Fifty eight Democrats voted No on the resolution for Charlie Kirk today. Thirty eight Democrats voted Present. Twenty two Democrats didn't vote at all.
Compare and contrast the Kirk resolution with the resolution in June honoring Melissa Hortman and her husband. That vote was 424-0.
These people aren't commenters on a blog. These are elected officials representing their constituents.
I don't want to hear another fucking word about 'both sides.'
It's fiction and fiction has an audience that likes it. They live in it as if it's true because it's entertaining. They know it's false but it doesn't matter. Here's a safe place where it's true, is the sentiment.
Doubt that anyone can willingly believe obvious fiction?
``When there was as yet no shrub of the field upon earth, and as yet no grasses of the field had sprouted, because Yahweh had not sent rain upon the earth, and there was no man to till the soil, but a flow welled up from the ground and watered the whole surface of the earth, then Yahweh molded Adam from the earth's dust (adamah), and blew into the nostrils the breath of life, and Adam became a living being.''
That's not meant to deceive but to present. It's an allegory for something true.
Likewise Kimmel.
Lit crit exercise: list five ways that Kirk was killed by his own supporters, as an allegory.
Forced memorializing is forced speech. It's the Pledge of Allegiance rule.
You might not want to deify Kirk. Some questionable quotes floating around, from meanness towards specific blacks to generic antisemitism ("Jewish money" as a cause of our problems).
U.S. Attorney Investigating Two Trump Foes Resigns After President Seeks to Oust Him ~ NYT
It's good that Siebert is doing the right thing, but "refusing to charge when there's not evidence" is a pretty low bar to clear. He's the frog that gave the scorpion a ride.
Trails off in contemplation of how BS the charges have to be for even Pam Bondi to defend Siebert.
"Attorney General Pam Bondi and Todd Blanche, the deputy attorney general who runs the day-to-day operations of the Justice Department, had privately defended Mr. Siebert against officials, including William J. Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, who had urged that he be fired and replaced with a prosecutor who would push the cases forward, according to a senior law enforcement official." ~ NYT
Jim at said... ..."These people aren't commenters on a blog. These are elected officials representing their constituents." ------------ Which is exactly what they are doing.
A new poll says that since the death of Charlie Kirk the number of Republicans who think the country is going in the right direction has dropped by 20%. I wonder whether this means that 20% of Republicans suddenly feel personally threatened - that would be a lot, that would be a major shift on a life issue. We have to wait to see whether it's that. But, anyhow, a huge drop like that means that the issue is enormous in some way and the Democrats, as usual in these times, are showing themselves out of touch. They have launched a campaign to support Jimmy Kimmel, a man who spoke about "the MAGA gang." That can only intensify the feeling that country is going in "the wrong direction." Republicans aren't a party to the supporters of this late night host, we're a "gang." That's ... not good.
The Kimmel suspension reminds me of employees I've had over the years. You have a person who constantly screws things up, misses a lot of work and causes far more than their share of problems. After multiple warnings haven't worked, you decide the next infraction will be the last. They miss another day of work and you fire them. They almost always say something along the lines of "I'm getting fired for missing one day of work?" That's what the Dems are doing with Kimmel. He's been on his way out for years, and it's just gotten worse lately.
Adam Corolla, who knows Kimmel and the entertainment business well, said when you lose one affiliate, it usually means you are about to lose more and your days are numbered. Dozens of affiliates and advertisers were up in arms about the guy before and after this last episode. This was just the last straw, or an opportunity from his employer's view.
I have great admiration for Charley Kirk, but I don't think putting memorial up for votes in Congress is a good thing. Then again, we do it all the time for politicians, who are some of the least admirable famous people in our culture. They recently renamed McCarren airport in Las Vegas to Harry Reid International. I hate that shit, even if Reid wasn't despicable, which he was. It should be called Las Vegas International, or maybe Lost Wages International, or even Desert Miracle International. Most politicians already get more then the deserve from us.
Rhhardin's link is meandering. Regarding Kirk, It references this: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/story/charlie-kirk-ezra-klein-tanehisi-coates?srsltid=AfmBOooAAEBFkPVmP2HQrvODD_q__GImXbtcntEyMW3oOgcrxAiPQYcF
“William J. Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, who had urged that he be fired and replaced with a prosecutor who would push the cases forward” I don’t know if this is true or not but (only my opinion, no real proof) Bill Pulte is a good friend of Scott Adams. So when Adams has a scoop or insights into what is going on in the WH, I assume they come from Pulte. Scott Adams says he’s better but his speech is so much slower (even at 2.5X), he slurs his words and his thinking seems to be foggy. Especially today. Maybe it’s the meds.
Shots fired at ABC affiliate. The original Nazis used to sent thugs to create an air of violence around their political opponents, so my guess is that this is what is happening. It's only a guess, I don't claim to have any further information than the tweet, and long experience studying these people running the Democratic Party.
The WEF is pulling the J6 scam in Romania now. They are going after the guy who would have won the election, but a court ruled that he couldn't run, and interesting, not as a matter of law, but as a matter of the judge's conscience. Now they are claiming that he was planning a violent coup, even as all of their other claims about him turned out to be utter fantasy, hence, ruling him ineligible because the judge had a "conscience" veto.
They are going to put him in jail for the crime of being popular, and against the war with Russia. But remember, we are fighting because Putin is a dictator!
“You know what, RH Hardin? Show your coward face. The little non-sequitor thing stopped working years ago, and we all know it. Or go away, you pathetic example of a person who can't put a real name and face to your sad, crabby whines.” OMG, Now you have to stay RH Hardin! Now that I know your comments bug TT, I like them even more.
Yes. I am feeling personally threatened. My faith and my friends are being attacked. My representative is receiving death threats and people close to me are applauding. It’s personal…. This is a significant moment.
From the Babylon Bee: Recent events in American society indicated that the very same people who are okay with murder are also outraged by the cancellation of a TV show.
This is my favorite. I’d embroider it on a pillow but too wordy: Tina Trent commenting on me: “Don't let your preening, narcissistic identity vote for you. Vote for the best platform. Capice? You people are so sad. If a trustworthy, rational, Democrat appeared on the scene, I'd consider them. And I wouldn't make it all about me. Pathetic and Deluded is no way go through life. Have the guts to make the right choices, not the politically correct ones. I've voted for local Democrats who get the job done. You're just hysterical. Exactly how many hours have you actually worked in politics? I estimate, at this point, when I have less productive time, at 700 hours. So stuff your attitude.” I defy anyone to find a better Tina Trent screed.
I dunno, she called me a rape fantasist for some reason. Which was so - I didn't know, what's the word, surprising? - since I typically agree with her. I've striven to let it go.
rhhardin said... Kimmel, Kirk killed by own supporters.
It's fiction and fiction has an audience that likes it. They live in it as if it's true because it's entertaining. They know it's false but it doesn't matter. Here's a safe place where it's true, is the sentiment. *********** It's a lot like the morons who believe "pro wrestlers" like Killer Kowalski were on the up-and-up, and still think the WWE is sotoday..
