in a place where corruption is standard business. Again, it's possible that it's nothing, but if Trump is burning down all his bridges here and banks around the world are wise to his antics, maybe becoming an oligarch in exchange for just making the most destructive policy possible might be the way he's choosing to go forward?

At this point, Trump doesn't have to be smart. He just has to follow instructions. Even if he does try to unsuccessfully flee the country, the damage is still done.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2018 3:45 pm UTC
by Soupspoon
Trump tweet:
The only way to stop drugs, gangs, human trafficking, criminal elements and much else from coming into our Country is with a Wall or Barrier. Drones and all of the rest are wonderful and lots of fun, but it is only a good old fashioned Wall that works

Him talking, I was of course imagining Reaper/Predator drones (good for his base, they'd lurv a bit of Death From Above on a family group). But then he also inadvertently pointed out that there are drones. Which even with loads of manpower in a relatively short boundary has been seen to be more trouble to the authorities that they would like.

(You can get caught, using them to transport drugs, but not easily if you're clever.)


Never mind the many problems with the Steel Slats 'wall', as plenty of people have mentioned already. Cost/benefit analysis is really badly swung the wrong way, unless your aim is something like necessitating the import loads of steel and have the tariff-raising parts of the government skim off the public-works part of the government, but still net benefit to the economy that sends the steel in.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2018 4:17 pm UTC
by CorruptUser
While any athletic criminal worth their salt would be able to find a way over a wall, barbed wire or no, children and pregnant women certainly won't. Thus ensuring that Trump is right about all the Mexicans coming in being criminals (because we kept out only everyone else).

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Wed Dec 26, 2018 4:43 pm UTC
by gd1
Guessing about why people who support Trump are deflecting:
They're not simply deflecting, they're saying that if they don't support Trump that Hillary will win and nothing Trump has done is worse than what Hillary would do (or what a liberal would do). They don't want to lose their way of life and they are saying that the liberals will force them to accept things that they don't want such as lgbt rights.

It's just a guess. If it's correct then it won't likely matter what is proven or shown unless Trump is shown to start killing them directly or something. Because as long as he keeps making policy to preserve their way of life they'll never stop supporting him. The economic policy is just a bonus if he follows through. What really matters is that they don't have to bake cakes for people they don't like and other social issues.

Am I supposed to include a link in baseless conjectures and speculations?

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Wed Dec 26, 2018 6:54 pm UTC
by CorruptUser
Welp, a second child died in custody.

Curiosity: how many died in custody during Obama administration?

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Wed Dec 26, 2018 6:59 pm UTC
by Thesh
Check right-wing media. If any children died in custody under Obama, they'll be talking about it.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2018 12:30 pm UTC
by Soupspoon
The future-President Jolie? (And obviously this website e:whateverthehellImeanttotypeinsteadof"website"! should inspire a rewrite of The Demolition (Wo)Man", to annoy the same people who were annoyed by the idea of the new Ghostbusters version.)

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2018 2:55 pm UTC
by CorruptUser
Nothing prepares you for the rigors of legislation of law and governance than looking pretty on camera and kidnapping children from across the world.

I actually meant that to be snarky, bit as I typed it, I realized that's kinda what we've had for the past few decades...

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2018 4:20 pm UTC
by addams
pogrmman wrote:While I’m sure everyone knows this, I’m putting it down for the future. The government is now in the midst of a partial shut down for the third time this year. Basically, Trump is not gonna sign any funding into law that doesn’t include funding for the wall, and Congress (especially the Senate) ain’t gonna pass such a thing. The Senate already unanimously passed a funding resolution with no money for the wall.

Just 11 days ago, Trump said that he’d be “proud” to shutdown the government over the wall, yet now he’s blaming Democrats.
He doesn't want a Wall.
He wants a 5 Billion Dollar 'slush fund' for rewarding himself and his Loyal, Powerful few.
(Grumble-Grumble-Grumble...)

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2018 3:41 am UTC
by CorruptUser
So... from Trump's POV...

