"both sides"
There ya go.
Let's have Trump try that in his defense in the Senate. Or any one of those fools arrested at the Capitol.
Speaking of hypocrisy, dneal, did you see that someone above advocated for "Civil War II"?
"both sides"
There ya go.
Let's have Trump try that in his defense in the Senate. Or any one of those fools arrested at the Capitol.
Speaking of hypocrisy, dneal, did you see that someone above advocated for "Civil War II"?
welch (March 10th, 2021)
Ever heard the term “whataboutthisism”? I head this often yesterday.
That might be a lot of things, but not hypocrisy.
Both sides have been fomenting this. I think there's an argument that Democrats have been more mainstream about it, and there are a lot of compilations of D Politicians explicitly calling for "violence"; although both sides are guilty in their fringes.
I agree that this blind, ignorant, unreasoning hatred [could quite possibly] lead us into a civil war. I've expressed my concerns many times. What civil war looks like in the 21st Century is hard to say. Whether or not it's a "good thing" is a question full of emotive problems. Was the 1860's civil war a good thing? Hundreds of thousands of Americans dead? I think not. But what about the perspective solving the problem of slavery and giving emancipation? You could argue it was a "good thing" - only with a horrible cost.
If Pendragon's point is that some sort of modern "civil war" restoring the union and sanity among the populace is a "good thing", I can see the point whether or not I completely agree with it.
I think there's an argument that we're in some sort of political "cold war".
It's *your* hypocrisy, not his.
You called my wish for a "standoff" with police both "sick" and "disgusting" because some people died, and I actually granted you that.
Now, someone on the Trump/conservative side suggests that another "Civil War" could be a good thing, and you fail to condemn it in like (if not more critical terms, because 600k+ Americans died in that "Civil War") and he capitalized it, referring even more specifically to the war in 1861-65. You work real hard here to rationalize ways into excusing the remark, whereas with my remark you opened by calling it sick and disgusting.
Whatever, dneal. I have really tried to cut you a break, put up with your endless gratuitous chirping of me (like calling my posts on the "dead voters"--which you listed in your causes for concern to doubt the election results--as "myopic," when all I did was pick one of the reasons that you listed.).
But your bias and hypocrisy are just as large here as anyone else's (if not more so), and your grandstanding on "lack of bias" and playing devil's advocate is just, finally, too much to take. I have never denied that I am a Trump hater. I have never denied bias. But you have railed against these features even while you exhibit them despite your best efforts to mask or deny them.
If you think that a second "Civil War" might restore sanity to the nation, why don't you write your employer, to your local newspaper, and to your local FBI and tell them so and sign your real name and address to it. Let's see how they feel about your "reasoning" and sense of restorative justice.
Others can continue here. I am done.
My hypocrisy? WTF are you even talking about? I don't want a civil war. I've specifically said I'm concerned, and used a "you have a brush fire" analogy to describe how this can all spiral out of control.
You said you would "...love to see a standoff between radical right and law enforcement." Pendragon did not say he would love to see a Civil War II. Wanna talk false equivalencies? There's a big one.
Regarding the dead voter thing. You ignored the point and harped on one example, and then ignored further clarification to continue your fallacious interpretation. Here, you simply demonstrate more of the same. Your mind is full of strawmen. Your bias peeks through, like with the "standoff" comment. Let's be honest, the only reason you backtracked is because you got caught red handed and had no other option. It otherwise never would have occurred to you how heinous that remark was.
Feel free to compare/contrast my bias and hypocrisy, and point out examples - because I so love adding the context of your selective quoting that is essential to your faux arguments.But your bias and hypocrisy are just as large here as anyone else's (if not more so)
Promises, promises. We all know you don't mean it.Others can continue here. I am done
As an aside re the civil war quote - the question of whether what one might call "rebellion" or "insurrection" benefits a particular political system, given its state at any given time is an old question in our country's political philosophy. Back in the time of Shay's Rebellion, there was a great deal of contemporary debate over whether the rebellion might have positive consequences, or negative ones. In fact Shay's Rebellion helped give rise to our Constitution.
Jefferson wrote during the period of the rebellion to James Madison, in a famous letter on the question of whether the rebellion might actually produce positive political consequences. Madison was distinctly negative on Shay's Rebellion, as was Washington. Jefferson wrote to Madison, differing from Madison's opinion and stating, "I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccesful rebellions indeed generally establish the incroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions, as not to discourage them too much. It is a medecine necessary for the sound health of government." [archaic spellings included]. Certainly Jefferson seemed to have in mind a little rebellion now and then against despotic governments, but he seems to have offered these curious remarks during Shay's Rebellion, which was an insurrection against a (at least for that time) democratically elected Massachusetts government.