A video posted to Facebook and Instagram by Nicole Kiprilov shows Trump saying this. Her post indicates he was speaking at a gala for Hope Through Education when he made the remarks.
Kiprilov is a Republican strategist, according to her social media profiles.
Todd & Weld LLP said Newsmax has refused to pay outstanding billings {$426K} for the Boston-based boutique law firm's work in defending the cable news channel from a Dominion Voting Systems defamation suit.
Right-wing news outlet Newsmax agreed to pay $67 million to settle a libel lawsuit brought by Dominion Voting Systems over the outlet’s claims that the voting machine company engaged in election fraud during the 2020 presidential election.
"A new poll says that since the death of Charlie Kirk the number of Republicans who think the country is going in the right direction has dropped by 20%. I wonder whether this means that 20% of Republicans suddenly feel personally threatened - that would be a lot, that would be a major shift on a life issue."
Opinion polling by its nature always generates more heat than light, particularly right direction/wrong direction questions. Everyone in every profession are asked questions by our clients, patients, and customers that demand yes/no good/bad answers that we'd rather not answer in those terms because we know how deceptive such answers can be.
Q: Should I jump from a third story window? A: No. You could do yourself a fatal injury. Q: What if the second story is on fire?
It's p-hacking, isn't it? Each of those 200 supposed Republicans has a very nuanced and detailed answer to the stupid question offered by the poll-taker. I doubt an honest person could digest those answers into a clear and forthright trend. That said, I'll contradict myself self by speculating that many of those 200 believed against evidence that the Democrats are civilized people worthy of self-government and are now reluctantly persuaded otherwise.
That's why they use their violent followers to do stuff like this, so that jim5301 and his buddies can write comments like that. Who has the larger motivation? Jim's side, which is losing the debate, or ours.
It's my first rule of the false flag. The second one is if the motivation of the person carrying out the act is said to be that he is "stupid and evil."
The whole point is to paint us as "stupid and evil." They have a playbook. It's perfectly logical and it's designed to work on those of us who are basically honest and have a good heart, known in the business as "normies." They use these attributes like control knobs.
hennepin county is like mos eiseley, a den of scum and villainy, thats where they charged chauvin, even though he was in the right, so I trust that story as much as I can throw them btw, I can't dismiss the cretinous lies re robinson as rhardin can, its not about melodrama, its about causing erika and her children pain, also inspiring the next group of psychos
Apparently remarking that Joe Biden was corrupt, an assertion supported by a *lot* of evidence, BTW, and the only "proof" against it is that it hurts the Democrats to admit it, and that he has caused a lot of death and destruction around the world, which is also undeniably true. When Putin was on Ukraine's border, for example, he didn't negotiate, he blustered and threatened.
Nowhere, in his offhand remark, referring to a hypothetical world where there was actually justice for all, did he say that Joe Biden should be shot down like a dog, not have a trial.
This will come as a surprise. I sympathize with the Dems who refused to vote for a Charlie Kirk (pbuh) memorial resolution. For context, recall that I am a red-hat Trumper, and I wore a Charlie (z''l) shirt to the Kennedy Center last night.
However, remember in 2020 when lefties were trying to get R's to say "black lives matter." Everyone but Romney (esad) refused. Why? Not because they thought black lives didn't matter, but because Black Lives Matter is the name of a political organization with aims far beyond keeping blacks alive - or really, not even including that aim. And with tactics including riots and violence.
Most people think puppies are cute. But if there was a political movement called "Puppies Are Cute" that rioted in the streets and sought all sorts of woke policies besides just protecting puppies, a lot of Rs would stop saying puppies are cute. They'd say "young canids are beautiful" or "all pets are cute" or something like that.
Anyway, I think the D's who voted no or abstained saw a Kirk (z''l) memorial resolution as a similar semantic trap. So they steered clear of it. The resolution did have a lot of "whereases" praising Charlie's (rip) career. So it wasn't just an "agree with him or not - don't kill the guy" resolution.
But hey, if they can run around screaming "Pence won't even say black lives matter!" then we can run around screaming "they wouldn't even vote for a non-violence resolution!" CC, JSM
The other thing that Coates said was that Kirk viewed the Palestinians as not human, which is also not true: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2qn0mvSCig
And apparently, pointing out that Maxwell's father was a spy chief with the Mossad is "anti-semitic"
But one thing that bothers me is what is this "fulfillment of prophecy" of which Kirk speaks regarding Israel? What he said was that he believed that Israel had a scriptural right to the land, and that he believed in "fulfillment of prophecy." Maybe he should read the Book of Joshua and how the Israelites put every many woman child and even animal to the blade, with the exception of one woman who had unknowingly betrayed her own people to their extermination by helping an Israelite. That's what's in the Book.
Strange but I don’t recall Republicans refusing to say “Black Lives Matter”. Except in the context of BLM demonstrators screaming in their faces to say it. I’d probably refuse to say it in that context also. Even though I firmly believe that Black lives matter. As do all lives. Including unborn ones.
Mosby @ 7:31AM, break your comment down — the false equivalence, the “semantic trap” framing, and the gotcha-symmetry politics — and the comparison doesn’t hold. Black Lives Matter is a broad movement and slogan with a contested political agenda; declining to say that slogan isn’t the same as refusing to endorse the basic value that lives matter. A Kirk memorial resolution, by contrast, is praise for one polarizing individual. Avoiding an implied endorsement of an ideology isn’t equivalent to denying a moral principle.
RJW: True. In both cases: BLM and Kirk (z’’l). Which is why Dems have the right not to vote for the resolution, and R’s have the right to twist it out of context for maximum benefit. I realize that shoe hurts - maybe try hospital socks? CC, JSM
ot: OAC refused to vote for the anti-violence measure. 100 dems did vote for it. Instead, AOC viciously attacked Charlie kirk and used her altered Kirk Quotes to call him a antisemite a racist and a fascist.
Ryan read the Charlie Kirk Quotes out loud - they are not any of the things AOC insisted. He used the WHOLE quote - with all context.
One guest on Ryan's show said - "I hope every top lawyer around the nation is on the phone with Erika Kirk right now ."
AOC thinks it's not only OK with omit context and alter quotes - she is fine doing so - to exploit and inspire violence against people she disagrees with.
In fact - if only the GOP had a brain and some balls - she would be ousted easily from her congressional seat. She does a piss poor job representing her district.
AOC is protected from prosecution and suit by the Speech and Debate Clause. Maybe not if she uses her CSPAN footage for fundraising etc outside the chamber. And for that matter any of her allies doing so. But she is not immune from the R leadership taking disciplinary action. Hope they have big enough balls to push her into a “nevertheless she persisted” moment. CC, JSM
john mosby said... This will come as a surprise. I sympathize with the Dems who refused to vote for a Charlie Kirk (pbuh) memorial resolution. For context, recall that I am a red-hat Trumper, and I wore a Charlie (z''l) shirt to the Kennedy Center last night.
I empathize.
I do not sympathize.
AOC is a dishonest piece of shit and a totlaitarian.
Charlie Kirk stood for the constitution and freedoms it provides. That is why AOC is happy he is dead.
These people cannot be honest about what they want. they do not provide us the same freedom we provide them.
AOC does not abide by the social contract described in our Constitution. She was more than happy to censor us during COVID. She is happy to dance on Kirk's grave and will not condemn the people who cheered his death.
AOC is the quintessential Democrat. She brings performances, with fake outrage, and does nothing for her district. Democrat voters seem especially and terminally susceptible to that.
Mostly yes, I think they do. That's why nothing was burnt to the ground last week, no riots, nobody bothered boarding up their windows, because people know who respects the social contract and who doesn't, even as they pretend the both sides bullshit..
"Black propaganda," thank you for that term. I am not the kind of expert in it that whoever is pulling the strings for the Democrats is, so I am just learning. The more you learn about propaganda, the more sense everything you see on the news makes.
Bogoh20 @ 12:10PM, I think undermining elections, storming the Capitol, or cheering threats against officials does more damage to the social contract than broken glass. But that was yesterday’s concern. Today, we’re seeing a different danger: the glee of silencing criticism, promises of more crackdowns, masked agents with no identification operating with impunity, and a government leaning on corporations and schools like a mafia shakedown. If respecting the Constitution is measured by whether people boarded up their windows last week, then I suppose you can keep your warm and fuzzy feeling—but a lot of us are seeing the warning signs.
But hey, if they can run around screaming "Pence won't even say black lives matter!" then we can run around screaming "they wouldn't even vote for a non-violence resolution!"
Instead of doing an apples to oranges comparison, why don't you do a direct one? Like I did. You know, the vote that ended up 424-0?
"I think undermining elections, storming the Capitol,"
Weren't the people who stormed the Capitol young men of military age with their faces masked?
This is another case where the benefits of the incident overwhelmingly to to the side making the accusation, and where the only explanation of why the accused party would do it was that they are "stupid and evil" and "Look! This event proves it!"
It's actually not that easy to separate out the violent offenders who broke in doors, in what we call "news coverage" of the event, which they all take for granted to be an "insurrection," but were the investigators were carefully selected to all have the *right* opinions on the matter.
It seems like, by now, we would have a real investigation that includes who precisely did precisely what on that day, and yet we don't. Probably because they were protected agent provocateurs involved in black propaganda, in that case. It's like in the trucker's protests in Ottawa, the government refused to release the identity of the man carrying the Nazi flag, whose presence gave the police a pretext for a rough crackdown, they didn't release his identity for "national security reasons." It doesn't take a genius to know that it wasn't a truck driver, or any other protester, in that case.
"undermining elections" is a pretty funny charge. What Trump wanted Pence to do was entirely legal, as is state legislatures submitting slates of alternate electors, in the case of disputes, and it's up to the House to vote which slate to accept.
You want to know how we know this, without even reading the Constitution? Because Nancy Pelosi passed a new law, probably of dubious constitutionality, to retroactively make what Trump was trying to do illegal.
Should Al Gore gone to prison for "undermining elections"? That's where a lot of the precedent for what Trump was attempting to do came from. Violence served no role in such a plan, and the fact that there was violence solely benefited the Democrats. It de-legitimized Trump's perfectly legal attempt to contest the election.
So no benefit to Trump, huge benefit to the Democrats. The only reason that Trump would have been behind the violence is that he is "stupid and evil," therefore, black propaganda, false flag.
The man who organized the Charlottesville rally had a blog and was a Hillary supporter, and one of the last posts that he did before his blog went dark and he came out as a "Trumpist," expressed admiration for "agent provocateurs.'
I guess we live on magic dirt where techniques that have been used to create narratives and control the crowds for as long as history has been written down are not used. Even as trillions of dollars and control of the US military is at stake in our elections.
Jaq, forgive me for passing on the bait, but that pivot-and-bury routine doesn’t look very appetizing. Hat tip though — you worked hard to re-litigate Jan. 6 and Charlottesville while skipping what’s unfolding right now: officials promising to police speech, masked agents roughing up and disappearing people not white enough, and corporations silenced under political pressure. That’s the authoritarian reality we’re living in.
You mean your guy who shot at the ABC building who has been arressted, and you will never believe this but:
Three shots were fired into a window at the ABC affiliate in Sacramento on Friday, a day after a protest was held outside the station over Jimmy Kimmel’s suspension.
Anibal Hernandez-Santana, 64, was later arrested on charges of assault with a deadly weapon, negligent discharge of a firearm, and shooting into an occupied building. […]
A LinkedIn account matching that name indicates he previously was a legislative director for the California Federation of Teachers, and is now retired and engaged in “full time parenting.”
An X account matching that profile contains a steady stream of anti-Trump commentary.
“The authoritarian oligarchy is now complete,” the account posted in July. “CBS+ caving, big law firms in DC, the subservients FBI and AG, university presidents stepping down, fan boys SCOTUS, public radio, ICE goons. We are going to have to ‘fight like hell’. Rules don’t apply if election was stolen. FIGHT!”
Oh yeah, and regarding Charlottesville, why did the Democratic governor or Virginia seal all of the trial evidence. This was done at his discretion.
Jaq, are you arguing that crime statistics excuse selective law enforcement or racial profiling? Laws should be enforced equally and without racial animus. If your point is different, spell it out.
Jaq has repeatedly insisted that Ukraine deserves to be invaded and crushed by Russia because they're all Banderites, though the only evidence for this is a statue of Bandera in his home town and a few idiot teenagers with Nazi tattoos. (Small towns often put up statues of bad men, if they're the only famous people to come from the town. And Russians with Nazi tattoos included Utkin, the founder and co-leader of the Wagner Group.)
Now (8:53pm) he's demanding that Romania allow an open admirer of the Iron Guard dictatorship that allied with Hitler and helped implement the Holocaust be allowed to run for president. Calin Georgescu is a Hell of a lot closer to Bandera than anyone in Ukraine who is anywhere near the levers of power today.
Amusingly, another pro-Putin Romanian politician arrested this year for treason seems to be an actual Nazi who fought for Hitler: 101-year-old retired general Radu Theodoru. He was 21 when Romania's pro-Nazi regime surrendered. Wikipedia used to claim that he was in flight school when the war ended, but now it says nothing. It seems very unlikely that someone who had been in flight school for two years would have been able to avoid being called up to fight in a country that was losing a war. Hitler was arming 13- and 14-year-olds like the future Pope Benedict. Surely a 21-year-old trained as a pilot would have been put to use? I think Theodoru's Wikipedia page is omitting pertinent information. In short, Theodoru looks like an actual unrepentant Nazi. He admires Stalin as well as Putin. Does Jaq think he should be allowed to run for office?
