Ryan is quite fair.
He will take money to kill anyone with his 'Health Care' bill.
He will take money to kill anyone with his 'Health Care' bill.
The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) was joined by comedian Ali Woods to look back at the best and worst moments of a rollercoaster season with the annual United Hour Awards.
Has Ten Hag been sacked yet? We're not sure and we hope not, but it's looking more likely as the days pass.
Who should replace him and why is it taking so long to make a decision?
- Status
Would be great Craic if Putin comes out and denounces him......
Would be a great craic if at his next rally Trump came out wearing baggy slacks and black leather boots up to his knees.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Awww bless her. She better be careful, I've heard Trump wants to kick all the dreamers out.
I don't think it is.
We've seen some examples such as Krauthammer, Smith and Wallace being regular critics of this president along with the 2 of the hosts being critical on The Specialists tonight.
But this is just a tiny percentage of the overall content of the Fox channel.
Na mate, just wait, it's just for his voters. It's coming. Aaany time now
100%. Anyone that is a self-professed neo-Nazi, white supremacist etc. is a wankstain of the highest order. A gathering which has that as the majority group should be vilified in the strongest possible manner.
Trump is also a racist, bigoted, corrupt, ignorant knobend who no doubt sympathises with them and may well support their cause. However, I do think he has a small point worth making, and it's the one she's taking issue with. He's making it for all the wrong reasons, and he's right to be called out on it, but I think it's important to use words carefully and I don't think she did.
To say that all Neo-nazis are bad people is true, in my perspective. However, the idea that every person in that rally is a Neo-nazi and/or a bad person by default is erroneous. Some people are not firmly on one side or the other and get caught up in a movement for reasons they don't understand, but certainly don't qualify as them being a supporter of the core ideology inspiring it.
To me this is a beautiful video:
Is he a bad person when he considers joining the movement? Is he a good person when he's forced to confront the issues in it and he repudiates it? I'm of the viewpoint that things are not black and white in either case. I also take the view that a black and white perspective, with a careless attitude to the facts and an inflammatory communication style is part of the problem. There's some evidence to support that too.
Smith is a general exception on Fox though, he goes without saying
SIAP, Colbert reaming Trump is 'old news' by now, but this one was particularly good...
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
@Carolina Red I know you're a history buff so this dig should be of amusement to you.
Yep, just one of a handful at Fox who have been critical of this administration.
I was disagreeing with the view that most of the hosts/pundits/at Fox News have turned on Trump, when i've not noticed this shift in opinion/views.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
And here's number FIVE!
Anyone who didn't leave the second "Jews will not replace us" chants started didn't get caught up for reasons they don't understand.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Trump apparently has never heard of Benedict Arnold
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Finally. It was a disgrace he stayed long after the fecking corporations started resigning.
1. He suggested that the mother of the woman who was killed by the neo-Nazi thinks that both sides are to blame. So he's trying to make us believe that the mother who's daughter was protesting against the far right was not blaming the far right.
2. He said he didn't want to blame one side until he had all the facts. Well, in the past it's never stopped him from blaming Muslims before having all the facts.
3. For a politician there can be no question of moral ambiguity when it comes to the far right, and especially so for a politician from a country with a history of racial inequality.
It is true.
Yeah, Lee and Stonewall Jackson and co were traitors who rebelled against the Union. They weren't the only American icons who held nasty views towards black people, but this isn't a debate where logic is the overriding factor. Lot of charged emotions, especially after the shooting in South Carolina.
I personally find the statue issue so irrelevant in light of more pressing matters... Plus as a history buff I'm not a fan of judging past actions by present values, or destroying historical artifacts, even if they were erected in defiance of equality for all. Place a marker next to it that provides context. But I understand where other people come from on this issue.
If they were there to protest the removal of a statue of a traitor put there to memorialize treason in the name of the subjugtion of an entire race of people then yes, they're a bad person.
Pro tip for wannabe protestors, if the crowd you're joining are waving swastika, KKK and confederate flags, chanting 'Jews will not replace us' and are armed like a low rent militia mob, then they're probably not very nice people.
I'm also a history buff who hates revisionism, but putting a plaque next to it isn't going to cut it. Put them in a museum in an exhibition with the context explained sure, but a lot of these monuments dominate the approaches to state buildings and African Americans have to pass these reminders of slavery on a daily basis.
I'll play the Devil's advocate here and say this is a weak argument. Lee is a fascinating historical figure, whilst the O.G.W and Jefferson both had slaves. Not to mention Jefferson had babies with one of his slaves.
I don't think you read my point because I agree with all of the above. What Trump did is unbelievably stupid and irresponsible and his motives for doing so are more than questionable. He'll never live it down.
You're working under the assumption that it was all one homogenous, consolidated group working as part of a coherent movement, in practice and in ideology. Things are a bit messier and more fragmented than that.
My family were involved in any number of political and social protests during the Troubles in Northern Ireland. Some were involved for the wrong reasons too, unfortunately. While I know you position yourself as being very politically active, I have no doubt you were not involved in the volume of significant protests some of them were, and thus don't have the same depth of knowledge or experience.
