Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[froot loops]

The media doesn't have to do any brainwashing, just repeating Trump's daily words is enough. He is infuriating daily, Stephen Ross should be proud when Trump talks and tweets. Raising that much money for the guy indicates he is a true believer and his corporate speak about inclusion is a mirage.

[iam416]

[Dr. Strangelove]

This jackass is lucky to be alive

https://www.kfvs12.com/2019/08/09/off-duty-firefighter-stops-man-armed-with-rounds-ammunition-south-springfield-walmart/

[froot loops]

This jackhole said he didn't consider himself a white supremacist only that he wanted the white race to win at life. So he cleared that up.

[Jeff Buchanan]

This article linked below is a decent report on the facts supporting the hypothesis, White Supremacists are responsible for the recent mass shootings in America.

Surrounding this hypothesis, we have identity politics at work which is being used as a club v. political opponents. Claims that the hypothesis is correct and specific individuals are responsible for inciting it are amplified by both social and traditional media. As well, in assessing the validity of the hypothesis, language is extremely important.

In the question of how to combat criminals from carrying out gun crimes motivated by White supremacist Ideology, the traditional task carried out by law enforcement of infiltrating these kinds of groups and foiling plots using this activity has gotten increasingly difficult to do as perpetrators frequently act independently, outside identifiable membership and physical presence at meetings and gatherings of these groups.

In summary, it's a mixed bag.https://www.factcheck.org/2019/03/th...e-nationalism/

[Ghengis Jon]

The real issue at hand, imo, is how American culture has radically changed over the last 50 years. The only real significant technical change (for the masses) is the internet - instead of having to dig and/or travel for information, it is now instantly available. Plus people, worldwide, can be interconnected through a few simple clicks. Since we are discussing violence (beyond the white supremacist activities), lets look how attitudes toward firearms have changed.

I started plinking with a .22 at 9 years old with my grandfather. By 12, I was given a .22 of my own and could use it unsupervised if I remained on family property. At 14, I could buy a box of .22 ammo at the local hardware store and blast away on local state land. I kept my .22 in my bedroom closet, not under lock and key, but with the bolt removed because I had younger siblings. I can honestly say that prior to turning 18, I never had an issue buying ammunition.

Compare those lax attitudes with the restrictive (more responsible?) attitudes of today. Why do we have more violence?

[Jeff Buchanan]

Doesn't really say a lot that we don't already know but this article focuses on who has the upper hand in the US-China trade war. The bottom line is, it appears to be a draw at this point and until the battle reveals results:

In the final analysis, then, China may have the most to lose from the ongoing dispute. But the U.S. bargaining position is more politically vulnerable.

And the Chinese can credibly claim that buckling under American pressure would be unacceptable to their domestic audience.

Studies of shooting wars indicate that they tend to continue until events on the ground reveal which side is likely to win. The same is surely true for trade wars.

Since neither side is clearly winning or losing, we have probably not seen the end of this conflict.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/who-has-the-upper-hand-in-the-us-china-trade-war-2019-08-05?mod=mw_quote_news

[froot loops]

Oh no, what am I going to do now that you've uncovered my true aims. Silence!

I'll quote what a famous person said about why you should have to defend your political donations.

"Requiring people to stand up in public for their political acts fosters civic courage, without which democracy is doomed. For my part, I do not look forward to a society which, thanks to the Supreme Court, campaigns anonymously and even exercises the direct democracy of initiative and referendum hidden from public scrutiny and protected from the accountability of criticism. This does not resemble the Home of the Brave.."

Nah, this post is a case of working the refs, just like Rocky Bleier's post was. The way you can tell is the glee about Gillette's loss of 8 billion dollars apparently because they had a commercial.

When Nike worked with Kaepernick did Rocky complain about intimidation of the company then?

Don't worry about Harbaugh, he'll survive this terrible criticism that will last one day. Stephen Ross is still going to hold his Hamptons fundraiser. That party will raise 10 million dollars in cash for Trump and in return one of his companies may get a no bid federal contract worth hundreds of millions. Or maybe he or a family member gets a sweet ambassadorship. Sure he issued a "strongly" worded statement that he disagrees with Trump on some unnamed things, but at the end of the day that's small price to pay for Ross. Kenny Stills is paying and will definitely continue paying the price for criticizing Ross with some form of intimidation from the MAGA folks(however feeble those threats may be). And really if someone is worrying about suppressing the opposition's voice by any means necessary, the response to credible threats against her wouldn't be along the lines of this.

