The All Things Political Topic - All people love themselves too much to be changed by something as simple as love.

[Gromnir]

8 hours ago, BruceVC said:

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/12/donald-trump-anti-semitism-jews-israel

Quite an anti -semitic rant by Trump, unusual he gets this careless ?

...

"unusual"?

what is usual is following an all too common trump verbal self-sabotage, gaslighting ensues which convinces some that what they heard were not what trump said. following such common trump blunders is also predictable efforts to deflect, where "fake news" is the curious rejoinder in spite o' media accurate reporting actual quotes, but emphasis is made that the libs is once again so focused on bringing down trump they cannot report on hunter biden's laptop or just how dangerous to liberty is vaccine mandates. worst o' all is the too significant % o' the trump base which parrots the fake news and gaslighting efforts, but truth is they agree with the disgraced former President's bigotry.

nothing unusual. is gop these past few years.

HA! Good Fun!

[BruceVC]

3 hours ago, Gromnir said:

...

"unusual"?

what is usual is following an all too common trump verbal self-sabotage, gaslighting ensues which convinces some that what they heard were not what trump said. following such common trump blunders is also predictable efforts to deflect, where "fake news" is the curious rejoinder in spite o' media accurate reporting actual quotes, but emphasis is made that the libs is once again so focused on bringing down trump they cannot report on hunter biden's laptop or just how dangerous to liberty is vaccine mandates. worst o' all is the too significant % o' the trump base which parrots the fake news and gaslighting efforts, but truth is they agree with the disgraced former President's bigotry.

nothing unusual. is gop these past few years.

HA! Good Fun!

Its unusual because depending on where Trump is and who he is talking to he will say " how much he is a friend of Jews and Israel " 

Only recently has he started venting against Israel and more specifically American Jews 

[Gromnir]

10 hours ago, BruceVC said:

Its unusual because depending on where Trump is and who he is talking to he will say " how much he is a friend of Jews and Israel " 

Only recently has he started venting against Israel and more specifically American Jews 

so not true. trump has been venting against "american jews" since (before) he started running for office, and there has been a constant effort to reimagine his predictable fits o' spleen. clearly such efforts have worked for folks like bruce. the thing is, trump support from the jewish population in this country has never been strong and 45 can't help but bemoan the lack o' votes from those he believes owe him fealty. 

what is maybe/kinda new is complaining 'bout israel and netanyahu, 'cause curious enough, israel and benji enjoy significant approval from the trump base... at least from those  who are not active affiliated with the proud boys and similar groups. the gop is just so weird these days.

regardless, trump has a considerable history o' saying the wrong thing 'bout those with disabilities, women, minorities, veterans, military commanders, individuals who are not christian, christians and dogs.  unless you are putin, is a good chance trump will eventual say something offensive 'bout you if he has not done so already.

where have you and gd been the last +5 years?

HA! Good Fun!

Edited December 20, 2021 by Gromnir

[BruceVC]

39 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

so not true. trump has been venting against "american jews" since (before) he started running for office, and there has been a constant effort to reimagine his predictable fits o' spleen. clearly such efforts have worked for folks like bruce. the thing is, trump support from the jewish population in this country has never been strong and 45 can't help but bemoan the lack o' votes from those he believes owe him fealty. 

what is maybe/kinda new is complaining 'bout israel and netanyahu, 'cause curious enough, israel and benji enjoy significant approval from the trump base... at least from those  who are not active affiliated with the proud boys and similar groups. the gop is just so weird these days.

regardless, trump has a considerable history o' saying the wrong thing 'bout those with disabilities, women, minorities, veterans, military commanders, individuals who are not christian, christians and dogs.  unless you are putin, is a good chance trump will eventual say something offensive 'bout you if he has not done so already.

where have you and gd been the last +5 years?

HA! Good Fun!