Having the shutdown/veto/hissy-fit now that the Dems take over the House means that, worst case scenario, for the next two years the Dems get absolutely nothing passed. In the meantime, without a budget, the non-crucial portions of government are shutdown; portions that tend to be staffed by Democrats. If the Dems cave in and get funding for the wall, with some compromise or some extra spending on pork, but come election time people will absolutely forget there was a shut down (remember the one in the 70's? no?) but remember that there is a wall being built.



My biggest other question: Does the shutdown affect CMS, EPA, EEOC, FDA, SEC, and/or other regulatory bodies? If it does, that's a "win" for Trump...

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2018 3:33 pm UTC
by sardia
CorruptUser wrote:So... from Trump's POV...

Having the shutdown/veto/hissy-fit now that the Dems take over the House means that, worst case scenario, for the next two years the Dems get absolutely nothing passed. In the meantime, without a budget, the non-crucial portions of government are shutdown; portions that tend to be staffed by Democrats. If the Dems cave in and get funding for the wall, with some compromise or some extra spending on pork, but come election time people will absolutely forget there was a shut down (remember the one in the 70's? no?) but remember that there is a wall being built.
My biggest other question: Does the shutdown affect CMS, EPA, EEOC, FDA, SEC, and/or other regulatory bodies? If it does, that's a "win" for Trump...

Someone's been reading the comments section of fox news...
Seriously, it only matters if Democrats cave as opposed to Trump feeling the pressure.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story ... ion-223569
Time for more palace intrigue. SCOTUS chief Roberts personally intervened in a mystery case linked to the Mueller investigation. Typically, a appellate
SCOTUS judge doesn't intervene a unanimous decision, so it's a mystery why he wants to personally review this case before deciding next year.
a regulator from Country A had filed a submission claiming that compliance with the subpoena would cause the Corporation to violate Country A’s law. So whoever Country A is, this matter captured its officials’ attention and prompted them to send filings to a faraway country to block the subpoena. Why does Country A care? And, what is it trying to hide?

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2018 4:14 pm UTC
by CorruptUser
Trump is incapable of feeling many things that normal humans feel, such as "empathy" or "shame". I'm quite sure "pressure" is one of those things. I believe he is very much capable of throwing a 2 years long temper tantrum.

Which brings up an interesting question. The non-essential jobs that are furlowed or whatever the word is, what happens to their pensions if the shutdown lasts more than 6+ months? AFAIK, government jobs require 6 months and 1 day to count as a full year for the pensions, and if the shutdown lasts 7 months do those people still work enough to get the year added to their pensions?

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2018 6:35 pm UTC
by ijuin
They will probably need to include a clause about it in the bill that provides for their back pay.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 4:57 am UTC
by CorruptUser
It's actually an interesting thing. If the partial shutdown lasts for, say, half a year, many of those workers will be forced to find other employment because landlords and banks are not known for being all that understanding as to why the rent/mortgage-payment is delayed by a few months. When the shutdown ends, back pay or not, many of the workers will not return to their previous roles because they either prefer their new jobs, have relocated for said jobs, or are just fed up with government hiccups regarding employment. Thus, Trump will have "reduced bureaucratic fat" in the form of eliminating government jobs, even though it's always the very best employees that are always the first to leave, which has an added bonus of fitting in with the Trump narrative that all government employees/agencies are incompetently run.

Say what you want, while he sounds like a dumbass and is easily in the top 100 most vile creatures to ever slither into American politics, his administration is showing some very twisted forms of brilliance.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 12:32 pm UTC
by sardia
CorruptUser wrote:It's actually an interesting thing. If the partial shutdown lasts for, say, half a year, many of those workers will be forced to find other employment because landlords and banks are not known for being all that understanding as to why the rent/mortgage-payment is delayed by a few months. When the shutdown ends, back pay or not, many of the workers will not return to their previous roles because they either prefer their new jobs, have relocated for said jobs, or are just fed up with government hiccups regarding employment. Thus, Trump will have "reduced bureaucratic fat" in the form of eliminating government jobs, even though it's always the very best employees that are always the first to leave, which has an added bonus of fitting in with the Trump narrative that all government employees/agencies are incompetently run.

Say what you want, while he sounds like a dumbass and is easily in the top 100 most vile creatures to ever slither into American politics, his administration is showing some very twisted forms of brilliance.

