Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Hannibal]

CIVIL WAR ON STEROIDS!!!

The brave officer who shot the unarmed Ashlii Babbitt is all that stands between Viking Hat man and the pillars of democracy.

[lineygoblue]

The brave officer who shot the unarmed Ashlii Babbitt is all that stands between Viking Hat man and the pillars of democracy.

I dunno, Hanni. The guy who took pictures of himself with Nancy Pelosi's podium looked kinda dangerous.

[Jeff Buchanan]

I forgot to add the link to the Giglio piece (it's below) but, yeah, I fall in the camp that finds a 2nd US civil war between competing ideologies of the left and right to be remote. However, there's enough anecdotal evidence out there to support the idea that insurrectionists like Rhodes have gained a substantial following of R's.

I should be clear, and if you read Giglio's article you'll see it, he's careful to avoid predicting a clash of L/R ideologies in the form of a civil war. Rhodes does not consider himself an insurrectionist . He argues he's a seller of ideologies and values that are, at base, conservative. The intent of Giglio's article is to chronicle Stewart Rhodes' history and development of his view of the US government as tyrannical and deserving of being challenged, forcefully if mere protest doesn't move the needle. Giglio also spends time advancing his argument that what Rhodes is selling is seductively popular in red states that supported and continue to support DJT. He cautions about the rising popularity of radical nationalism and it's impact on the course of US politics and the direction of America.

https://theintercept.com/2022/03/08/oath-keepers-january-6-stewart-rhodes-trump/

[iam416]

There's a lot of self-interest and party-interest in labeling the Rs as anti-democratic radicals. There's a lot of political capital to be had in saying you must vote D to "Save Democracy". There's a lot political points to be scored in lableing democractically enacting voting bills "Jim Crow on Steroids." The MSM is certainly pushing, very hard, this narrative. So, I take everything that pushes that Narrative with a ginormous grain of salt.

He cautions about the rising popularity of radical nationalism and it's impact on the course of US politics and the direction of America

To wit -- don't vote R. It's destroying America. Fundamentally, that's the argument. I'd feel better about the author if he did a similar piece on how the Ds are threatening D and freedom with Communist ideals.

[Tom W]

I've been of the mind that the solid majority, say 70-75%, of this country is just sitting back and watching the loons at either extreme make asses out of themselves. They may even share views with the extremists, but it's really not worth their time, money or energy to throw their dogs into the fight- until things need to be moderated. I find it humorous that so much is made of the "Insurrection" on January 6th because it seems to be an obvious reaction to the nonsense of the year leading up to it. If we weren't being assaulted by prog idealists and their BLM, ANTIFA and pandhysteric lockdowns, then, I doubt if the "Insurrection" would have happened. By calling out the bullshit for what it was and serving notice that it could be responded to in kind should serve as notice that the progs really don't have it all figured out.

[iam416]

One recent poll found that 47 million Americans believe Joe Biden is an illegitimate president and 21 million support the idea of removing him from office by force.

And in 2019, a poll fund that 50% of Americans believed that DJT colluded with Russia in 2016. To cleverly transpose that number into something staggering -- 160 million Americans think DJT colluded with Russia.

This would be another article/profile I'd enjoy seeing the author do. If the author is actually interested in "democracy" and respecting outcomes. Maybe go to Georgia and talk to Abrams. Maybe note the outright lies of "Jim Crow on Steroid."

I don't think January 6 is a "nothing burger", but it's also not portentious. You can't storm the Capital. You go to jail. But, the "Save Democracy" white-knighting of the Ds is preposterous.

[iam416]

I've been of the mind that the solid majority, say 70-75%, of this country is just sitting back and watching the loons at either extreme make asses out of themselves. They may even share views with the extremists, but it's really not worth their time, money or energy to throw their dogs into the fight- until things need to be moderated. I find it humorous that so much is made of the "Insurrection" on January 6th because it seems to be an obvious reaction to the nonsense of the year leading up to it. If we weren't being assaulted by prog idealists and their BLM, ANTIFA and pandhysteric lockdowns, then, I doubt if the "Insurrection" would have happened. By calling out the bullshit for what it was and serving notice that it could be responded to in kind should serve as notice that the progs really don't have it all figured out.