 " christians and dogs " ....Gromnir are you sure you not exaggerating? What has Trump said about dogs

And Trump has offended me personally  as a white South African. He pandered to the hyperbole about " white people in SA are facing genocide especially in farm killings " which is an egregious framing of the reality of farm killings in SA. And this is real but its criminal and not genocide organised by the state or ANC 

[Gromnir]

13 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

 " christians and dogs " ....Gromnir are you sure you not exaggerating? What has Trump said about dogs

 

https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/politics/article/donald-trump-dogs

serious, where have you been? one of trump's favorite insults is to compare ____________ to dogs. 

HA! Good Fun!

[BruceVC]

6 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/politics/article/donald-trump-dogs

serious, where have you been? one of trump's favorite insults is to compare ____________ to dogs. 

HA! Good Fun!

Thats an interesting read but I am not sure when Trump says things like  " died like a dog” it should be taken literally, its more about Trumps normal usage of metaphors and Trumpisms when he makes public and private speeches?

The article even says its the suggested views of Vanity Fair so I am not convinced we can say with certainty " Trump hates\dislikes dogs " ?

 

[Gromnir]

2 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Thats an interesting read but I am not sure when Trump says things like  " died like a dog” it should be taken literally, its more about Trumps normal usage of metaphors and Trumpisms when he makes public and private speeches?

The article even says its the suggested views of Vanity Fair so I am not convinced we can say with certainty " Trump hates\dislikes dogs " ?

 

you suggested hyperbole as you had no recollection o' trump making disparaging comments 'bout dogs. if trump claimed that individuals he disliked had died or begged like a woman, you would no doubt agree such were insulting to women. call a simile or figure o' speech does not make any less insulting. is only ok 'cause is dogs and not women or asians or whatever.

and the "inability to say with certainty defense" is getting tired. trump doesn't have a dog. his ex claims trump doesn't like dogs. trump routine compares the worst aspects o' humanity to qualities absent in canines. pretty strong prima facia case for trump dislike o' dogs... which again is irrelevant to question o' whether trump had ever said anything insulting 'bout dogs.

...

is partial on us for bothering to respond. mea culpa.

HA! Good Fun!

 

[BruceVC]

3 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

you suggested hyperbole as you had no recollection o' trump making disparaging comments 'bout dogs. if trump claimed that individuals he disliked had died or begged like a woman, you would no doubt agree such were insulting to women. call a simile or figure o' speech does not make any less insulting. is only ok 'cause is dogs and not women or asians or whatever.

and the "inability to say with certainty defense" is getting tired. trump doesn't have a dog. his ex claims trump doesn't like dogs. trump routine compares the worst aspects o' humanity to qualities absent in canines. pretty strong prima facia case for trump dislike o' dogs... which again is irrelevant to question o' whether trump had ever said anything insulting 'bout dogs.

...

is partial on us for bothering to respond. mea culpa.

HA! Good Fun!

 

Well thanks for responding, you make some good points and I will reflect on them 

But I  still think you are over-analyzing Trumps comments and making your own statements of fact about what Trump meant or didnt mean. The idiom " die like a dog" and other statements like " its a dogs life " are not supposed to be taken literally and the genesis of these statements and how they get used is not suppose to be actually anti-dog 

Here is a definition of the  expression 

https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/die+like+a+dog

So you cant make false equivalences like what would I think about Trump saying  "die like a women\LGBT\Muslim\Jew ..xxx " because these other idioms dont exist so I cant comment on them and you cant really make your own  definitions up of what " die like dog means " and other ostensibly anti-dog sayings?

 

[Gromnir]

and speaking o' those willing to embrace gaslighting

Peng Shuai denies making sexual assault allegation against retired Communist Party leader, but WTA concerns persist

for those who may not recall

those who is suspicious o' ccp will congratulate selves for seeing through the gaslighting. those who sympathize with ccp will deflect and claim fake news; perhaps ask why so many qq over a nothingburger. perhaps indulge in transparent whataboutism?

*shrug*

HA! Good Fun!

[Gfted1]

Dog Idioms and Sayings.

