Kansas Crimson

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Jul 17, 2024 1:44 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 17, 2024 8:50 am

pdub wrote: ↑Wed Jul 17, 2024 8:38 am I would.
It remains to be seen what Trump could do - I very very much doubt it could ever get anywhere close to Hitler in the USA in todays age but we could go backwards by quite a bit as a nation.
So, if I had a Time Machine and the same question was asked of Trump, no, I definitely would not - but i'd sure as hell go forward in the Time Machine 4-8 years and see what we look like and possibly reconsider.

I will say this - finishing Band of Brothers with my boy over the weekend, I found the scenes where Easy Company discovered the camps to be even heavier than they'd normally be. Knowing that one side of our politics wants to see mass, government-coordinated action that will, if undertaken as promised, require putting people of shared characteristics in camps, bearing our symbols and at our expense.

Whaddya mean one side?

Cuz there’s been robust bipartisan support for…oh, fuck it, never mind.

Back with the just asking questions false equivalencies.

Oh, no, not at all.

It’s happening! With so many of the expenses paid for by you and me!

But, there are some things we Americans as a whole prefer to just not understand.

Not in real time, at least.

And besides, this is not the thread.

We do have a thread for it, but it’s futile.

Today In: We're fucked. But, don't forget to vote.

Sam Harris

In the aftermath of yesterday's events, we must hold three truths in mind simultaneously: The first is that political violence, of any kind, is horrific and obscene. Despite the widespread moral confusion evident on social media, the attempted assassination of former President Trump was simply a tragedy for our country. And in response to this truth, we must do whatever we can to restore civility and basic decency to our politics.

But there is a second truth, now all but unutterable, and it is this: No one has done more to destroy civility and basic decency in our politics than Donald Trump. No one, in fact, has done more to
increase the threat of political violence. Unlike any president in modern history, Trump brings out the worst in both his enemies and his friends. His influence on American life seems almost
supernaturally pernicious.

The problem for Democrats is that any observation of this second truth—a truth that seems likely to darken and expand in the aftermath of yesterday's attack-will now be condemned as rancorous and immoral-or worse, as an incitement to further political violence. Every necessary criticism of Trump's authoritarianism, fondness for dictators, fraudulence, personal corruption, hostility to the rule of law, and fathomless dishonesty —will be mistaken for (or cynically construed as) a symptom of the very political disease we must cure. Telling the truth about the actual risks that Trump and Trumpism still pose to our democracy just became much more difficult.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Jul 17, 2024 1:51 pm Oh, no, not at all.

It’s happening! With so many of the expenses paid for by you and me!

But, there are some things we Americans as a whole prefer to just not understand.

Not in real time, at least.

And besides, this is not the thread.

We do have a thread for it, but it’s futile.

But, again, you are falling into a false equivalency.

If we agree that one unit of something is bad, then we agree that one unit of something is bad.

But when you start measuring the number of units with some number of zeroes attached, I think the distinction between the number of zeroes is extremely important.

And at some point, the number of zeroes on one side of the ledger is conclusive as to taking a measure of the whole picture.

Frankly, I see our other discussion largely the same way. My personal frustration is that you have insisted upon painting both sides with generally the same brush, even though one side has committed many many many more zeroes of bad than the other.

Ousdahl pulls into a diner and sits down at a booth and puts in an order.
Looks out the window and sees a man set his car on fire.
"Yea, that was bad, for sure, I'm not denying that, but can we also mention that my toast was burnt?"

Watching (reading) Ousdahl think he's more enlightened than everyone else is really quite funny. I'm not sure I've ever seen someone so sure they "get it" and everyone else doesn't.

Please tell me you didn’t really just equate burnt toast with genocide.

And fish, if you really wanna talk frustration, just imagine how I feel when you very conspicuously refuse to understand very valid concerns here.

To try to keep the thread on topic - it’s not that we don’t excuse political violence, it’s that we don’t excuse political violence against our own establishment.

Cuz other than that, when it comes to political violence, the U.S. is like thee world leaders, and proud of it.