That's the same narrative the tea party used under Obama and Bush. Remember how Reagan said how the worst phase was I'm from the government and I'm here to help?" https://www.vox.com/2016/7/18/12210500/ ... ican-party
At the very least, you have vox noting the push towards incompetent government since 1992 Gingrich.

Given all the dark news, If the Democrats win 2020, I'm thinking they should purge Hydra Nazis from the country, immediately. Trump has shown that Nazis are everywhere and are everyday people you meet. Kinda dark, but being patient with them hasn't gotten us anywhere, and made things worse. Let's see how the GOP likes it when 10% of their base is behind bars, deported or dead. At least law enforcement would be doing something useful.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 1:59 pm UTC
by idonno
You might want to exercise a bit of care with any plans to go after Nazis head on. Hitler was arrested and sentenced on clearly legitimate grounds after a blatant attempted coup d'état and still managed to turn it into a propaganda win for his side.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 3:44 pm UTC
by ucim
CorruptUser wrote: If the partial shutdown lasts for, say, half a year...
...then it's not just on the president, but on Congress, which can overrule the president with a (two thirds?) majority. It would only take one third of the republicans to repudiate the president for this to happen.

CorruptUser wrote:Say what you want, while he sounds like a dumbass and is easily in the top 100 most vile creatures to ever slither into American politics, his administration is showing some very twisted forms of brilliance.
Don't confuse amorality with brilliance. Sure, there are sneaky ways to destroy things; people don't do them not because they are dumb, but because they are (mostly) moral.

Jose

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 4:29 pm UTC
by CorruptUser
ucim wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Say what you want, while he sounds like a dumbass and is easily in the top 100 most vile creatures to ever slither into American politics, his administration is showing some very twisted forms of brilliance.
Don't confuse amorality with brilliance. Sure, there are sneaky ways to destroy things; people don't do them not because they are dumb, but because they are (mostly) moral.

Jose


1) It takes amorality and intelligence to pull off some stuff.
2) It's the administration and not necessarily Trump that is doing this; Trump has been able to surround himself with brilliant albeit twisted minds, including some "heroes" like Elon Musk for a little while, and it's possible that Pence is the type of puppetmaster that Cheney would sacrifice virgins/goats/virgin-goats in order to gain favors from.
3) People aren't (mostly) moral, we just want to believe we are.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 4:46 pm UTC
by MartianInvader
sardia wrote:
Given all the dark news, If the Democrats win 2020, I'm thinking they should purge Hydra Nazis from the country, immediately. Trump has shown that Nazis are everywhere and are everyday people you meet. Kinda dark, but being patient with them hasn't gotten us anywhere, and made things worse. Let's see how the GOP likes it when 10% of their base is behind bars, deported or dead. At least law enforcement would be doing something useful.

Umm, wouldn't that be fascism? Like, at a far worse level than anything Trump has done?

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 5:06 pm UTC
by elasto
It'll be satire but, yes, one has to be intolerant of intolerance up to (but not beyond) it becoming counter-productive.

Trump has shown one can be pretty damn intolerant indeed and still win though, which is depressing - his supporters taking him seriously but not literally and his opponents v.v. and all that...

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 5:17 pm UTC
by Dauric
MartianInvader wrote:
sardia wrote:
Given all the dark news, If the Democrats win 2020, I'm thinking they should purge Hydra Nazis from the country, immediately. Trump has shown that Nazis are everywhere and are everyday people you meet. Kinda dark, but being patient with them hasn't gotten us anywhere, and made things worse. Let's see how the GOP likes it when 10% of their base is behind bars, deported or dead. At least law enforcement would be doing something useful.

Umm, wouldn't that be fascism? Like, at a far worse level than anything Trump has done?


Friedrich Nietzsche wrote:He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 6:39 pm UTC
by ucim
CorruptUser wrote:1) It takes amorality and intelligence to pull off some stuff.
Yes, but in most cases the thing that keeps people from pulling that kind of stuff off isn't lack of intelligence, it is lack of amorality.
CorruptUser wrote:3) People aren't (mostly) moral, we just want to believe we are.
People aren't completely moral, but I do think that most people are mostly moral. Locally at least. Humans are social creatures; that wouldn't work if most people were mostly immoral. Nonetheless, the lack of perfection (and the fact that one act of evil can destroy thousands of acts of good, but not the other way around) means police are needed, and the presence of police ensures that they will always be needed.