[Gromnir]

am not seeing:

When Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi died following a raid by American special forces in his Syrian bolthole, Donald Trump was delighted to report, in October, that the Islamic State leader had “died like a dog”.

You mean enfolded by love and grief, Mr President? You mean surrounded by human beings who feel like they have just had their hearts ripped out?

Not quite. If anyone was in any doubt about how a dog dies, Trump was happy to elaborate: al-Baghdadi had “whimpered, cried and screamed like a coward”, he chortled. “[He] spent his last moments in utter fear, in total panic and dread!”

also

indian-giver which is hardly a solitary example o' current or past idioms which folks has or should abandon. 

however, using the defense o' idiom is the kinda predictable generalizing misdirection we see all too frequent to excuse gaslighting efforts and trump. is a dog-eat-dog world but is no reason to doggedly hound a man for innocent use o' inoffensive turn o' phrase. after all, have personal admitted to being dog tired by one poster's dog with a bone fixation. IF trump infrequent used dog idioms to express appreciation for an under-dog by noting every dog has its day, then is unlikely we woulda' added dogs to list o' those insulted by trump. duh. 

 "This also is not the first, second, or even tenth time the President of the United States has referred to one of his opponents as a dog; a scroll through his extensive and toxic list of dog tweets shows that Trump clearly means “dog” as a vicious insult, one that he deploys against enemies he particularly wants to malign."

you people is so weird.

HA! Good Fun!

ps 

expounding on the prospect o' insanity from another thread, coupled with our infrequent repeated observation that all obsidian posts are arguable star trek posts, we shoulda' included the following:

a missed opportunity corrected, though is perhaps time to call off the dogs.

Edited December 20, 2021 by Gromnir

[Gfted1]

Like a dog with two tails.  

[Gorth]

I’m sure there is a kennel set aside for Trump to spend eternity in when he passes on some day

[Guard Dog]

Don't rightly know where Gromnir get's the idea I'm a Trump fan. I don't recall every saying anything nice about him other than he was better than Hillary Clinton. I was a little off the mark on that one. It annoys him that I find no virtue in the "ruling class". Oh well. There are naught but devils in hell and nothing I've observed is changing my mind about that. I recall a story from the Bible when God told Abraham He would spare Sodom if he found just fifty honest men there. While I'm certain there are plenty of honest folks in Sodom-on-the-Potomac if the search is limited to the Capitol Hill and 1600 Pennsylvania Ave they are all f---d. To wit

Personally, IDGAF anymore. That's why I don't post on this thread much anymore. The United States is doomed to implosion either by incompetent governance or simple stupidity. No "politician" of group of them can save it because problems cannot be solved by doubling down on the things that caused the problems. And I don't think it deserves to be saved. There are really a lot of stupid f-----s in this country. And you cannot have a rational discussion with people who are enjoying a sense of "moral superiority" in their ignorance. Now I just find myself agreeing with every stupid thing I hear just to avoid a headache inducing conversation. Far better to just say "Yep, you're right". Oh the election was stolen? Yep, you're right. Inflation is not tied to government spending? Yep, you're right. 

Besides, that only thing I care about anymore is compensating for the 7.5 kHz shift in DC Subcarrier spacing on 5G NR uplink when reselecting from a public network to a private one. That is far more vexing to me than politics. 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I think that Trump coming out as hating dogs would do more damage than claiming da joos ran congress. But, like every other horrible thing he's said or done, I think that most of his supporters don't really care and that their supposedly sacrosanct beliefs will get tossed aside for political expediency. I guess we'll see in three years, as the prince symbol variant ravages the world.

[ShadySands]

TBH I don't think Trump likes any pets though I have no idea if he holds a special hatred for dogs in particular. I don't remember where I heard that but it was long before he was into politics.

[Gromnir]

1 hour ago, Gorth said:

I’m sure there is a kennel set aside for Trump to spend eternity in when he passes on some day

late 80s animation tells us all dogs go to heaven and that burt reynolds was not a great choice for a musical... which is so weird 'cause it weren't even the first musical in which he sang. 

regardless is perhaps appropriate that in the afterlife kennels should be for those who go to a different destination than heaven.

