BigRedBuster Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 (edited) 12 minutes ago, knapplc said: I don't disagree with that, but it makes me curious why this thing was written, now, in today's political climate. Is Farrakhan a current problem? I'm perfectly capable of discussing what has been wrong on both sides of American politics in the past while still keeping an eye on what is going on in this very disturbing administration. Edited January 30, 2018 by BigRedBuster Link to comment
knapplc Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 Cool. I wasn't questioning your ability to do that. I know you can walk & chew gum at the same time. I haven't read the article and aside from these drive-by questions in the short time I have to check back here, I don't know what's going on with that. That's why I'm asking if Farrakhan is a current problem. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 8 minutes ago, knapplc said: Cool. I wasn't questioning your ability to do that. I know you can walk & chew gum at the same time. I haven't read the article and aside from these drive-by questions in the short time I have to check back here, I don't know what's going on with that. That's why I'm asking if Farrakhan is a current problem. I haven't heard Farrakhan's name for quite a while. However, I hadn't heard David Duke's name for quite a while either until Trump's campaign. I believe two of the politicians who are pictured meeting with Farrakhan are still in Washington (Maxine Waters and Al Green). 1 Link to comment
Moiraine Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 (edited) 8 hours ago, BigRedBuster said: Dunno if he's running this year. But this makes a racist Democrat (or at best, an ignorant buffoon) and a racist Republican nominee both in Chicago. And holy s*** look at this map of another district in Chicago. This was drawn in 1993 so I don't know who it benefited but it's effing ridiculous. Edited February 9, 2018 by Moiraine 1 Link to comment
commando Posted February 25, 2018 Share Posted February 25, 2018 is this the democratic utopia? Link to comment
RedDenver Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 21 hours ago, zoogs said: This is a bad thing: Tom Watson is trying to connect age with "Time's up", but isn't that what any group wanting the incumbent to be ousted essentially saying? What's bad about this? Using a turn of phrase against Feinstein? Link to comment
zoogs Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 What's bad about this is the use of the language of the anti-harrassment movement (are you familiar with the #TimesUp hashtag?) to express political differences. I don't know that much about Feinstein, frankly. From what I do know I'm probably more inclined to support her opponent. And to be clear her opponent's supporters are not uniform in this tactic, but it's an ugly one. Feinstein is not someone who committed sexual assault or harassment and is now being justifiably outed on those grounds*. Nor is she comparable to one. The reason this is bad is not the injury to Feinstein, it's the way in which #MeToo has been co-opted and trivialized. IMO, #MeToo is an area where there's a great deal of inadequacy on the left, and this seems like an example of that. *I mean, maybe she is --- but AFAIK, this is largely about her "militarism" and deference to the security state; at least, if Glenn Greenwald's characterization is reliable. It isn't always. Link to comment
RedDenver Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 10 minutes ago, zoogs said: What's bad about this is the use of the language of the anti-harrassment movement (are you familiar with the #TimesUp hashtag?) to express political differences. I don't know that much about Feinstein, frankly. From what I do know I'm probably more inclined to support her opponent. And to be clear her opponent's supporters are not uniform in this tactic, but it's an ugly one. Feinstein is not someone who committed sexual assault or harassment and is now being justifiably outed on those grounds*. Nor is she comparable to one. The reason this is bad is not the injury to Feinstein, it's the way in which #MeToo has been co-opted and trivialized. IMO, #MeToo is an area where there's a great deal of inadequacy on the left, and this seems like an example of that. *I mean, maybe she is --- but AFAIK, this is largely about her "militarism" and deference to the security state; at least, if Glenn Greenwald's characterization is reliable. It isn't always. I've heard of #MeToo but never #TimesUp, but I see what you're saying. I'm parsing semantics here, but I'd classify this as "distasteful" and not really "bad"- it can be an ugly side of politics but it is what it is. And at least from my perspective, Feinstein is a big part of the establishment and money in politics, which is why I'd vote her out moreso than Greenwald's arguments. 1 Link to comment
zoogs Posted March 5, 2018 Share Posted March 5, 2018 "My god, these liberals and their PC culture are out of control" is a conservative rallying cry that seems notably absent when it comes to the need to denounce a (to be clear, very denunciation-worthy) brown man. Link to comment
commando Posted March 5, 2018 Share Posted March 5, 2018 i think the democratic utopia is watching donald and his merry band of idiots totally trash the republican party 1 Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted March 5, 2018 Share Posted March 5, 2018 Even though it seems like the Republican Party is the only one with idiots, contrary to popular belief, they don’t have a monopoly on it. Im fine with pointing out idiots on both sides. 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts