Gas Bandit's Political Thread V: The Vampire Likes Bats
- Thread starter GasBandit
- Start date
Until one of these Koch suckers actually walks the walk instead of just talking the talk *cough*Jeff Flake*cough*, they're going to be deservedly lumped in with the most rabid MAGA chanters. Because time after time when they needed to act, they proved what side they were really on.
If you're only willing to denounce in a strongly worded tweet, but are still voting straight GOP, you're stating your true colors right there. Here's your armband.
If you're only willing to denounce in a strongly worded tweet, but are still voting straight GOP, you're stating your true colors right there. Here's your armband.
But extrajudicial police killings, locking children in concentration camps in the desert, calling the free press the enemy of the state, chanting "lock her/him up" about your political rivals at every "political rally" you hold, lying constantly about terrorist attacks (I will never forget that Trump and Guilliani claimed that no Muslim terror attacks had happened on US soil until Obama was president), talking about the good people on both sides of the debate when one side is literally marching in the street under the Nazi flag - those are all fine? That's fucking going on here! Now! I'm not arguing against Republican economic policy! I'm on their side half the time on that! That's why I'm not a Fucking Democrat! Never once did I mention the Republican party in my response. I didn't say a god damn thing about the average member of the party. I said that I was concerned with the level of violence being perpetrated by right-wing extremists. Please, for the love of all that is holy, point out where in that statement I'm being divisive, and I'm the one whose attitude is going to lead to war. Well, y'know what? If war is what it takes to keep the extremists from killing my friends because of their skin color, or their religion, or their sexuality, then sign me the fuck up.
You know what, though? I WILL say it's the Republican party, because all of the above is going on in the party's name. And when all the talking is done, no one is willing to break rank and declare THIS IS WRONG with a fucking VOTE. For all the talk from John McCain, you could bet on him being in lockstep with the party when the roll call came.
figmentPez
Staff member
Moving this out of the Funny Political Pictures thread:
If you'd said that a few years ago, I'd have agreed with you. Since then the President called himself a (white) Nationalist, and the GOP just kinda went "well, yeah." Democrats are vocally for reforming immigration law and have specific plans for how they want to deal with illegal immigration. Republicans, on the other hand, refuse to denounce racist groups. BIG difference. When Trump denounces David Duke. When they stop doing shit like having a Christian act as Rabbi in the wake of an anti-Semitic shooting. When they stop promoting violence against journalists and minorities. When they stop telling ridiculous lies about immigrants. Then we can go back to saying that wanting to kill all minorities is an inaccurate portrayal of Republicans. Because right now their highest ranking officials are acting like Nazis, and we know what Nazis do.
GasBandit
Staff member
All of that's a bad look, yes, but it does not make "kill all brown people" the official platform of the party. Likewise, "unrestricted and unmonitored immigration for all, regardless of criminality, utility, or dependence" isn't the "official" platform of the Democrat party either, but it's the naturally extrapolated meaning behind democrat policy just as much, if not moreso, than the GOP's stance.
And thus is the rub that people are saying - you (and especially Blots) are eager to assign implied intent to one party as "official policy" but not the other, and blots is then fallaciously using that to assert a false dichotomy with no allowance for other viewpoints or middle ground.
Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't one of the definitions of genocide include taking children and assigning them new 'acceptable' parents in an attempt to steer them away from their culture and roots?
...because the Betsy DeVos thing makes me think of that every time.
Edit: Wikipedia seems to corroborate this.
...because the Betsy DeVos thing makes me think of that every time.
Edit: Wikipedia seems to corroborate this.
Last edited:
Yes, this part of cultural genocide. It's been done in America, Canada, Australia... pretty much anywhere where one force overtook another. Look up Indian Schools for another part of it.
Hint, hint: This ties into the whole "They won't assimilate into our culture" thing that conservatives usually have a bug up their ass about.
I find it ironic that a Conservative’s ideal is for everyone else to change to match his belief that things should stick with what he’s comfortable with and never change.
—Patrick
figmentPez
Staff member
This makes me wonder. Just how far do things have to go before we admit that the people in power are literally fascist white supremacists? They've already taken children away from their parents, and vastly increased the amount of people in what are, literally, internment camps.
Can we call them fascist white supremacists when they start praising violent attacks on their enemies?... Oh wait, they've already done that.
Can we call them fascist white supremacists when they try to revoke citizenship?... Too late, they've done that too.
Can we call them fascist white supremacists when they make efforts to undermine free speech?... Oh no, that's another line we've already crossed.
How many of the check boxes do they have to fill in before we can call them what they are?
That’s a genuinely good question, because if there WERE some kind of accepted universal DSM5-like standard, we would then have something concrete that we could point to/show around and be like, “Yep, it’s time.”
But there isn’t.
—Patrick
If you want FAR more fun, try defining "left-wing" and "right-wing", with concrete examples of "this government is/was left wing because A, B, C" and "this government is/was right wing because D, E, F" And try and make your definitions fit AT LEAST the following from WWII:
I'll come back in a few days and see how you're doing tying yourselves up in knots coming up with something consistent on this one.
- Communist China (Mao) (Left)
- Communist USSR (Stalin) (Left)
- Nazi Germany (Right)
- USA 1941-45 (pick a definition)
- Britain 1939-45 (pick a definition)
I'll come back in a few days and see how you're doing tying yourselves up in knots coming up with something consistent on this one.
figmentPez
Staff member
Welcome to politics, where the parties are made up and the talking points don't matter.
We do not have the same definition of fun.
figmentPez
Staff member
I don't see how this relates. "Left" and "Right" are arbitrary. Texas used to be a Democrat state. It's interesting how the changes happen, but it's not relevant.
Fascist does have a fairly clear definition, even if the line defining when something is fascist-enough to be called fascist is a fuzzy line.