@Guard Dog find where we said you is a trump supporter. will wait.

...

still waiting.

of course the they are all bad  silliness precludes you from acknowledging any kinda support trump or any other holder o' national office. duh. however, and perhaps curiously, you are a functional trump apologist, working kinda hard at times to minimize the magnitude o' his failings, 'cause they are all bad doesn't work if you got an example far worse than the other options, eh? subvert rule of law, and indulge in transparent graft while seeking to overturn the results o' free and fair elections? tough to find a balance for such unless you first convince self that trump offenses weren't as bad as described or visible to any paying attention.

HA! Good Fun!

[Guard Dog]

28 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

 

of course the they are all bad  silliness precludes you from acknowledging any kinda support trump or any other holder o' national office. duh. however, and perhaps curiously, you are a functional trump apologist, working kinda hard at times to minimize the magnitude o' his failings, 'cause they are all bad doesn't work if you got an example far worse than the other options, eh? subvert rule of law, and indulge in transparent graft while seeking to overturn the results o' free and fair elections? tough to find a balance for such unless you first convince self that trump offenses weren't as bad as described or visible to any paying attention.

HA! Good Fun!

Yep, you're right

[majestic]

On 12/14/2021 at 5:50 AM, BruceVC said:

Come on you can do better than that because it sounds like you are calling me a fascist for giving an opinion but you cant actually spend 2 minute explaining your point and why Im a fascist .....dont you see how silly it sounds 

I am not sure if I   ever told you  I use to  do debating  at school and its a such a relevant subject because it teaches you the art of meaningful and important debate and its a skill you use your whole life to engage with people. And one of several things you learn in debating is you convince people your point is true when you present why its true.

So going forward please try to do that, just explain why Im a fascist based on what I say because then we can engage further in the art of debate 

I originally just wanted to ignore this, but I can't sleep, so why not. See, at the core of fascism, and that is pretty much the only thing academia can agree on when it comes to defining the word in this day and age (and not even that, in some cases, I guess), you'll find what Adolf Hitler later called the Führerprinzip. The glorious leader and the leader's cult of personality. For you though, that doesn't mean following an actual person, just your glorified image of the United States government, of all things, as this glorious, infallible defender of freedom, virtue and justice in the world. The avatar and your own projections, essentially, that can do no wrong and very much rests above the law and justice it deigns to mete out in the world.

The glorious leader that should never be criticised, because everywhere else is worse. That train of thought follows through many of your postings and points of view. Snowden is a traitor, Assange is a terrorist. If someone from Russia and China would leak documents detailing their global espionage programs or human rights violations, or actual war crimes, you'd be at the forefront, leading the vanguard in arguing against them and calling these people heroes. Rightly so, actually. In turn though, when your glorious leader commits war crimes, the one leaking the information is not a hero, but a criminal. So you argue against China violently stopping protests in Hong Kong because China is the enemy, not because you're convinced or believe that protests should not be stopped violently. As long as those protests are at the home front, and heaven forbid, threaten business interests, it suddenly becomes an acceptable train of thought to carpet bomb them with pepper spray, or to send in the police to violently beat miners back to work, because they're hurting the bottom line of stakeholders - and because they shouldn't complain about their lot, miners in China have it worse still.

Russia isn't supposed to support Assad in Syria because Assad is a terrible person. True. But so is Mohammed bin Salman, but he's buying sweet, sweet hardware from your glorious leader, so therefore that cooperation can't be bad. Never mind that having enemies chopped up and dissolved in acid, or locking them up without trial, or beheading them is... well, is that actually any better at all than using chemical weaponry on your own population?