It looks like Jaq doesn't actually have anything against Nazis and Stalinists, as long as they admire Putin.
"hough the only evidence for this is a statue of Bandera in his home town and a few idiot teenagers with Nazi tatto"
This is from the first returns of the search, there are lots more, if you really want to go down this road.
The frenzy in Ukraine of renaming streets and landmarks shows no sign of abating, with one of Kyiv's main thoroughfares about to lose its name, Moskovskiy Prospekt, or Moscow Avenue.
Instead, the street will be named after Stepan Bandera, a Ukrainian nationalist resistance leader who fought both Soviet and Nazi forces during World War II but is particularly revered by right-wing extremists and reviled by many Poles and Jews over bloody campaigns carried out in his name. - Radio Free Europe
I don't think Ukraine deserves to be. invaded because they celebrate a holocaust participant, but I don't think that they are the kinds of people we should be fighting alongside of either. It's none of our business. Ukraine should work out its problems with its neighbor.
When Ukraine was granted its independence, the Russians promised to respect its borders, and Ukraine promised to be non nuclear, and to remain neutral. After the color revolution, oh, excuse me, the "Orange Revolution," Ukraine started costing up to NATO, breaking their side of the bargain. In 2008, or whenever it was, when NATO started negotiations with Ukraine, it could have said "Sorry, our constitution says that we are non aligned, and therefore can't join NATO." But nope, what Ukraine did was said "We don't have to keep our side of the bargain, but Russia must absolutely keep theirs!" How many are dead because of this?
Not our fight. Ukraine should work it out with its neighbor.
Let’s pause the detours into foreign policy, historical analogies, and demographics. My question was simple: do today’s conservatives and MAGA consistently respect the social contract and constitutional norms? This isn’t about individual incidents or who they support abroad—it’s about whether allegiance to the law and the Constitution remains foundational. Anything else is deflection. Can we stick to that core issue, or have we reached the point where the Constitution itself is seen as having failed?
So Jaq refuses to answer the question of whether Romania should allow their own unrepentant pro-Nazi equivalents to Banderites to run for office. Why is that?
And he even insists that it is "not our fight" though Bill Clinton's promise in the Budapest Memorandum made it our fight.
Finally, telling someone to "work it out with the neighbor" when that neighbor is actively trying to crush and enslave you is, to put it bluntly, stupid and dishonest. Putin wants all of Ukraine, and his propagandists on RT openly say that he wants to draft all the Ukrainian young men so he can invade Poland, Germany, and the rest of Europe. No compromise is possible with such aims.
Jaq @ 7:55 PM, couple of things but first, threads like this keep rolling off into the archive abyss before we face the core issue: our constitutional crisis.
Stage One — Constitution as shield: Conservatives claim to be its ‘true defenders,’ wrapping themselves in selective readings of the First and Second Amendments.
Stage Two — Constitution as obstacle: Checks and balances become ‘the deep state’ standing in the way of the people’s will.
Stage Three — Constitution as negotiable: When crises mount (Jan 6), loyalty to leader or cause outweighs fidelity to the document.
Stage Four — Constitution as disposable: Some now muse that maybe democracy no longer works and call for a strong hand — the rule of man replacing the rule of law.
That pattern isn’t unique to America. Look at Ukraine: the Budapest Memorandum made Russia the guarantor of its sovereignty. Russia broke its word, yet somehow Ukraine is accused of betraying a bargain by seeking security elsewhere. The logic is inverted: loyalty to agreements only matters until it no longer serves the agenda, then it’s discarded.
That’s the question before us: do laws, treaties, and constitutions still bind us — or only when convenient?
Rusty, that’s exactly the shift I’m describing. Stage One is waving the Constitution as a shield. Stage Two is dismissing constitutional limits by redefining harm so narrowly that anything short of prison doesn’t count. That misses the bigger point: when speech is chilled, delegitimized, or selectively punished, the social contract is already under strain. Waiting until people are in cells before we admit there’s a problem is how we slide into Stage Three and Four.
You cant answer or you won't answer? I've got horrible news for you. The Constitution is our shield. It is the only thing standing between my natural rights and people like you who would equivocate our rights to death.
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.
I am a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for me to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Encourage Althouse by making a donation:
Make a 1-time donation or set up a monthly donation of any amount you choose:
९८ टिप्पण्या:
Fifty eight Democrats voted No on the resolution for Charlie Kirk today. Thirty eight Democrats voted Present. Twenty two Democrats didn't vote at all.
Compare and contrast the Kirk resolution with the resolution in June honoring Melissa Hortman and her husband. That vote was 424-0.
These people aren't commenters on a blog. These are elected officials representing their constituents.
I don't want to hear another fucking word about 'both sides.'
Kimmel, Kirk killed by own supporters.
It's fiction and fiction has an audience that likes it. They live in it as if it's true because it's entertaining. They know it's false but it doesn't matter. Here's a safe place where it's true, is the sentiment.
Doubt that anyone can willingly believe obvious fiction?
``When there was as yet no shrub of the field upon earth, and as yet no grasses of the field had sprouted, because Yahweh had not sent rain upon the earth, and there was no man to till the soil, but a flow welled up from the ground and watered the whole surface of the earth, then Yahweh molded Adam from the earth's dust (adamah), and blew into the nostrils the breath of life, and Adam became a living being.''
That's not meant to deceive but to present. It's an allegory for something true.
Likewise Kimmel.
Lit crit exercise: list five ways that Kirk was killed by his own supporters, as an allegory.
Lit crit hint: killing often stands for change.
Forced memorializing is forced speech. It's the Pledge of Allegiance rule.
You might not want to deify Kirk. Some questionable quotes floating around, from meanness towards specific blacks to generic antisemitism ("Jewish money" as a cause of our problems).
Glenn Loury listen until 1:12:08
I don't want to hear another fucking word about 'both sides.'
Prediction: You will.
Clip starts at 57:26 so it's not as much listening as you might think
U.S. Attorney Investigating Two Trump Foes Resigns After President Seeks to Oust Him ~ NYT
It's good that Siebert is doing the right thing, but "refusing to charge when there's not evidence" is a pretty low bar to clear. He's the frog that gave the scorpion a ride.
Trails off in contemplation of how BS the charges have to be for even Pam Bondi to defend Siebert.
"Attorney General Pam Bondi and Todd Blanche, the deputy attorney general who runs the day-to-day operations of the Justice Department, had privately defended Mr. Siebert against officials, including William J. Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, who had urged that he be fired and replaced with a prosecutor who would push the cases forward, according to a senior law enforcement official." ~ NYT
Jim at said...
..."These people aren't commenters on a blog. These are elected officials representing their constituents."
------------
Which is exactly what they are doing.
"Which is exactly what they are doing."
I think that has something to do with his following comment...
