Now That Trump's President... (not any more!)

[usagi]

the Pence hack is amazing.

 

edit: the gay counter fluctuates between 381 and 382

Edited August 15, 2017 by usagi

[caze]

not a hack though, which is why it's still there after over four months.

[YO303]

i really wanted that anonymous hack thing to be real. fuck the daily stormer. i can't believe they're relevant at all. but i also can given the recent state of affairs in us politics over the last few years. gah. 

 

extremism is on the rise, and the worst is yet to come, the orangutan blew the war horn and resurrected all the orcs

 

 isis and our domestic terrorists are going to make the next decade very interesting, i can see us descending into a total nanny state, specially with a wannabe despot at the helm

Edited August 15, 2017 by Deer

[ignatius]

 

 

 

This is a reminder to kill all your tiny dogs

Sign up to receive email notifications regarding best ways to do so, including strangling, drowning, and others.

 

hahaha

 

 

was he accused of killing a dog or something? or is that just random lulz?

 

 

 

 

random lolz.. but.. mike huckabee's son killed a dog when huckabee was governor and he got the investogators to look the other way.. and it was fucking weird. apparently huckabee's son killed the dog, gutted it and hung it from a tree during some kind of organized youth event  campout w/some younger kids and he hung it in a place so all the kids had to walk passed it. 

 

there's a guy who for a while on twitter was posting in response to anything huckabee tweeted "your son murdered a dog" and then would go into details about it.. until huckabee finally blocked him. 

 

oh.. so my details may not be correct but..  they apparently strangled the dog. 

 

http://www.snopes.com/politics/politicians/huckabeedog.asp

 

 

  Anonymous rumors about how the dog was killed hold that Frady and Huckabee hanged the dog, slit its throat, and stoned it to death.

 

 

 

[Hugh Mughnus]

all around fucked up lol

[joshuatxuk]

lol, there's always this one guy..

lol yep

 

so it goes

 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[joshuatxuk]

You can call Maher a douche, and he has been at times, but he draws credible lines here between stifling free speech from the left, and the right in America.

 

https://youtu.be/xI9tLozsDB4

Yeah I've always respected him, especially lately, because that off-putting vibe he gives off goes hand-in-hand with the way he does interviews and conversations, which is a lot more provocative and thought-provoking than most of his peers. Compared to the Daily Show or any of the late night talk shows hosted by liberals he actually encourages debate and discussion instead of just having a circle jerk of left wing Echo chamber venting.

 

I think he's pretty much dead-on in this clip. I'll forgive him generalizing Millennials because he wasnt sparing baby boomer Trump supporters either in his first bit from criticism and he was making a good point about how much social media has amplified missteps in the way many of this generation were raised.

 

I think he's most at on about how trumps when was a protest vote. If you get past the superficial appeal and the delusional promises everyone I've talked to who the Trump supporter just ends up revealing this vague, fragnented, cynical world view. The most offensive thing about his wind was that he wasn't some right-wing religious conservative, he was quite literally a "fuck you" vote to everyone else. I think what is so upsetting to me is that the people who are older, baby boomers, gen xers, they benefited and benefit from things like Social Security, unions, stronger public spending, better public school systems and cheaper higher education, etc. But they all think the world's kind of shit and they really don't care about everyone who's going to have to deal with it after they're gone. The GOP used to talk about fiscal and social restraint and conservatism but now they espouse this idea of washing their hands of any kind of responsibility for any issues and a real initiative to offer a different plan of action. Its just more "deregulate, defund, deflect" bullshit.

Edited August 15, 2017 by joshuatx

[thawkins]

 

Found a good analysis comparing neoliberalism and Nazi Germany today: https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/the-supermanagerial-reich

 

This isn't a good analysis at all, completely fails to mention the role socialism had in the growth of nazism for a start (until the night of the long knives), continues spreading the myth of neoliberalism, totally mischaracterizes the state of the world economy today wrt to levels of poverty, general well being etc. all in all not a lot positive to say about it at all really.

 

 

It seeme pretty dead-on for me, but I guess I have been reading a lot of this stuff recently. I don't know enough of German history to argue about the role of socialism before WW2, but the parts about neoliberalism resonate with me a lot.

I don't know what you mean by the "myth of neoliberalism", but my impression (and also it seems Adam Curtis' in Hypernormalisation) in short is that it's the philosophy of delegating state power to private enterprises because it is believed that the state will not run things as efficiently as the free market. In theory, the state was supposed to regulate things to ensure that there are no huge monopolies and poorer people aren't shut off from essential services. What's happened instead is that there's huge companies like Wal-Mart or Amazon who have achieved market dominance and can essentially destroy local businesses so they don't have to compete on equal ground. Because they're often the only business in town, people have no choice but to work for them for shit pay, and because their owners are some of the richest people in the world, they can buy off the government who is supposed to regulate things.