Saudia Arabia is one of the biggest destablizing factors in the Middle East, a topic you love to comment on, except in your glorious leader given worldview, it's actually Iran who is the biggest threat to stability in the Middle East, not the nation that's bankrolling terrorist groups left and right. The Iranians are simply the enemy from a while back because eh, nobody liked Khomeini (and nobody should), especially not when he leads revolutions agains the puppets of the glorious leader.

You look at proof of systemic racism in the United States, and defend it by saying that it's not that bad, after all, it was - maybe still is - way worse in South Africa. As if two wrongs make a right. You look at companies and other nations buying Huawei hardware and argue against it, and when presented with proof - undeniable, hard proof at that, which, remember, does not exist for the opposite claim (although it would be naive to think that there are no backdoors in Huawei hardware, mind) - you default back to "but they wouldn't do the bad things China is going to do with that data", more or less ignoring that Snowden detailed how intelligence agents kept emailing each other with intercepted nude pictures of college students to either make fun of them or whack off to, and tell me, in what way should people of such moral turpitude be trusted to take more care with intelligence they gather than anyone else on the planet? Hint: They shouldn't.

Finally, let's go back to how Assange should trust the United States legal system. I do not know how bad the legal system in South Africa is, to be honest, but it must be pretty terrible if you look at the US and see a model legal system for everyone to emulate. I mean, you actually do believe that Assange is going to get a fair trial in the US. Something which not even a UK court was convinced of, and the UK is, these days, in a hilarious inversion of history, nothing but a colony of the United States. Hell, even their current prime minister is a ludicrous little copy of the former Tangerine in Chief of the United States.

So, no, you're incredibly biased towards your glorious leader, incapable of seeing the flaws where they are, unable to entertain the idea that there are any. You criticise one course of action only to turn around and cheer exactly the same, just because the glorious leader does it. You try to feign neutrality, but in reality love any and all draconian and autocratic measures you can think of, just as long as they're democratically legitimized, because it would look bad if they weren't. Caesar can do no wrong, after all. When Big Brother decides that Eurasia is now an ally, and Eastasia the enemy, then it was always thus, never any different, because who are we to argue, right? There are five fingers, and we all love Big Brother.

We could argue a technicality here and say that actual fascism requires an actual glorious leader as a person, not an idealized symbol of something that either never existed in the first place or is long gone. Perhaps that is the case. If so, then you're not a facist, just a cult member drinking the kool aid. I don't know if that is any better. Probably not. At any rate, that's just semantics.

At the end of the day, you're exactly the sort of person who would read Brave New World and wonder why it's a dystopian vision of the future. *sigh*

I already regret posting this before the fact. Alas, now that I've spent time on this, what am I to do but press Submit Reply. Perhaps the forum will eat the post. Oh, should I only be so lucky...

Edited December 21, 2021 by majestic
Alas, of course, the post did not get eaten, but mas-tur-bate is back on the censor list, and therefore I replaced it by whack off, which is of course a much more civilized and rightly not censored euphemism. How wonderful.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

1 hour ago, majestic said:

I originally just wanted to ignore this, but I can't sleep, so why not. See, at the core of fascism, and that is pretty much the only thing academia can agree on when it comes to defining the word in this day and age (and not even that, in some cases, I guess), you'll find what Adolf Hitler later called the Führerprinzip. The glorious leader and the leader's cult of personality. For you though, that doesn't mean following an actual person, just your glorified image of the United States government, of all things, as this glorious, infallible defender of freedom, virtue and justice in the world. The avatar and your own projections, essentially, that can do no wrong and very much rests above the law and justice it deigns to mete out in the world.

The glorious leader that should never be criticised, because everywhere else is worse. That train of thought follows through many of your postings and points of view. Snowden is a traitor, Assange is a terrorist. If someone from Russia and China would leak documents detailing their global espionage programs or human rights violations, or actual war crimes, you'd be at the forefront, leading the vanguard in arguing against them and calling these people heroes. Rightly so, actually. In turn though, when your glorious leader commits war crimes, the one leaking the information is not a hero, but a criminal. So you argue against China violently stopping protests in Hong Kong because China is the enemy, not because you're convinced or believe that protests should not be stopped violently. As long as those protests are at the home front, and heaven forbid, threaten business interests, it suddenly becomes an acceptable train of thought to carpet bomb them with pepper spray, or to send in the police to violently beat miners back to work, because they're hurting the bottom line of stakeholders - and because they shouldn't complain about their lot, miners in China have it worse still.