"Woe is her. Such a victim."

[iam416]

Just awful. I would point out that even the law recognizes a difference between public and private individuals and what you can say about them, but that's a point that won't ever be considered.

In any event, my favorite part of the whole Castro bullshit is his claim that he means those private individuals no harm. Yeah. LMMFAO.

[iam416]

McConnell is going to put background checks and "red flag" laws "front and center" -- https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...checks-1453520

My guess is that the Senate could easily pass a bill addressing background checks and some sort of red flag law. My guess is that it will not be so easy. I rather doubt any D will go along because of some bullshit like "it doesn't go far enough" -- as if Senators aren't familiar with the way policy and legislation works. So that'll mean that Mitch the Awesome will need to get nearly all Rs on board. That'll be tough. Hopefully some Ds will recognized that something is better than nothing and cross the aisle to vote for something they obviously agree with. But, I'm guessing most will, quite tellingly, play politics.

[iam416]

It seems like PDJT is considering action to address the efforts of the #GentryCommunists to silence all opposition on Twitter. These social media platforms are a rather interesting legal question. They're private, but they're very much public forums. I go back and forth on how they should be treated, but I can see an argument that they're public fora and should be treated as such under the First Amendment.

In any event, while I find Twitter a total tool of the #GentryCommunists and their Stalinist approach to free speech, I'm not a big fan of Executive Orders, so I think I'd prefer they do nothing.

Focus more on Universities and their efforts to silence dissent.

[froot loops]

Just awful. I would point out that even the law recognizes a difference between public and private individuals and what you can say about them, but that's a point that won't ever be considered.

In any event, my favorite part of the whole Castro bullshit is his claim that he means those private individuals no harm. Yeah. LMMFAO.

Your bitch is with Whitley on Castro, to my recollection I didn't speak on the issue. I don't condone the Castro listing of retirees or regular private citizens. He's on better footing exposing businesses and business owners.

Stephen Ross is a much better target in my opinion. Jim Harbaugh! may have been unaware he stepped on a hornets nest. But to conflate Harbaugh getting criticism for a tweet to the doomsday scenario that Bleier presented is a little much.

[iam416]

Ross is a big boy. He's a public figure. Stills is a public figure who injected himself, very publicly, into the debate. HARBAUGH!!! probably is receiving unfair criticism but he's a public figure, too.

Personally, I find the outrage over someone's politics ridiculous. I can't imagine reducing a person to their vote for President *[EDIT -- I get that it's a continuum and we our own scales -- if you give a Nazi salute then you have some real problems. We place various acts on our own continuum -- I just can't imagine boycotting a business b/c they support Elizabeth Warren.] But, while I find it remarkably stupid and, for that matter, not good for the country, Stephen Ross can handle it. Some otherwise anonymous dude in El Paso? That's bullshit.

He's on better footing exposing businesses and business owners.

I guess, but he has to own the fact that only reason he's exposing businesses is to put them out of business -- because their politics. I mean, there is no other reason to "expose" businesses as such. He has to own it -- he can't fuck around with "I don't mean them no harm" horseshit.

[crashcourse]

freedom of religion freedom of press freedom of speech etc etc but your right to contribute to charities, political parties, causes etc of your choosing can now be extorted in some ways

I guess you could argue kaepernick faced the same thing --but he chose to have his beliefs put out there in public regardless of the price.

what people choose to do--- they should have therfreedon to decide quietly as they want or loudly as they want who they support and in what way they support a cause candidate or whatever.

[Ghengis Jon]

That's idealistic crash. According to the 21st century's Dred Scott decision Citizen's United, corporations are people - citizens are relegated to secondary status. A person's political views, contributions, activities, organization, or privacy is deemed unimportant when corporate money is involved. Individualism in America is dead. All corporations are created equal - humans don't count.