Jose

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 8:10 pm UTC
by sardia
MartianInvader wrote:]
Umm, wouldn't that be fascism? Like, at a far worse level than anything Trump has done?

What are you afraid of that's worse than what the Trump administration has done? Demonization of a minority group (Nazis), Mass incarceration of Nazis? Terrified Nazis who hide from government officials? You're could argue something about Nazi sympathizers who get caught up in the system, but you're not really fixing anything by saying we shouldn't go after Nazis. Whatever government evils you're afraid of would still exist, but just different groups would be affected. That sounds like a general criminal Justice reform thing.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 9:04 pm UTC
by MartianInvader
sardia wrote:What are you afraid of that's worse than what the Trump administration has done? Demonization of a minority group (Nazis), Mass incarceration of Nazis? Terrified Nazis who hide from government officials? You're could argue something about Nazi sympathizers who get caught up in the system, but you're not really fixing anything by saying we shouldn't go after Nazis. Whatever government evils you're afraid of would still exist, but just different groups would be affected. That sounds like a general criminal Justice reform thing.

I am afraid of making political beliefs, of any kind, illegal. Even Trump has not yet done this.

Also, I set a higher bar than "not worse than what the Trump administration has done" when deciding what I think the government should do. I hope most people do the same.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2019 5:37 am UTC
by CorruptUser
MartianInvader wrote:I am afraid of making political beliefs, of any kind, illegal.


But that isn't the same as protecting political beliefs. I can have the political belief that, for instance, we should reinstate Jim Crow and related rules, and while I can't be imprisoned for that alone, that doesn't mean that I can't be dismissed from a job for openly espousing said belief, and marching in front of the town hall dangling a noose at any black children that come near me would likely end up with me before a jury for hate crimes. So why should Nazis of any flavor, who espouse an ideology where entire swaths of the population should be put to death simply for existing, have their beliefs "protected" from job dismissals or have intimidation tactics protected by "free speech" rules?

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2019 5:57 am UTC
by idonno
CorruptUser wrote:But that isn't the same as protecting political beliefs. I can have the political belief that, for instance, we should reinstate Jim Crow and related rules, and while I can't be imprisoned for that alone, that doesn't mean that I can't be dismissed from a job for openly espousing said belief, and marching in front of the town hall dangling a noose at any black children that come near me would likely end up with me before a jury for hate crimes. So why should Nazis of any flavor, who espouse an ideology where entire swaths of the population should be put to death simply for existing, have their beliefs "protected" from job dismissals or have intimidation tactics protected by "free speech" rules?

At a 10% estimate, it doesn't sound like what is being discussed is just arresting people who are actually breaking current laws. 10% of Trump voters is over 6 Million people. I'm not sure you could hit that number even if you arrested everyone who was engaging in even vaguely racist demonstrations. Sure it might be hyperbole but if this is just people doing what you are talking about
Let's see how the GOP likes it when 10% of their base is behind bars, deported or dead. At least law enforcement would be doing something useful.
would be hyperbole to such an extent that the GOP probably wouldn't care that much. In fact I suspect they would get more votes from stirring up that portion of their base than they would lose from people being arrested which is a win for them.

Note: I am not advocating that the law not be enforced to keep the GOP base from being stirred up. I am only saying that the first half being hyperbole invalidates the second half so either sardia is advocating for something more extreme than what you describe or hasn't thought through the difference between results of the hyperbole and the results of the actual numbers.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2019 6:28 am UTC
by Dauric
I'm just going to have to reiterate the quote I posted from Friedrich Nietzsche above:

He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you.


The problem with using the tactics of the National Socialists on the National Socialists themselves is that you become the monster you are trying to fight.

This is a problem because, to paraphrase Godwin's Law: At some point every position on every political issue has been equated to Nazis. Over in the "Teachers being trained to kill Kids" thread Ijuin makes a good observation:

ijuin wrote:I would say that the root cause is a culture of conflict resolution that views the total eradication of opponents as the preferred method rather than persuasion or reconciliation.


