The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
No bio...
User ID: 174
Ask Jim Damore.
(And mods, before you ding me for low effort, consider what Rov_Scam is actually doing here. First, expressing a Dory-like disingenuous ignorance of, well, the whole culture war. Second, insinuating that obviously anything one might want to say that would trigger "hostile environment law" is something which is obviously unreasonable to say. And further, gloating that of course any employer would restrict such stuff without the government's help, perhaps because said employers are run by the left anyway. But without spelling it out, so there's no handle with which to dispute it)
I would argue with Trump it went even beyond finding the man — they invented a crime largely out of whole cloth and then jury rigged the law to get a conviction. It will be overturned on appeal.
Already been sustained by NY's highest court.
"Read the room" means "Defer to the people in the room who have high status".
It's different when they bomb a US ally with whom we have various agreements involving keeping a military base in their country and selling them advanced weapons.
Apparently it isn't. Qatar has been playing both sides of the fence, and nobody really cares if they got a bloody nose for it.
Gun control's back on the agenda. Banning guns for transgenders and also (checks notes) bolt action hunting rifles.
Media would report it as the only time the US mainland has ever been bombed and the first bombing of US territory since WWII.
The media might well report it that way, but the US mainland was bombed (as in, from the air) in WWII.
The message is being taken in the Muslim world: collaboration will not save you.
Who is Qatar collaborating with? I wouldn't call "harboring enemy leaders" an instance of collaborating with Israel, or with its allies including the US.
Zelensky has traveled to the United States multiple times, if the Russians blew up his limo would that be acceptable?
That's war. Doing it on the territory of a neutral risks making the neutral into a belligerent, of course, but the US likely wouldn't actually do anything all that rash. The Soviets were and now Putin is fairly well known for that sort of thing, actually.
No other country can assassinate or bomb its enemies on our soil, not if we remain a sovereign country.
Sure they can. They just risk the US's not-inconsiderable wrath if they do.
SARS-CoV-3, Viral Jubilee.
If it is indeed a dirt old, cheap, relatively abundant surplus bolt action, and considering the shooter only had to take one shot, I think it'll be hard to make the usual gun control arguments for this one. At least regarding the weapon.
Former NYC mayor David Dinkins made a push for gun control after a rash of stabbings.
Most of them came after, I believe.
The petrochemical industry is super duper red.
Not the owners of the petrochemical industry.
Assuming the antifa and pro-trans inscriptions are true... those were meant to be found. Argues at least as strongly for false flag as it does actual leftist, and crazy person (like the recent church shooter, who I think had such inscriptions) remains a strong possibility. I'll reserve judgement for now.
I guess they are dominantly Republican now. But they elected Manchin and Byrd for many years on end, not so long ago.
Kathy Griffin holding Trump's severed head, etc, etc.
Honestly, I always thought that one was in bounds. Killing your opponents in effigy is good clean political fun; I think Griffin got the outsized reaction because the head was so viscerally disturbing. There's a lot that you mentioned that's worse.
Well, no, supporting rioters had not been par for the course for the right for many years before January 6. Because the right pretty much didn't riot. And if the Democrats hadn't decided to try to bury the January 6 rioters under the jail, and quite a few non-rioters with them, and use the whole thing to try to disqualify the Republican candidate, I doubt the larger right would have supported them.
You, as with Nybbler, confuse epistemically always betting on black with wisdom. Your hits don't come from reason, they come from pessimism and the scree "Nothing ever happens." When you are proved wrong you ignore and move on.
Last time we were "proved wrong" about that was January 6. And Capital Room was proved right about the response -- violence from the left is excused or celebrated, violence from the right was cracked down upon without mercy. Even the stuff which didn't happen, like the murder of Brian Sicknick -- who you'll note at least one commenter here is STILL pinning on the right.
And I'm just tired. I'm tired of the infantilization of leftist rhetoric, where they've so effectively cultivated their little sphere to have no remaining adults in the room to stand up and tell them to sit down and be quiet, and I'm tired of the infantilization of rightist rhetoric, like exactly here, where smugness meets ignorance. They aren't docile, they're the adults who know the stakes.
Being tired leads to "nothing ever happens". The "adults" on the right who knew the stakes just kept letting the left getting victory after victory... right up until Trump. And Trump started doing things (not all of which I like, but a lot of which I do), and you know what... the world did NOT end.
That shows you the remaining divide between "Blue Tribe" and "Democrat". West Virginia isn't dominantly Republican but it is certainly dominantly "Red Tribe".
A lot of people on the right didn't like him, but the only group on the right I know who really hated him were the groypers. Were there more?
Also the Israeli Molotov attack was political, but it was basically foreign politics (the attacker was an Egyptian with an expired visa) that just happened to take place on US soil.
They successfully forced the gray tribe in big tech to convert or submit a decade ago.
Where was the uproar when Democratic senators were assassinated in Minnesota?
Where was the celebration of it? Did National Review Online use the opportunity to insult them (the way The Nation did to Kirk)? Did Fox (or the Daily Caller or Breitbart) suggest they brought it on themselves, the way MSNBC did?
ETA: it's not the shooting of Kirk that moves the needle. It's the reaction from the mainstream left (and no, declaring MSNBC and NROs first reactions, plus Reddit, as all atypical extremists is not convincing) that moves the needle. Reacting to the death of Kirk as if he were Osama bin Laden makes it quite clear that the situation is not opposition, it is enmity.
Of course, this is not the first time, though it may be the first for a murder of a right wing figure (I don't count the US Healthcare guy, as health insurance executives are kinda the designated villain now that everyone's forgotten about tobacco company people). What was the response to Margaret Thatcher's (natural) death? "Ding, dong, the witch is dead". How about Antonin Scalia's death? I sure remember open celebration. I remember because I called someone out on it and they said it was OK because he was against gay marriage.
TMZ denies this. Their explanation sounds unlikely to me, but at the very least they did eventually become ashamed enough to lie.
The xeets Yglesias quoted were not calling for violence.
I thought I read it HERE, in this thread a few weeks ago.
https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/n.y.-appeals-court-voids-fine--upholds-judgement-against-trump
However, perhaps this is not the case you were referring to; it's not the election interference case.
More options
Context Copy link