White Supremacy also has a consistent definition, even if people debate when someone is racist-enough to be called a white supremacist.
There's no parallel where "white supremacy used to be in favor of minorities" or "fascism used to a permissive and benevolent form of government".
The problem with the current Right Wing of US politics isn't that they're Right Wing. I'm not adamantly opposed to the leadership of the GOP because they're Right Wing. The problem is that they're promoting fascist white supremacy, which is something that should not be associated with ANY political party, in the US or otherwise.
Oh my god, people. These aren’t our sports teams.
On a news note, apparently money was offered to a woman to launch false accusations os sexual assault by Mueller.
https://www.npr.org/2018/10/30/6621...gn=politics&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=2058
On a news note, apparently money was offered to a woman to launch false accusations os sexual assault by Mueller.
https://www.npr.org/2018/10/30/6621...gn=politics&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=2058
See, this is the basic problem with politics in this country. People equate political parties and elections with sports. Hell, I think I've heard some political pundits call Election Day "our Super Bowl Sunday" at least once.
This has been brought up time after time when it comes to Trump rallies; the vibe isn't that of something like a national convention for a party, but rather a sporting event... complete with people selling t-shirts and foam fingers. People ARE treating it like going to the game.
figmentPez
Staff member
A two pronged assault. They get to attack Mueller, and they also get to perpetuate the myth that false sexual assault accusations are being made en masse.
That's literally what's going on in the NJ Senate race between Bob Menendez and Bob Hugin. Hugin has been running ads saying that Menendez has been taking taxpayer funded trips to the Dominican Republic in order to have sex with underage prostitutes. He claims that the FBI has evidence of it including affadavits and eyewitness statements.
Literally none of that is true.
There was an anonymous tipster who claimed Menendez and the friend he was vacationing with were frequenting underage prostitutes, but no evidence was ever found, which the FBI report explains. Two women said they were offered money to lie about Menendez and to say he hired them for sex acts. Some of the eyewitnesses agreed the Menendez was present at the time and place specified, but didn't claim to see any sexual activity, paid or otherwise.
Hell, they couldn't even prove that Menendez peddled influence during his corruption trial - a hung jury resulting in a mistrial and the judge saying that there wasn't enough evidence to justify another trial.
Hugin has offered literally no plan for NJ and is more or less open about being a rubber stamp for whatever Trump wants.
Meanwhile, the incoming head of the Massachusetts Police Association has called for officers under his purview to stop practicing restraint, to meet violence with violence, and to kill any who disobey their authority. But it's totally OK, because he didn't mean it. It was satire. That's why he wrote three pages worth of article about it. Don't worry though - he's been placed on administrative leave by his home agency, just like this fucker who sexually assaulted a WSU student has been since April when they confirmed that the semen on her sleeve matched his DNA. It sure would have been nice if they'd had some warning that he was a psychopath, looking to abuse his power. Too bad he didn't threaten to physically abuse someone over backing into a parked car 17 years ago while he was still a rookie cop working as a Parole Officer... oh wait, he totally did that. To me. I reported it then, apparently I need to send a letter reminding them of this. I think I'll just send it to the local papers instead. It's time to start pointing out evil, violent psychopaths for what they are, for all to see - and no, it won't be my fault if they then commit another horrific crime, it will still be theirs for being shitty, violent psychopaths.
Just remember that if you do this, you had better have sufficient proof to back it up, because if you don’t, you will be sued for libel. And lose.
As it is, even with proof you might still be sued for libel. And win. But then be broke. Might also want to check out what sort of anti-SLAPP protections are available to you.
—Patrick
I really don't like this perjorative. I know you don't mean it as homophobic, but that's what it implies, that this name should hurt people because it's accusing them of being gay.
I've said before, cocksucker should never be a negative term. Do you know how much better the world would be if more of that happened? Just like military service, it's not something I would ever do, so I salute those that are willing.
Even with the obvious connotation, I never felt like that particular term was an automatic accusation of homosexuality. Instead I saw it more like, “These are people willing to do whatever the KBros want them to, even if it means debasing themselves.” In my interpretation, the ones doing the sucking are still as heterosexual as they ever were, they are merely showing just how far they are willing to go for their masters.
—Patrick
—Patrick
That's it everyone. The great and powerful, all knowing @PatrThom has spoken. Cocksucker cannot be taken as a gay slur, and feeling that it is is your problem. So, for those keeping score at home, here are the labels that are OK to use:
- Cocksucker
- White Trash
- Right-wing populist
- Right-wing terrorist
"Koch-sucker," not "Cocksucker."
C'mon, man. I know you're smart enough to get that they can have different connotations despite being homophones.
I get that you're drowning in triggers right now, but you seem unusually combative of late: taking things in the worst possible light, attacking people personally, frothing and typing from deep in fight-or-flight panic territory. If by this point you aren't grasping that I've been nothing but supportive of your situation, then it's because you don't WANT to. Snap out of it, already, before you end up in the news!
--Patrick
I haven't seen myself as doing anything other than having calm discussions ranging from lighthearted banter to grave seriousness. If that's not how it has been coming across, I welcome further discussion in order to educate how I appear from a 3rd person perspective (though probably in PMs, so's not to soil the politics thread with my soul-searching).
--Patrick
12 Young People on Why They Aren't Voting This Election
I'm usually first in line to defend Gen Z, but I can't even get through this article and these kids' excuses.
EDIT: Scrolling further, there are people my age, and they don't have the excuse of being pretentious college students, but being lazy and showing their whole asses.
I'm usually first in line to defend Gen Z, but I can't even get through this article and these kids' excuses.
EDIT: Scrolling further, there are people my age, and they don't have the excuse of being pretentious college students, but being lazy and showing their whole asses.