A new poll says that since the death of Charlie Kirk the number of Republicans who think the country is going in the right direction has dropped by 20%. I wonder whether this means that 20% of Republicans suddenly feel personally threatened - that would be a lot, that would be a major shift on a life issue. We have to wait to see whether it's that. But, anyhow, a huge drop like that means that the issue is enormous in some way and the Democrats, as usual in these times, are showing themselves out of touch. They have launched a campaign to support Jimmy Kimmel, a man who spoke about "the MAGA gang." That can only intensify the feeling that country is going in "the wrong direction." Republicans aren't a party to the supporters of this late night host, we're a "gang." That's ... not good.
"I wonder whether this means that 20% of Republicans suddenly feel personally threatened..."
I would suspect it didn't have anything to do with feeling personally threatened, just that Democrats continue to insist on being assholes.
At some point, you're bound to give up hope that'll ever change.
The Kimmel suspension reminds me of employees I've had over the years. You have a person who constantly screws things up, misses a lot of work and causes far more than their share of problems. After multiple warnings haven't worked, you decide the next infraction will be the last. They miss another day of work and you fire them. They almost always say something along the lines of "I'm getting fired for missing one day of work?" That's what the Dems are doing with Kimmel. He's been on his way out for years, and it's just gotten worse lately.
Adam Corolla, who knows Kimmel and the entertainment business well, said when you lose one affiliate, it usually means you are about to lose more and your days are numbered. Dozens of affiliates and advertisers were up in arms about the guy before and after this last episode. This was just the last straw, or an opportunity from his employer's view.
I have great admiration for Charley Kirk, but I don't think putting memorial up for votes in Congress is a good thing. Then again, we do it all the time for politicians, who are some of the least admirable famous people in our culture.
They recently renamed McCarren airport in Las Vegas to Harry Reid International. I hate that shit, even if Reid wasn't despicable, which he was. It should be called Las Vegas International, or maybe Lost Wages International, or even Desert Miracle International. Most politicians already get more then the deserve from us.
Rhhardin's link is meandering. Regarding Kirk, It references this:
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/story/charlie-kirk-ezra-klein-tanehisi-coates?srsltid=AfmBOooAAEBFkPVmP2HQrvODD_q__GImXbtcntEyMW3oOgcrxAiPQYcF
Lowry also reveals he voted for Cornel West, because..
The other guy said he voted for "that gay guy, the libertarian"
"Most politicians already get more then the deserve from us."
Truer words are rarely spoken.
“William J. Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, who had urged that he be fired and replaced with a prosecutor who would push the cases forward”
I don’t know if this is true or not but (only my opinion, no real proof) Bill Pulte is a good friend of Scott Adams. So when Adams has a scoop or insights into what is going on in the WH, I assume they come from Pulte.
Scott Adams says he’s better but his speech is so much slower (even at 2.5X), he slurs his words and his thinking seems to be foggy. Especially today. Maybe it’s the meds.
Does anyone really think that if you heard a shot fired you would actually have a rational thought such as that bullet is not meant for me?
You know what, RH Hardin? Show your coward face. The little non-sequitor thing stopped working years ago, and we all know it.
Or go away, you pathetic example of a person who can't put a real name and face to your sad, crabby whines.
https://x.com/OliLondonTV/status/1969162872925093893
Shots fired at ABC affiliate. The original Nazis used to sent thugs to create an air of violence around their political opponents, so my guess is that this is what is happening. It's only a guess, I don't claim to have any further information than the tweet, and long experience studying these people running the Democratic Party.
The WEF is pulling the J6 scam in Romania now. They are going after the guy who would have won the election, but a court ruled that he couldn't run, and interesting, not as a matter of law, but as a matter of the judge's conscience. Now they are claiming that he was planning a violent coup, even as all of their other claims about him turned out to be utter fantasy, hence, ruling him ineligible because the judge had a "conscience" veto.
They are going to put him in jail for the crime of being popular, and against the war with Russia. But remember, we are fighting because Putin is a dictator!
It's always projection. Always.
“You know what, RH Hardin? Show your coward face. The little non-sequitor thing stopped working years ago, and we all know it.
Or go away, you pathetic example of a person who can't put a real name and face to your sad, crabby whines.”
OMG, Now you have to stay RH Hardin!
Now that I know your comments bug TT, I like them even more.
Yes. I am feeling personally threatened. My faith and my friends are being attacked. My representative is receiving death threats and people close to me are applauding. It’s personal…. This is a significant moment.
Not whatever you want. It's never whatever you want. It's all fiction.
From the Babylon Bee: Recent events in American society indicated that the very same people who are okay with murder are also outraged by the cancellation of a TV show.
This is my favorite. I’d embroider it on a pillow but too wordy:
Tina Trent commenting on me:
“Don't let your preening, narcissistic identity vote for you. Vote for the best platform. Capice? You people are so sad. If a trustworthy, rational, Democrat appeared on the scene, I'd consider them. And I wouldn't make it all about me.
Pathetic and Deluded is no way go through life. Have the guts to make the right choices, not the politically correct ones. I've voted for local Democrats who get the job done. You're just hysterical. Exactly how many hours have you actually worked in politics? I estimate, at this point, when I have less productive time, at 700 hours. So stuff your attitude.”
I defy anyone to find a better Tina Trent screed.
Eva Marie: did I misunderstand you? If I did, I'm sorry. It seems confusing.
Also I can embroider.
So have at, Eva.
Tina Trent said, “I can embroider.”
You sure can!!!!!
Eva, you saved your Tina reprimand?
I wish I had saved mine.
I defy anyone to find a better Tina Trent screed.
I dunno, she called me a rape fantasist for some reason. Which was so - I didn't know, what's the word, surprising? - since I typically agree with her. I've striven to let it go.
rhhardin said...
Kimmel, Kirk killed by own supporters.
It's fiction and fiction has an audience that likes it. They live in it as if it's true because it's entertaining. They know it's false but it doesn't matter. Here's a safe place where it's true, is the sentiment.
***********
It's a lot like the morons who believe "pro wrestlers" like Killer Kowalski were on the up-and-up, and still think the WWE is sotoday..
Did Trump say, 'smart people don't like me?'
A video posted to Facebook and Instagram by Nicole Kiprilov shows Trump saying this. Her post indicates he was speaking at a gala for Hope Through Education when he made the remarks.
Kiprilov is a Republican strategist, according to her social media profiles.
Todd & Weld LLP said Newsmax has refused to pay outstanding billings {$426K} for the Boston-based boutique law firm's work in defending the cable news channel from a Dominion Voting Systems defamation suit.
Right-wing news outlet Newsmax agreed to pay $67 million to settle a libel lawsuit brought by Dominion Voting Systems over the outlet’s claims that the voting machine company engaged in election fraud during the 2020 presidential election.
"A new poll says that since the death of Charlie Kirk the number of Republicans who think the country is going in the right direction has dropped by 20%. I wonder whether this means that 20% of Republicans suddenly feel personally threatened - that would be a lot, that would be a major shift on a life issue."