DeletedUser wrote: ↑Wed Jul 17, 2024 5:40 pm Watching (reading) Ousdahl think he's more enlightened than everyone else is really quite funny. I'm not sure I've ever seen someone so sure they "get it" and everyone else doesn't.

Do us all a favor and ignore me.

Pretty please?

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Jul 17, 2024 6:44 pm Please tell me you didn’t really just equate burnt toast with genocide.

And fish, if you really wanna talk frustration, just imagine how I feel when you very conspicuously refuse to understand very valid concerns here.

To try to keep the thread on topic - it’s not that we don’t excuse political violence, it’s that we don’t excuse political violence against our own establishment.

Cuz other than that, when it comes to political violence, the U.S. is like thee world leaders, and proud of it.

It says quite a lot about your whole...thing...here that you think there are points to be scored by attacking someone for simply admitting that he doesn't know a situation well enough to confidently express a strong opinion.

You would be VERY well served by doing just that.

ETA: The response above assumes (based on past similar attacks) you are talking about my reluctance to express strong opinions about some Israel/Hamas things. Sometimes you say things in way that leaves room for doubt as to what exactly I'm supposed to aim at. If you meant that I am "very conspicuously refus[ing] to understand very valid concerns" about something else, let me know what that something else is.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Jul 17, 2024 6:44 pm

DeletedUser wrote: ↑Wed Jul 17, 2024 5:40 pm Watching (reading) Ousdahl think he's more enlightened than everyone else is really quite funny. I'm not sure I've ever seen someone so sure they "get it" and everyone else doesn't.

Do us all a favor and ignore me.

Pretty please?

I wish you made it easier for all of us to ignore you.

DeletedUser wrote: ↑Wed Jul 17, 2024 7:20 pm

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Jul 17, 2024 6:44 pm

DeletedUser wrote: ↑Wed Jul 17, 2024 5:40 pm Watching (reading) Ousdahl think he's more enlightened than everyone else is really quite funny. I'm not sure I've ever seen someone so sure they "get it" and everyone else doesn't.

Do us all a favor and ignore me.

Pretty please?

I wish you made it easier for all of us to ignore you.

1. Click the username in question
2. Click “add foe”
3. When asked to confirm, click “yes”

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 17, 2024 6:50 pm

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Jul 17, 2024 6:44 pm Please tell me you didn’t really just equate burnt toast with genocide.

And fish, if you really wanna talk frustration, just imagine how I feel when you very conspicuously refuse to understand very valid concerns here.

To try to keep the thread on topic - it’s not that we don’t excuse political violence, it’s that we don’t excuse political violence against our own establishment.

Cuz other than that, when it comes to political violence, the U.S. is like thee world leaders, and proud of it.

It says quite a lot about your whole...thing...here that you think there are points to be scored by attacking someone for simply admitting that he doesn't know a situation well enough to confidently express a strong opinion.

You would be VERY well served by doing just that.

ETA: The response above assumes (based on past similar attacks) you are talking about my reluctance to express strong opinions about some Israel/Hamas things. Sometimes you say things in way that leaves room for doubt as to what exactly I'm supposed to aim at. If you meant that I am "very conspicuously refus[ing] to understand very valid concerns" about something else, let me know what that something else is.

In the interest of exhibiting humility on the pols bored (wut)…

Forgive me for coming across as attacking. It’s honestly not my intent, tho I know I can bring an attitude sometimes.

And I appreciate your humility in admitting you don’t understand middle eastern conflicts as well as you could or would or should.

(Why you choose to understand the Ukraine/Russia conflict to the exclusion of the middle eastern and so many other conflicts is another discussion, but let’s save that for another…well, discussion)

But, this whole “understand” controversy is rooted not in my request to discuss middle eastern or Israel/Palestine conflicts at large, but in one very specific event - when a U.S. ally used U.S. weapons to bomb U.S. civilian aid workers.

And rather than just comment a “that’s fucked up” or “that’s too bad” or “that sounds like a tragic mistake” or “I think the dozens of Democratic law makers have good reason to express concern;” or even just commenting nothing at all (cuz you would have been at least better served by doing just that!), you offered this “I don’t understand.”

As if there might be some bigger picture nuance, some yet-to-be-disclosed detail, some something out there that might downplay or normalize or lend credence or something, to the killing of U.S. civilian aid workers. With U.S. bombs. By U.S. allies.

I’d say I just don’t get it, except it’s just yet another example of how incredibly narrow and selective your views seem to be when discussing global conflicts.

And, again, to keep the thread on topic: we’ve seen some concerning number of Americans, including on this bored, exhibit more humanity for Trump’s fucking ear, than they have for the (at least, likely far more than) tens of thousands of innocent Palestinian civilians, mostly women and children, who continue to be slaughtered by our allies with weapons paid for by you and me.

the Russia Ukraine war does not equal the middle east conflict. they are not similar in any way. If you can't understand that then you are hopeless. Quit comparing the two.

He's just showing humility. He's told us so several times now.

Man, as the details continue to emerge, the Secret Service only looks worse and worse...and worse. Talk about dropping the ball.

Shirley wrote: ↑Thu Jul 18, 2024 6:53 am Man, as the details continue to emerge, the Secret Service only looks worse and worse...and worse. Talk about dropping the ball.

What little (but some) interactions I have had with the Secret Service, they were ALWAYS A+ in regards to professionalism and thoroughness. Granted, I'm just a schmuck who has very little idea of ALL the things that that must take in to account (and my guess is there are often things they can't 100% prepare for) but I was asked questions and told things that my guess is 99% of the people on this board would never have thought of.
Therefore, I am really surprised at the APPARENT lapses and dare I say incompetence of the Secret Service that was assigned to protect Trump in Pennsylvania.

Shirley wrote: ↑Thu Jul 18, 2024 6:53 am Man, as the details continue to emerge, the Secret Service only looks worse and worse...and worse. Talk about dropping the ball.

You happen to see the FOIA dump yesterday, relating to the frequency and reach of unauthorized access to Trump at Mar-a-Lago?

We’re all inclined to see what we want to see in these things, but it might well just be that we’re seeing the result of the Secret Service not having the resources to protect this particular protectee, and this particular protectee not having the willingness to modify the way he wants to live in order to help the Secret Service protect him.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 18, 2024 7:31 am

Shirley wrote: ↑Thu Jul 18, 2024 6:53 am Man, as the details continue to emerge, the Secret Service only looks worse and worse...and worse. Talk about dropping the ball.

You happen to see the FOIA dump yesterday, relating to the frequency and reach of unauthorized access to Trump at Mar-a-Lago?

We’re all inclined to see what we want to see in these things, but it might well just be that we’re seeing the result of the Secret Service not having the resources to protect this particular protectee, and this particular protectee not having the willingness to modify the way he wants to live in order to help the Secret Service protect him.

No, I didn't. And as cynical as I am already, not sure I want to.
#ignoranceisbliss

It, ah, makes you think that maybe it’s not a good idea to leave a $5 bill out on a table, let alone nuclear secrets.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 18, 2024 7:31 am

Shirley wrote: ↑Thu Jul 18, 2024 6:53 am Man, as the details continue to emerge, the Secret Service only looks worse and worse...and worse. Talk about dropping the ball.

You happen to see the FOIA dump yesterday, relating to the frequency and reach of unauthorized access to Trump at Mar-a-Lago?

We’re all inclined to see what we want to see in these things, but it might well just be that we’re seeing the result of the Secret Service not having the resources to protect this particular protectee, and this particular protectee not having the willingness to modify the way he wants to live in order to help the Secret Service protect him.

But it seems, in this instance, as if they did have the resources to protect him -- secret service spotted him on the roof 20 minutes before he fired.

And then they shot him 20 seconds after he fired.

So it doesn't seem like a resource problem in this case.

I might attribute it more to what twocoach said -- you can't shoot him just because he's carrying a high powered rifle because carrying that weapon is not against the law.