Grand Upshot: You create a policy that imprisons Nazis, that "deports" Nazis (how would that even work? You deport foreign nationals to their home countries, Neo-Nazis have most likely never left their country of origin...), execute Nazis, gas-chamber Nazis...

Then a few months down the line anti-abortion activists decide that "baby murder is equivalent to Nazism", so they add an amendment to the law justifying the gas-chambering of Nazis to include anyone who's pro-abortion, who performs abortions, and forcibly imprisons anyone who's had an abortion for Nazi sympathies. Then the Gun Control lobby decides anyone who owns a gun is a murdering Nazi, and the Gun Rights side counters that Gun Control proponents are Authoritarian Fascists, just like Nazis...

Martin Luther King Jr. wrote:"The old law of an eye for an eye leaves everyone blind."

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2019 11:33 am UTC
by Sableagle
Nothing wrong with shooting as long as the right people get shot!

Briggs, I hate the goddamn system! But until someone comes along with changes that make sense, I'll stick with it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgHWwYQ3XSg
Somewhere in that same movie he said something like: "Pretty soon you're shooting your neighbour because his dog crapped on your lawn."

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2019 11:41 am UTC
by sardia
MartianInvader wrote:I am afraid of making political beliefs, of any kind, illegal. Even Trump has not yet done this.
Also, I set a higher bar than "not worse than what the Trump administration has done" when deciding what I think the government should do. I hope most people do the same.

Interesting, using law enforcement on minorities and illegal Immigrants isn't a thought crime, but using it on Nazis is to you. Remember that domestic terrorism is still a crime, regardless of ideology. Just because white privilege had law enforcement ignore Nazis doesn't mean it's wrong to prosecute them.
The scale of Nazi infiltration in the US is so bad; you're hoping I'm wrong.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/03/maga ... right.html
Law Enforcement Failed to See the Threat of White Nationalism. Now They Don’t Know How to Stop It.
For two decades, domestic counterterrorism strategy has ignored the rising danger of far-right extremism. In the atmosphere of willful indifference, a virulent movement has grown and metastasized.

As for your supposed defense of free speech, you are either ignorant of the current situation, or helpless that it's already that bad.
The F.B.I. does not and cannot police ideologies under the First Amendment.” But looking at prosecutions, German says, “it’s clear that many of the people targeted for investigation for allegedly supporting the Islamic State were initially identified because of something they said online.”

Nobody knows how many Nazis are in the country because every time a Nazi acts, they classify it as a mentor challenged man.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2019 12:01 pm UTC
by Angua

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2019 12:57 pm UTC
by Dauric
sardia wrote:Nobody knows how many Nazis are in the country because every time a Nazi acts, they classify it as a mentor challenged man.


The FBI Isn't entirely wrong with that assessment however.

Again, in the vein of how we work harder to exterminate opposition rather than persuasion/conversion, I note that there's an emphasis on "destroying" Nazis and not so much of an emphasis on being better at recruiting, being better at extending acceptance to those feeling disaffected, than the white supremacists. White Supremacy groups are extremely effective at recruiting, at making people who are feeling alone and unaccepted feel wanted and giving them belonging. At giving a sense of pride and power, as well as instilling fear that those good feelings could be taken away.

All the "Nazi Eradication" efforts won't amount to anything unless you can get ahead of the recruitment curve and prevent children in their pre-teens and early teens from fulfilling their needs for acceptance and community by membership in these groups. From a tactical/strategic standpoint there needs to be more efforts at getting at White Supremacist logistics, the ability to gather supplies and recruits, from disrupting recruitment efforts and/or suborning those efforts and tactics to steer children away from hate groups.

Re: Trump presidency

Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2019 4:21 pm UTC
by MartianInvader
sardia wrote:
MartianInvader wrote:I am afraid of making political beliefs, of any kind, illegal. Even Trump has not yet done this.
Also, I set a higher bar than "not worse than what the Trump administration has done" when deciding what I think the government should do. I hope most people do the same.

Interesting, using law enforcement on minorities and illegal Immigrants isn't a thought crime, but using it on Nazis is to you.

Disagreeing with an opinion does not mean I think it's a thought crime. The fact that you don't seem to distinguish between the two is precisely the problem.