Opinion polling by its nature always generates more heat than light, particularly right direction/wrong direction questions. Everyone in every profession are asked questions by our clients, patients, and customers that demand yes/no good/bad answers that we'd rather not answer in those terms because we know how deceptive such answers can be.
Q: Should I jump from a third story window?
A: No. You could do yourself a fatal injury.
Q: What if the second story is on fire?
It's p-hacking, isn't it? Each of those 200 supposed Republicans has a very nuanced and detailed answer to the stupid question offered by the poll-taker. I doubt an honest person could digest those answers into a clear and forthright trend. That said, I'll contradict myself self by speculating that many of those 200 believed against evidence that the Democrats are civilized people worthy of self-government and are now reluctantly persuaded otherwise.
There are seemingly thousands of video hours of Charlie Kirk. He’ll always be with us.
“Hennepin County Attorney’s Office charges man following threats of violence as retaliation for death of Charlie Kirk”
Nobody here I hope.
jim5301...can you please stop showing what a slimeball you are?? Grow up.
That's why they use their violent followers to do stuff like this, so that jim5301 and his buddies can write comments like that. Who has the larger motivation? Jim's side, which is losing the debate, or ours.
It's my first rule of the false flag. The second one is if the motivation of the person carrying out the act is said to be that he is "stupid and evil."
The whole point is to paint us as "stupid and evil." They have a playbook. It's perfectly logical and it's designed to work on those of us who are basically honest and have a good heart, known in the business as "normies." They use these attributes like control knobs.
hennepin county is like mos eiseley, a den of scum and villainy, thats where they charged chauvin, even though he was in the right, so I trust that story as much as I can throw them
btw, I can't dismiss the cretinous lies re robinson as rhardin can, its not about melodrama, its about causing erika and her children pain, also inspiring the next group of psychos
If Charlie Kirk was a leftist who was assassinated
there would be riots all over
and lots of innocent people would be killed
and the media would call it "mostly peaceful street protests."
But a right-wing man was assassinated
so there were no riots
Just a lot of people who were fired for celebrating
and one propaganda jack-off who was kicked off the air
and yet, this peaceful, non-violent response is referred to as "fascism."
scorpions can do nothing but sting,
the jimmy kimmel fan dancers (ht frank herbert) are amusing, I'm sure he can go to msnbc, scratch that, well bang co conuts together like terry moran
Here is the Tennessee Coates article with no paywall:
https://archive.ph/7uhwf
Apparently remarking that Joe Biden was corrupt, an assertion supported by a *lot* of evidence, BTW, and the only "proof" against it is that it hurts the Democrats to admit it, and that he has caused a lot of death and destruction around the world, which is also undeniably true. When Putin was on Ukraine's border, for example, he didn't negotiate, he blustered and threatened.
Nowhere, in his offhand remark, referring to a hypothetical world where there was actually justice for all, did he say that Joe Biden should be shot down like a dog, not have a trial.
This will come as a surprise. I sympathize with the Dems who refused to vote for a Charlie Kirk (pbuh) memorial resolution. For context, recall that I am a red-hat Trumper, and I wore a Charlie (z''l) shirt to the Kennedy Center last night.
However, remember in 2020 when lefties were trying to get R's to say "black lives matter." Everyone but Romney (esad) refused. Why? Not because they thought black lives didn't matter, but because Black Lives Matter is the name of a political organization with aims far beyond keeping blacks alive - or really, not even including that aim. And with tactics including riots and violence.
Most people think puppies are cute. But if there was a political movement called "Puppies Are Cute" that rioted in the streets and sought all sorts of woke policies besides just protecting puppies, a lot of Rs would stop saying puppies are cute. They'd say "young canids are beautiful" or "all pets are cute" or something like that.
Anyway, I think the D's who voted no or abstained saw a Kirk (z''l) memorial resolution as a similar semantic trap. So they steered clear of it. The resolution did have a lot of "whereases" praising Charlie's (rip) career. So it wasn't just an "agree with him or not - don't kill the guy" resolution.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-resolution/719/text
But hey, if they can run around screaming "Pence won't even say black lives matter!" then we can run around screaming "they wouldn't even vote for a non-violence resolution!" CC, JSM
The other thing that Coates said was that Kirk viewed the Palestinians as not human, which is also not true: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2qn0mvSCig
And apparently, pointing out that Maxwell's father was a spy chief with the Mossad is "anti-semitic"
But one thing that bothers me is what is this "fulfillment of prophecy" of which Kirk speaks regarding Israel? What he said was that he believed that Israel had a scriptural right to the land, and that he believed in "fulfillment of prophecy." Maybe he should read the Book of Joshua and how the Israelites put every many woman child and even animal to the blade, with the exception of one woman who had unknowingly betrayed her own people to their extermination by helping an Israelite. That's what's in the Book.
I was talking about Jericho. I feel bad for the poor Bar Mitzvah boy who gets the description of that battle as his Tora portion.
Strange but I don’t recall Republicans refusing to say “Black Lives Matter”. Except in the context of BLM demonstrators screaming in their faces to say it. I’d probably refuse to say it in that context also. Even though I firmly believe that Black lives matter. As do all lives. Including unborn ones.
tennessee coates is the village idiot, he though he was James Baldwin or Richard Wright, and he does think Jews are not worth anything,
Pence on Face The Nation refusing to say Black Lives Matter:
https://youtu.be/juJzmpBQCTw?si=rGzA814bQOaVe5b7
CC, JSM
woopie do,
"Black Lives Matter" is endorsement of a notably DEIst (e.g. racist) corporation and handmade tale.
That said, baby lives matter.
Mosby @ 7:31AM, break your comment down — the false equivalence, the “semantic trap” framing, and the gotcha-symmetry politics — and the comparison doesn’t hold. Black Lives Matter is a broad movement and slogan with a contested political agenda; declining to say that slogan isn’t the same as refusing to endorse the basic value that lives matter. A Kirk memorial resolution, by contrast, is praise for one polarizing individual. Avoiding an implied endorsement of an ideology isn’t equivalent to denying a moral principle.
RJW: True. In both cases: BLM and Kirk (z’’l). Which is why Dems have the right not to vote for the resolution, and R’s have the right to twist it out of context for maximum benefit. I realize that shoe hurts - maybe try hospital socks? CC, JSM
ot: OAC refused to vote for the anti-violence measure. 100 dems did vote for it.
Instead, AOC viciously attacked Charlie kirk and used her altered Kirk Quotes to call him a antisemite a racist and a fascist.
Ryan read the Charlie Kirk Quotes out loud - they are not any of the things AOC insisted. He used the WHOLE quote - with all context.
One guest on Ryan's show said - "I hope every top lawyer around the nation is on the phone with Erika Kirk right now ."
AOC thinks it's not only OK with omit context and alter quotes - she is fine doing so - to exploit and inspire violence against people she disagrees with.
AOC will never be president.
In fact - if only the GOP had a brain and some balls - she would be ousted easily from her congressional seat. She does a piss poor job representing her district.