 

Basically, neoliberalism to me is the prioritisation of rich people's incomes and money over the wellbeing of the people who actually work for them. It's the idea that things like health insurance and education should only go to those who can afford it, because "the free market has decided the poor aren't worth helping". I can agree that the philosophy behind the term isn't so bad, but the actual outcome is pretty shit.

 

Why it all ties up to Trump and the Nazis and the article I linked.. 

https://twitter.com/audrawilliams/status/896717616600895488 

Edited August 15, 2017 by thawkins

[whosebrian]

[doublename]

lol

[ignatius]

 

 

Basically, neoliberalism to me is the prioritisation of rich people's incomes and money over the wellbeing of the people who actually work for them. It's the idea that things like health insurance and education should only go to those who can afford it, because "the free market has decided the poor aren't worth helping". I can agree that the philosophy behind the term isn't so bad, but the actual outcome is pretty shit.

 

 

 

 

i don't know how the word 'liberal' got attached to neo in this case but whatever.. i thin neo liberalism is 10 differen things depending on who you talk to.  but your idea about prioritizing rich people's incomes is not a new or particularly liberal idea.  it's just an elitist idea.  it's both republican and democratic at times depending on the politician but isn't by any means a uniting philosophy or agenda in either party..  well.. maybe that's not accurate.. but what i mean is other than 'tax cuts' for the rich in the republican party.. well.. the dems find other ways to give those breaks.. they just aren't as honest about it often.. but they do it i think. blah. 

 

i don't think i've seen a 'good' meaning accurate definition of what it is or might be.   if i was to try to define what i thought it means it'd be something completely different.

 

american politics is esentially a power struggle with the aim being to help those people who get you there.. and along the way bring some of the basic ideas of the party to the forefront. but it's just a power struggle.. different narratives with differet goals.  some will stoop lower, be more dispicable towards the poor, middle class.. anyone not 'elite'  when moving forward with their agenda.. 

 

but i still don't know what neoliberal means.   neocon was easy.. it was warhawks.. regime change etc.. under GWB. and then i'd have said neoliberal was a different big money concern, a different type of fascism.. but now i don't know.. and i don't think anyone else does either. we'll see what the next 5 years shapes up to be. 

 

edit: if you want a read a good well written but kind of dry book about it.. though dated.. read "America What went wrong?" it's a bit dated but ever so true and lays out how things are done in congress and washington.. to ebnefit the wealthy and the people who make the rules. 

 

https://www.amazon.com/America-Wrong-Donald-L-Barlett/dp/0836270010

Edited August 15, 2017 by ignatius

[thawkins]

 

 

 

Basically, neoliberalism to me is the prioritisation of rich people's incomes and money over the wellbeing of the people who actually work for them. It's the idea that things like health insurance and education should only go to those who can afford it, because "the free market has decided the poor aren't worth helping". I can agree that the philosophy behind the term isn't so bad, but the actual outcome is pretty shit.

 

 

 

 

i don't know how the word 'liberal' got attached to neo in this case but whatever.. i thin neo liberalism is 10 differen things depending on who you talk to.  but your idea about prioritizing rich people's incomes is not a new or particularly liberal idea.  it's just an elitist idea.  it's both republican and democratic at times depending on the politician but isn't by any means a uniting philosophy or agenda in either party..  well.. maybe that's not accurate.. but what i mean is other than 'tax cuts' for the rich in the republican party.. well.. the dems find other ways to give those breaks.. they just aren't as honest about it often.. but they do it i think. blah. 

 

i don't think i've seen a 'good' meaning accurate definition of what it is or might be.   if i was to try to define what i thought it means it'd be something completely different.

 

american politics is esentially a power struggle with the aim being to help those people who get you there.. and along the way bring some of the basic ideas of the party to the forefront. but it's just a power struggle.. different narratives with differet goals.  some will stoop lower, be more dispicable towards the poor, middle class.. anyone not 'elite'  when moving forward with their agenda.. 

 

but i still don't know what neoliberal means.   neocon was easy.. it was warhawks.. regime change etc.. under GWB. and then i'd have said neoliberal was a different big money concern, a different type of fascism.. but now i don't know.. and i don't think anyone else does either. we'll see what the next 5 years shapes up to be. 

 

edit: if you want a read a good well written but kind of dry book about it.. though dated.. read "America What went wrong?" it's a bit dated but ever so true and lays out how things are done in congress and washington.. to ebnefit the wealthy and the people who make the rules. 