Agree with first part. Disagree to extent there's an argument Jan 6 was justified. It was not.

Unfortunately, our current landscape gives outsized voice to loons. As I've said before, I'd get rid of primaries in a fucking heartbeat if I could. I guess this makes me "anti-democractic", but right about now I'd much rather have nominees chosen by backroom party shenanigans. We're going to grift and machine politics regardless. We might as well at least get candidates that are less insane.

[Jeff Buchanan]

........ you feel, then, that Giglio has a left or D leaning agenda beyond chronicallying Rhodes' history? I didn't get that but you raise a fair point. When I watched the Amanpour interview with Giglio, I got the impression that he was sincerely concerned about the political divide and that radicalism - ???extremism - had been normalized in main stream politics, both sides of the aisle.

After I found his article in The Intercept and read it, I thought it was balanced neither extolling or deriding political extremism but rather cautioning readers of the dangers extremism - either side - presents to the nation. He just happened to be writing about Stephen Rhodes and the Oath Keepers as a vehicle to advance his objective.

[iam416]

Well, right. He didn't "happen" to write about him. He was purposefully chose (IMO). He could have chosen a BLM founder, but he would NEVER choose a BLM founder/leader. That would advance the wrong narrative (IMO).

The piece on Rhodes is interesting enough if you keep in mind how limited his influence actually is. And that's also part of the problem -- there has to be some sort of underlying jusitification for spending that much time and that many words on this guy. And I don't really agree with the underlying justification.

Eh, whatever.

[THE_WIZARD_]

Why don't you two make out somewhere else...

[Tom W]

Agree with first part. Disagree to extent there's an argument Jan 6 was justified. It was not.

That's kinda the point. The cooler heads, who are usually content to just go on with our lives, will recognize that there are ditches on both sides of the road that we had better not let this country get driven into.

[THE_WIZARD_]

Spot. On.

[Mike]

I never even knew what the hell these right wing fringe groups were until the summer of 2020 when they counter-protested the BLM/leftist riots. Their influence and following is miniscule to the loons on the left. In fact, it can be argued their prominence in contemporary American political discourse is wildly exaggerated by the Left and their media allies to distract from the utter destruction they wrought in 2020. They would have you believe that Viking Man, the Proud Boys and, by extension, the Republican Party is a threat to our democracy. A democracy that BARELY escaped from being toppled on January 6.

Conversely, the progressive Left wants to abolish the Electoral College, pack the Supreme Court, grant Puerto Rico and Washington D.C. statehood to add an automatic 4 D seats to the Senate, implement a federal takeover of elections in all 50 states, and open our southern border to unlimited illegal immigration. THAT, my friends, is a mothherfucking threat to our democracy.

And the people who hold actual power in the halls of congress that advance those ideas are not ostracized as threats to our Republic and our future prosperity, they are treated as celebrities and placed on magazine covers.

[THE_WIZARD_]

Mitt Romney and his ilk say hello.

[Mike]

Unfortunately, our current landscape gives outsized voice to loons. As I've said before, I'd get rid of primaries in a fucking heartbeat if I could. I guess this makes me "anti-democractic", but right about now I'd much rather have nominees chosen by backroom party shenanigans. We're going to grift and machine politics regardless. We might as well at least get candidates that are less insane.

Every time I'm having a conversation and someone says it sucks that we keep ending up with these shitty candidates to vote on (2016 and 2020 specifically) I bring up this exact point. Just go back to the smoke filled room and present what you believe is the most viable candidate. This "Bachelorette" style game show bullshit will only get worse and will have terrible consequences.