AOC is protected from prosecution and suit by the Speech and Debate Clause. Maybe not if she uses her CSPAN footage for fundraising etc outside the chamber. And for that matter any of her allies doing so. But she is not immune from the R leadership taking disciplinary action. Hope they have big enough balls to push her into a “nevertheless she persisted” moment. CC, JSM
well the district, has a desire to suffer, she brings no benefit, and often detracts,
run footage of the actual quote along side AOC's altered and cut-and paste quotes. Ruin her in any way possible.
The truth will out.
I like the framing of that shot. There's no tension, but anticipation. Will somebody walk in frame and sit on the bench? Contemplative.
Ritual denunciation bores.
john mosby said...
This will come as a surprise. I sympathize with the Dems who refused to vote for a Charlie Kirk (pbuh) memorial resolution. For context, recall that I am a red-hat Trumper, and I wore a Charlie (z''l) shirt to the Kennedy Center last night.
I empathize.
I do not sympathize.
AOC is a dishonest piece of shit and a totlaitarian.
Charlie Kirk stood for the constitution and freedoms it provides. That is why AOC is happy he is dead.
These people cannot be honest about what they want. they do not provide us the same freedom we provide them.
AOC does not abide by the social contract described in our Constitution. She was more than happy to censor us during COVID. She is happy to dance on Kirk's grave and will not condemn the people who cheered his death.
john mosby said...
AOC is protected from prosecution and suit by the Speech and Debate Clause.
But she would actively deny that protection to Republicans.
What does that say?
Jim5301 writes, "Nobody here I hope."
Put your mind at ease. It was one of your engaged in black propaganda.
AOC is the quintessential Democrat. She brings performances, with fake outrage, and does nothing for her district. Democrat voters seem especially and terminally susceptible to that.
Achilles says; “ AOC does not abide by the social contract described in our Constitution. ”
And today’s so-called conservatives and MAGAs do?
Mostly yes, I think they do. That's why nothing was burnt to the ground last week, no riots, nobody bothered boarding up their windows, because people know who respects the social contract and who doesn't, even as they pretend the both sides bullshit..
"Black propaganda," thank you for that term. I am not the kind of expert in it that whoever is pulling the strings for the Democrats is, so I am just learning. The more you learn about propaganda, the more sense everything you see on the news makes.
Bogoh20 @ 12:10PM, I think undermining elections, storming the Capitol, or cheering threats against officials does more damage to the social contract than broken glass. But that was yesterday’s concern. Today, we’re seeing a different danger: the glee of silencing criticism, promises of more crackdowns, masked agents with no identification operating with impunity, and a government leaning on corporations and schools like a mafia shakedown. If respecting the Constitution is measured by whether people boarded up their windows last week, then I suppose you can keep your warm and fuzzy feeling—but a lot of us are seeing the warning signs.
Specifically. Which one of your rights have been violated?
But hey, if they can run around screaming "Pence won't even say black lives matter!" then we can run around screaming "they wouldn't even vote for a non-violence resolution!"
Instead of doing an apples to oranges comparison, why don't you do a direct one? Like I did. You know, the vote that ended up 424-0?
Ron Ward - all you have is Jan 6th - Feds in masks - instigating.
That is all you have as some sort of proof.
We watched a lot of peaceful people walk thru open doors at the Capitol - they were all arrested.
Which one Rusty asks. The one where my government gets to decide which words count as crimes this week.
what about which bullet, this week? One said "Catch this, fascist"
Who uses the word "fascist" day in and day out to describe Trump and his supporters? Media, Biden, Tim Walz, Kamala, CNN, other top spot dems.
"I think undermining elections, storming the Capitol,"
Weren't the people who stormed the Capitol young men of military age with their faces masked?
This is another case where the benefits of the incident overwhelmingly to to the side making the accusation, and where the only explanation of why the accused party would do it was that they are "stupid and evil" and "Look! This event proves it!"
It's actually not that easy to separate out the violent offenders who broke in doors, in what we call "news coverage" of the event, which they all take for granted to be an "insurrection," but were the investigators were carefully selected to all have the *right* opinions on the matter.
It seems like, by now, we would have a real investigation that includes who precisely did precisely what on that day, and yet we don't. Probably because they were protected agent provocateurs involved in black propaganda, in that case. It's like in the trucker's protests in Ottawa, the government refused to release the identity of the man carrying the Nazi flag, whose presence gave the police a pretext for a rough crackdown, they didn't release his identity for "national security reasons." It doesn't take a genius to know that it wasn't a truck driver, or any other protester, in that case.
"undermining elections" is a pretty funny charge. What Trump wanted Pence to do was entirely legal, as is state legislatures submitting slates of alternate electors, in the case of disputes, and it's up to the House to vote which slate to accept.
You want to know how we know this, without even reading the Constitution? Because Nancy Pelosi passed a new law, probably of dubious constitutionality, to retroactively make what Trump was trying to do illegal.
Should Al Gore gone to prison for "undermining elections"? That's where a lot of the precedent for what Trump was attempting to do came from. Violence served no role in such a plan, and the fact that there was violence solely benefited the Democrats. It de-legitimized Trump's perfectly legal attempt to contest the election.
So no benefit to Trump, huge benefit to the Democrats. The only reason that Trump would have been behind the violence is that he is "stupid and evil," therefore, black propaganda, false flag.
(I know, I am going to wear that term out.)
The man who organized the Charlottesville rally had a blog and was a Hillary supporter, and one of the last posts that he did before his blog went dark and he came out as a "Trumpist," expressed admiration for "agent provocateurs.'
I guess we live on magic dirt where techniques that have been used to create narratives and control the crowds for as long as history has been written down are not used. Even as trillions of dollars and control of the US military is at stake in our elections.
Jaq, forgive me for passing on the bait, but that pivot-and-bury routine doesn’t look very appetizing. Hat tip though — you worked hard to re-litigate Jan. 6 and Charlottesville while skipping what’s unfolding right now: officials promising to police speech, masked agents roughing up and disappearing people not white enough, and corporations silenced under political pressure. That’s the authoritarian reality we’re living in.
hypocrite democrats -the movie
The Charlotteville lie.
do quote Trump fully - in context. Right now. Ron Ward.
NOW.
"What's unfolding right now?"
You mean your guy who shot at the ABC building who has been arressted, and you will never believe this but:
Three shots were fired into a window at the ABC affiliate in Sacramento on Friday, a day after a protest was held outside the station over Jimmy Kimmel’s suspension.
Anibal Hernandez-Santana, 64, was later arrested on charges of assault with a deadly weapon, negligent discharge of a firearm, and shooting into an occupied building. […]
A LinkedIn account matching that name indicates he previously was a legislative director for the California Federation of Teachers, and is now retired and engaged in “full time parenting.”
An X account matching that profile contains a steady stream of anti-Trump commentary.