From their experience I can say without question that the assumption that homogenous groups working in a coherent, consolidated protest is often very far from the reality. It's convenient to believe otherwise, of course, but the facts have a way of cutting through that.
That's looking at it through the lens of a very rational perspective, which by default is inherently flawed because people are incredibly irrational. As a result the reality is nowhere near as straightforward. Cognitive dissonance has a strong pull on all of us. As demonstrated in the video.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Just waiting for Trump to go off on one about "sources" again. It's obvious by the pictures that Kelly didn't look happy at all today, it's also clear that people saying Kelly could control Trump and get him to behave more Presidential are extremely deluded.
Difference is this protest was actually quite coherent. They all had the chants down, they dressed the same, they were chanting the same thing, they had their little torches, they were making the same derpy faces. It wasn't say a huge anti-austerity protest where you can easily spot the marxists, the socialists, or people simply want specific cuts to stop. Or an anti-war protest, where you can easily spot the pacifist to people who simply disagree with this war and so on.
There weren't competing chants, the biggest difference as far as I could see between these protestors is weather they prefer the confederate or the nazi flag. The protest was organised by white supremacists, and attended by white supremacists.
Last edited:
People have to take responsibility for their actions. If you just happen to be walking by and decide to stand in a group of people while they kick someone to death, you take on responsibility for part of that action. If you go on a protest march for something morally repulsive then you take on some of the responsibility. If that person is there because they believed their favourite right wing talk show host, then that doesn't mean they get a free pass. People make choices, and they have to live with them.
In the name of good feck can we get rid of this asshole yet?
I agree. Which is why I said...
I just think the labelling of individuals within it is, in some cases, overly simplistic and intellectually lazy. I think the way this conversation has gone reiterates that. At a broader level it's also likely to be unhelpful to the greater cause, as per the UNESCO report I cited.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Someone make sure George Costanza is ok.
The labelling of people present serves a very real purpose. It tells the public that taking part in such a diabolical gathering opens you up to instant vilification and public shaming. This is good. This is how we persuade people who might be sucked into extremism that they should stay away without having to wait until further down the line when they end up spreading hate and potentially jailed or dead.
We're arguing the same central point but disagree on key details. The conversation isn't going anywhere useful because we're talking in abstract terms and avoiding specific points so let's just agree to disagree.
Even though the man called Mexicans all sorts of things and couldn't go 2min without talking about how Muslims would blow up America unless the travel ban was put in place I still feel as this is the moment where he truly laid out all his cards on the table. Before he could point to for example the gang violence and drug import in the US and the ISIS attacks in Europe and go, 'this is why we need the wall and the travel ban', and while all of it was very transparent he could still get away with it.
But now he has not once, but twice showed where he truly stands by defending those Nazi cnuts, and there is no poor excuse to hide behind anymore. Thankfully he seems to be getting more criticism for this than ever before and hopefully more senators and other officials will be lining up to say that he's way out of line.
I can't for the life of me understand where he's going with this and what he's trying to do though.
But now he has not once, but twice showed where he truly stands by defending those Nazi cnuts, and there is no poor excuse to hide behind anymore. Thankfully he seems to be getting more criticism for this than ever before and hopefully more senators and other officials will be lining up to say that he's way out of line.
I can't for the life of me understand where he's going with this and what he's trying to do though.
I'm not sure he knows either.
If you want to leave it there, then thats fine, I need to sleep shortly anyway. I'm not avoiding any specifics of this case though, I'm happy to address any point you'd like to raise.
Here's a refresher for everyone. It's Trump's interview when he pretended to be a guy called John Miller. I've just re-read it and it's hilarious.
I've seen more than a few people saying he was more coherent when he was younger, well he sure as hell wasn't here. It's definitely worth a read just because it's so insane. The man is so insecure he has to pretend to be someone else to big himself up
Ahhhhhh, poor man, he's had a broken mind for years and I don't think anybody ever had the nerve to tell him. If they did he sure as feck didn't do anything about it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...razier-than-you-think/?utm_term=.747f04fc0f44
I've seen more than a few people saying he was more coherent when he was younger, well he sure as hell wasn't here. It's definitely worth a read just because it's so insane. The man is so insecure he has to pretend to be someone else to big himself up
Ahhhhhh, poor man, he's had a broken mind for years and I don't think anybody ever had the nerve to tell him. If they did he sure as feck didn't do anything about it.https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...razier-than-you-think/?utm_term=.747f04fc0f44
Jesus wept he's intolerable.Here's a refresher for everyone. It's Trump's interview when he pretended to be a guy called John Miller. I've just re-read it and it's hilarious.
I've seen more than a few people saying he was more coherent when he was younger, well he sure as hell wasn't here. It's definitely worth a read just because it's so insane. The man is so insecure he has to pretend to be someone else to big himself up
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...razier-than-you-think/?utm_term=.747f04fc0f44
Who fecking does this?
If you are interested and have a spare 30 mins it's well worth a google. He used to phone up News Channels pretending to be his own publicist and some of them are hilarious. Well they are all hilarious because he genuinely believes nobody knows it was him on the phone. Even before he was President or even on The Apprentice he was still well known and had one of the most recognisable voices in the world.
After listening just remind yourself he was voted President.
- Status