Russia isn't supposed to support Assad in Syria because Assad is a terrible person. True. But so is Mohammed bin Salman, but he's buying sweet, sweet hardware from your glorious leader, so therefore that cooperation can't be bad. Never mind that having enemies chopped up and dissolved in acid, or locking them up without trial, or beheading them is... well, is that actually any better at all than using chemical weaponry on your own population?

Saudia Arabia is one of the biggest destablizing factors in the Middle East, a topic you love to comment on, except in your glorious leader given worldview, it's actually Iran who is the biggest threat to stability in the Middle East, not the nation that's bankrolling terrorist groups left and right. The Iranians are simply the enemy from a while back because eh, nobody liked Khomeini (and nobody should), especially not when he leads revolutions agains the puppets of the glorious leader.

You look at proof of systemic racism in the United States, and defend it by saying that it's not that bad, after all, it was - maybe still is - way worse in South Africa. As if two wrongs make a right. You look at companies and other nations buying Huawei hardware and argue against it, and when presented with proof - undeniable, hard proof at that, which, remember, does not exist for the opposite claim (although it would be naive to think that there are no backdoors in Huawei hardware, mind) - you default back to "but they wouldn't do the bad things China is going to do with that data", more or less ignoring that Snowden detailed how intelligence agents kept emailing each other with intercepted nude pictures of college students to either make fun of them or whack off to, and tell me, in what way should people of such moral turpitude be trusted to take more care with intelligence they gather than anyone else on the planet? Hint: They shouldn't.

Finally, let's go back to how Assange should trust the United States legal system. I do not know how bad the legal system in South Africa is, to be honest, but it must be pretty terrible if you look at the US and see a model legal system for everyone to emulate. I mean, you actually do believe that Assange is going to get a fair trial in the US. Something which not even a UK court was convinced of, and the UK is, these days, in a hilarious inversion of history, nothing but a colony of the United States. Hell, even their current prime minister is a ludicrous little copy of the former Tangerine in Chief of the United States.

So, no, you're incredibly biased towards your glorious leader, incapable of seeing the flaws where they are, unable to entertain the idea that there are any. You criticise one course of action only to turn around and cheer exactly the same, just because the glorious leader does it. You try to feign neutrality, but in reality love any and all draconian and autocratic measures you can think of, just as long as they're democratically legitimized, because it would look bad if they weren't. Caesar can do no wrong, after all. When Big Brother decides that Eurasia is now an ally, and Eastasia the enemy, then it was always thus, never any different, because who are we to argue, right? There are five fingers, and we all love Big Brother.

We could argue a technicality here and say that actual fascism requires an actual glorious leader as a person, not an idealized symbol of something that either never existed in the first place or is long gone. Perhaps that is the case. If so, then you're not a facist, just a cult member drinking the kool aid. I don't know if that is any better. Probably not. At any rate, that's just semantics.

At the end of the day, you're exactly the sort of person who would read Brave New World and wonder why it's a dystopian vision of the future. *sigh*

I already regret posting this before the fact. Alas, now that I've spent time on this, what am I to do but press Submit Reply. Perhaps the forum will eat the post. Oh, should I only be so lucky...

**** you, there's too many opportunities for quotes here.

And really too much effort. Wall of texts are for magical girls and Star Trek (including the hoax show that isn't real), not telling what is at best a bad faith troll why their uncritical support for authoritarianism and police states to defend the corporateland is fascist. He is just going to respond with a boiler plate "you funny " and a statement with a question mark at the end, showing that all your words banged into an impenetrable wall of bad faith or true believer ideology. Just call him a name or post a smug anime face lmao.