“The authoritarian oligarchy is now complete,” the account posted in July. “CBS+ caving, big law firms in DC, the subservients FBI and AG, university presidents stepping down, fan boys SCOTUS, public radio, ICE goons. We are going to have to ‘fight like hell’. Rules don’t apply if election was stolen. FIGHT!”
Oh yeah, and regarding Charlottesville, why did the Democratic governor or Virginia seal all of the trial evidence. This was done at his discretion.
If illegal immigration is heavily committed by non-whites, does that mean that immigration laws, duly passed by Congress, are unenforceable?
I hope it wasn't one of your close friends, Ronald.
"Jim5301 writes, "Nobody here I hope."
LOL, imagine that, he deleted it. Bookmarking this page for his inevitable return.
Jaq, are you arguing that crime statistics excuse selective law enforcement or racial profiling? Laws should be enforced equally and without racial animus. If your point is different, spell it out.
Jaq has repeatedly insisted that Ukraine deserves to be invaded and crushed by Russia because they're all Banderites, though the only evidence for this is a statue of Bandera in his home town and a few idiot teenagers with Nazi tattoos. (Small towns often put up statues of bad men, if they're the only famous people to come from the town. And Russians with Nazi tattoos included Utkin, the founder and co-leader of the Wagner Group.)
Now (8:53pm) he's demanding that Romania allow an open admirer of the Iron Guard dictatorship that allied with Hitler and helped implement the Holocaust be allowed to run for president. Calin Georgescu is a Hell of a lot closer to Bandera than anyone in Ukraine who is anywhere near the levers of power today.
Amusingly, another pro-Putin Romanian politician arrested this year for treason seems to be an actual Nazi who fought for Hitler: 101-year-old retired general Radu Theodoru. He was 21 when Romania's pro-Nazi regime surrendered. Wikipedia used to claim that he was in flight school when the war ended, but now it says nothing. It seems very unlikely that someone who had been in flight school for two years would have been able to avoid being called up to fight in a country that was losing a war. Hitler was arming 13- and 14-year-olds like the future Pope Benedict. Surely a 21-year-old trained as a pilot would have been put to use? I think Theodoru's Wikipedia page is omitting pertinent information. In short, Theodoru looks like an actual unrepentant Nazi. He admires Stalin as well as Putin. Does Jaq think he should be allowed to run for office?
It looks like Jaq doesn't actually have anything against Nazis and Stalinists, as long as they admire Putin.
Are you arguing that immigration laws shouldn't be enforced because the preponderance of the illegal aliens are non-white? Spell it out.
"hough the only evidence for this is a statue of Bandera in his home town and a few idiot teenagers with Nazi tatto"
This is from the first returns of the search, there are lots more, if you really want to go down this road.
The frenzy in Ukraine of renaming streets and landmarks shows no sign of abating, with one of Kyiv's main thoroughfares about to lose its name, Moskovskiy Prospekt, or Moscow Avenue.
Instead, the street will be named after Stepan Bandera, a Ukrainian nationalist resistance leader who fought both Soviet and Nazi forces during World War II but is particularly revered by right-wing extremists and reviled by many Poles and Jews over bloody campaigns carried out in his name. - Radio Free Europe
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2016/07/07/ukraine-names-street-and-sausage-after-controversial-nationalist-hero-bandera-a54498
BTW, the "Moscow Times is a CIA front newspaper run out of Denmark or the Netherlands, oh! Should I call it "Netherlands"?
I don't think Ukraine deserves to be. invaded because they celebrate a holocaust participant, but I don't think that they are the kinds of people we should be fighting alongside of either. It's none of our business. Ukraine should work out its problems with its neighbor.
When Ukraine was granted its independence, the Russians promised to respect its borders, and Ukraine promised to be non nuclear, and to remain neutral. After the color revolution, oh, excuse me, the "Orange Revolution," Ukraine started costing up to NATO, breaking their side of the bargain. In 2008, or whenever it was, when NATO started negotiations with Ukraine, it could have said "Sorry, our constitution says that we are non aligned, and therefore can't join NATO." But nope, what Ukraine did was said "We don't have to keep our side of the bargain, but Russia must absolutely keep theirs!" How many are dead because of this?
Not our fight. Ukraine should work it out with its neighbor.
Let’s pause the detours into foreign policy, historical analogies, and demographics. My question was simple: do today’s conservatives and MAGA consistently respect the social contract and constitutional norms? This isn’t about individual incidents or who they support abroad—it’s about whether allegiance to the law and the Constitution remains foundational. Anything else is deflection. Can we stick to that core issue, or have we reached the point where the Constitution itself is seen as having failed?
So Jaq refuses to answer the question of whether Romania should allow their own unrepentant pro-Nazi equivalents to Banderites to run for office. Why is that?
And he even insists that it is "not our fight" though Bill Clinton's promise in the Budapest Memorandum made it our fight.
Finally, telling someone to "work it out with the neighbor" when that neighbor is actively trying to crush and enslave you is, to put it bluntly, stupid and dishonest. Putin wants all of Ukraine, and his propagandists on RT openly say that he wants to draft all the Ukrainian young men so he can invade Poland, Germany, and the rest of Europe. No compromise is possible with such aims.
Jaq @ 7:55 PM, couple of things but first, threads like this keep rolling off into the archive abyss before we face the core issue: our constitutional crisis.
Stage One — Constitution as shield: Conservatives claim to be its ‘true defenders,’ wrapping themselves in selective readings of the First and Second Amendments.
Stage Two — Constitution as obstacle: Checks and balances become ‘the deep state’ standing in the way of the people’s will.
Stage Three — Constitution as negotiable: When crises mount (Jan 6), loyalty to leader or cause outweighs fidelity to the document.
Stage Four — Constitution as disposable: Some now muse that maybe democracy no longer works and call for a strong hand — the rule of man replacing the rule of law.
That pattern isn’t unique to America. Look at Ukraine: the Budapest Memorandum made Russia the guarantor of its sovereignty. Russia broke its word, yet somehow Ukraine is accused of betraying a bargain by seeking security elsewhere. The logic is inverted: loyalty to agreements only matters until it no longer serves the agenda, then it’s discarded.
That’s the question before us: do laws, treaties, and constitutions still bind us — or only when convenient?
Ronald J. Ward said...
"Which one Rusty asks. The one where my government gets to decide which words count as crimes this week."
Which words are those? Who has been imprisoned for speaking. Who has been harmed?
Rusty, that’s exactly the shift I’m describing. Stage One is waving the Constitution as a shield. Stage Two is dismissing constitutional limits by redefining harm so narrowly that anything short of prison doesn’t count. That misses the bigger point: when speech is chilled, delegitimized, or selectively punished, the social contract is already under strain. Waiting until people are in cells before we admit there’s a problem is how we slide into Stage Three and Four.
You cant answer or you won't answer?
I've got horrible news for you. The Constitution is our shield. It is the only thing standing between my natural rights and people like you who would equivocate our rights to death.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.