There follow a couple of difficult questions, namely whether Jefferson's "rebellion" concept is the same as a civil war or something entirely different, and whether Jefferson himself even differed from this opinion later in life. By the early 1820s, Jefferson seems to have contradicted, or at least qualified his 1787 viewpoint. He wrote on the subject of the Missouri Compromise, "but this mementous question, like a fire bell in the night, awakened and filled me with terror. I considered it at once as the knell of the Union. it is hushed indeed for the moment. but this is a reprieve only, not a final sentence." [archaic spellings again]. So perhaps the Jefferson of the early 1820s as a more pessimistic, fatalistic thinker who saw the Union as doomed and simply as a prisoner awaiting final "sentencing".
Anyway, as an aside to all the personal venom re insurrection, rebellion, etc., I just thought I would point out that there is a long history of debate especially in the U.S. over whether such activities might, at least in some cases, produce positive political consequences. Outside of the personal attacks being made, it's actually a long-standing and legitimate debate within the political history of the U.S. Some of the forces at work are old ones and seem bound into human nature, including the nature of people in the U.S.
It is not false equivalency at all. The problem is that many people are completely intolerant of any dissent, and quite willing to use force to ram their will down everyone's throats.
I hardly advocated for a civil war, only wondered whether it might no be a bad thing. Our country is seemingly possessed by two troll armies, differing only in their political rhetoric. If they were to destroy each other, that might be a good thing in the long run. Then the rest of us could have our country back. Perhaps all we would have is cinders, but they would be our cinders. And we would be rid of the left and right wing extremists. It would be like the Huns and Goths wiping each other out, thereby allowing Rome to survive. Of course, the best thing would be for no civil war at all. Given the violent, uncompromising and totalitarian bent of the barbarian tribes, that seems rather unlikely at the moment.
How do you know my employer does not share my views? In truth, they could simply move their operations overseas in very short order. The FBI is no doubt well aware of the Planet Of The Apes situation in the US. They don't need me, you or anyone else to realize that the monkeys are off their feed.If you think that a second "Civil War" might restore sanity to the nation, why don't you write your employer, to your local newspaper, and to your local FBI and tell them so and sign your real name and address to it. Let's see how they feel about your "reasoning" and sense of restorative justice.
So if you can't win you are going to grab all your marbles and go home?Others can continue here. I am done.
Last edited by Pendragon; January 31st, 2021 at 06:57 PM.
Two last appeals to overturn state results rejected by the SC.
Even to March 7th this has been drawn out by weak, baseless suits simply because the egomaniac in question can't take the loss to Joe Biden and had been drunk on the idea of his own power and was charismatic and evil enough to persuade tens of millions of followers to believe (erroneously) that he cared about their plight.
We'll see how smart the GOP can be for 2024. Now there is a state by state battle over voting access.
welch (March 10th, 2021)
Nice to hear a decent person address the nation last night.
BlkWhiteFilmPix (March 13th, 2021), welch (March 14th, 2021)
Not sure what took her this long, but good to hear Beth Moore state the obvious.
For posterity:
Media misquoted Trump in notorious phone call with Georgia investigator
Correction: Two months after publication of this story, the Georgia secretary of state released an audio recording of President Donald Trump’s December phone call with the state’s top elections investigator. The recording revealed that The Post misquoted Trump’s comments on the call, based on information provided by a source. Trump did not tell the investigator to “find the fraud” or say she would be “a national hero” if she did so. Instead, Trump urged the investigator to scrutinize ballots in Fulton County, Ga., asserting she would find “dishonesty” there. He also told her that she had “the most important job in the country right now.” A story about the recording can be found here. The headline and text of this story have been corrected to remove quotes misattributed to Trump.
— Washington PostEditor's note: An earlier version of this story, published January 9, presented paraphrasing of the President's comments to the Georgia elections investigator as direct quotes. The story has been updated following the discovery of an audio recording of the call. Read more here.
— CNN
"A truth does not mind being questioned. A lie does not like being challenged."
724Seney (March 15th, 2021)
Five people died as a direct result of the former occupant. I keep on being reminded of this and how their deaths seem not to matter.
If you listened to the phone call made to Georgia or the speech Trump made before the insurrection event, and unless you are deaf or cannot read, there should be not confusion unless you want to be confused.
Confused? Deaf?? Cannot read??
Seriously Chuck??
At least those deaths get mentioned. And, they were deaths.
This while the many more murders (and the shameless destruction) that occurred last Summer are simply ignored. (Or are maybe correctly described as having been "cancelled?")
Why do you believe the deaths at the Capital should "matter" but the murders in the streets of countless cities should not?
Facts, such pesky things...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...-investigator/
"In both cases, the quotes were wrong..."
Query: how do you put quotation marks around things that were never said?
lol. Go ahead and make your case, Mr. prosecutor. Please tell us about each of the 5 deaths, and how a sitting politician caused them.
Here's your cheat sheet:
1 - Shot by security
1 - Heart attack
1 - Stroke
1 - Undetermined at this time
1 - Undetermined at this time
"A truth does not mind being questioned. A lie does not like being challenged."
Bookmarks