[Gorth]

2 hours ago, majestic said:

 Perhaps the forum will eat the post. Oh, should I only be so lucky...

It also keeps a log of editing history, so all versions of a post can be viewed for audit purposes, even if trying to blank out the post after submitting

 

edit: I.e. the internet never forgets nor forgives

[ShadySands]

1 hour ago, Gorth said:

It also keeps a log of editing history, so all versions of a post can be viewed for audit purposes, even if trying to blank out the post after submitting

 

edit: I.e. the internet never forgets nor forgives

Oh man, I must have some doozies.

[majestic]

4 hours ago, KP on top of ZA WARUDO said:

**** you, there's too many opportunities for quotes here.

Ah, a side effect I had not considered.

4 hours ago, KP on top of ZA WARUDO said:

And really too much effort. Wall of texts are for magical girls and Star Trek (including the hoax show that isn't real), not telling what is at best a bad faith troll why their uncritical support for authoritarianism and police states to defend the corporateland is fascist. He is just going to respond with a boiler plate "you funny " and a statement with a question mark at the end, showing that all your words banged into an impenetrable wall of bad faith or true believer ideology. Just call him a name or post a smug anime face lmao.

That's true, but I didn't spend a whole lot of effort or time writing the post, to be honest. I could have put up helpful links to read through regarding the debates around what is and isn't fascism as the term moves more and more towards what you've mentioned, i.e. any sort of law and order type of police state or a nation more run by corporate interests than those of its people (often both, for somewhat obvious reasons). In the more expanded sense, we have a good deal more fascists on the board than just him, even though they've been curiously quiet in the past weeks.

I could have looked up some of the many articles about Snowden or Assange, and linked those, put in more of a structure, anything really. What I should have done though is differentiate a little in the legal system part of the post before Gromnir swoops in and counter-rants. No, of course the US legal system is better than that of many nations, because by far and large it is functional. It does, however, have a number of downsides, and when you read that someone in Missouri has been wrongfully imprisoned for 42 years and isn't pardonned immediately after realizing that fact because "he's probably guilty of something" and "his pardon is not a priority" then that's just ludicrous and not worth emulating.

An anecdote? Perhaps. What's not one is the horrible state the US prisons are in, including the systematic violence, or the fact that no other Western nation has more inmates per capita, which is really not something that is readily explained away by way of saying "the US is different than other places on the planet", which might hold true for gun related violence or th sheer, easily underestimated size of absolutely nothing in between the coasts (re: posts about a first world nation with third world infrastructure), but not for the fact that there are too many people imprisoned over crimes that should not carry any prison sentence in the first place and that the courts seem to get mired in dealing with little things that should be done with a slap on the wrist. I think that's something that could use some reform.

It also has a couple of upsides. Class action lawsuits are something that I'd love to see here too. VW, having bought Germany's CDU, was more than just slapped on the wrist for their manipulated exhaust tests in the US, while in Germany and by extension the rest of the EU they got off way too easily - but yeah, that's Germany for you. Where one can get the idea that big oil and the military-industrial complex owns the United States government, the automobile companies certainly own Germany's.

Of course, for any of the points, we could argue that somewhere else is worse. Of course, there almost always is a place where things are worse, but that can't be the standard we're holding everything to. "It's worse somewhere else" as the basis for not trying to improve seems like the perfect way for things to deteriorate until the barbarian hordes (not talking about the illegal immigrant issue here) are at the gate and it is too late.

[Gfted1]

11 hours ago, majestic said:

As long as those protests are at the home front, and heaven forbid, threaten business interests, it suddenly becomes an acceptable train of thought to carpet bomb them with pepper spray...

Nah, thats me. I guess Im going to have to learn how to goose step.  

[Pidesco]

25 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

Nah, thats me. I guess Im going to have to learn how to goose step.  

 

I thought they already taught that in the US, in between the allegiance to the flag lessons.