 

https://www.amazon.com/America-Wrong-Donald-L-Barlett/dp/0836270010

 

 

I'm basically basing my definition of neoliberalism on what Wikipedia says. I only checked it out now, so if we assume the WP definition reflects some widely accepted standard, I should be good.

 

 

Neoliberalism (neo-liberalism)[1] refers primarily to the 20th-century resurgence of 19th-century ideas associated with laissez-faire economic liberalism.[2]:7 These include economic liberalization policies such as privatization, fiscal austerity, deregulation, free trade,[3] and reductions in government spending in order to increase the role of the private sector in the economy and society.

 

I'm not saying that prioritizing rich people's incomes is a neoliberal idea, rather it is an outcome of the current application of neoliberal ideas. In other words, the rich have benefitted from the free market to the point where they actually control the market in many cases (i.e. monopolies). I think what's happening now is that the people on top have optimized their business - by way of low wages and raising prices - to the point where the people who have no capital at all are just reduced to a desperate mass of job-seekers who have no choice but to work 2-3 jobs for shit pay. And when the lower classes start to complain, the response seems to be either ignore the problem ("America is already great", "Strong and stable government", etc.) or basically tell people that immigrants or some other minority are to be blamed, which is a divide & conquer type of strategy that's never worked out anywhere ever.

 

Thanks for the book suggestion.

Edited August 15, 2017 by thawkins

[Rubin Farr]

 

You can call Maher a douche, and he has been at times, but he draws credible lines here between stifling free speech from the left, and the right in America.

 

https://youtu.be/xI9tLozsDB4

Yeah I've always respected him, especially lately, because that off-putting vibe he gives off goes hand-in-hand with the way he does interviews and conversations, which is a lot more provocative and thought-provoking than most of his peers. Compared to the Daily Show or any of the late night talk shows hosted by liberals he actually encourages debate and discussion instead of just having a circle jerk of left wing Echo chamber venting.

 

I think he's pretty much dead-on in this clip. I'll forgive him generalizing Millennials because he wasnt sparing baby boomer Trump supporters either in his first bit from criticism and he was making a good point about how much social media has amplified missteps in the way many of this generation were raised.

 

I think he's most at on about how trumps when was a protest vote. If you get past the superficial appeal and the delusional promises everyone I've talked to who the Trump supporter just ends up revealing this vague, fragnented, cynical world view. The most offensive thing about his wind was that he wasn't some right-wing religious conservative, he was quite literally a "fuck you" vote to everyone else. I think what is so upsetting to me is that the people who are older, baby boomers, gen xers, they benefited and benefit from things like Social Security, unions, stronger public spending, better public school systems and cheaper higher education, etc. But they all think the world's kind of shit and they really don't care about everyone who's going to have to deal with it after they're gone. The GOP used to talk about fiscal and social restraint and conservatism but now they espouse this idea of washing their hands of any kind of responsibility for any issues and a real initiative to offer a different plan of action. Its just more "deregulate, defund, deflect" bullshit.

As much as I detest these neo Nazi shitheads and their rhetoric, we're already seeing domain services like Google, GoDaddy deregister hate group URLs, yes they are idiots, but free speech includes unpopular speech. I think this speaks to what Maher was saying about young people getting butt hurt to the point they want to sometimes ban what they don't agree with. That's still repression. Violence is not condoned on any level, but PC and SJW elements can't be allowed to dictate society, he is right about Generation Z coming up quickly, they will rebel against what they see as illogical, it will be an interesting next decade for sure. And now a historical quote for ya'll:

 

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" - Evelyn Beatrice Hall

[Squee]

 

 

You can call Maher a douche, and he has been at times, but he draws credible lines here between stifling free speech from the left, and the right in America.

 

https://youtu.be/xI9tLozsDB4

Yeah I've always respected him, especially lately, because that off-putting vibe he gives off goes hand-in-hand with the way he does interviews and conversations, which is a lot more provocative and thought-provoking than most of his peers. Compared to the Daily Show or any of the late night talk shows hosted by liberals he actually encourages debate and discussion instead of just having a circle jerk of left wing Echo chamber venting.

 

I think he's pretty much dead-on in this clip. I'll forgive him generalizing Millennials because he wasnt sparing baby boomer Trump supporters either in his first bit from criticism and he was making a good point about how much social media has amplified missteps in the way many of this generation were raised.

 

I think he's most at on about how trumps when was a protest vote. If you get past the superficial appeal and the delusional promises everyone I've talked to who the Trump supporter just ends up revealing this vague, fragnented, cynical world view. The most offensive thing about his wind was that he wasn't some right-wing religious conservative, he was quite literally a "fuck you" vote to everyone else. I think what is so upsetting to me is that the people who are older, baby boomers, gen xers, they benefited and benefit from things like Social Security, unions, stronger public spending, better public school systems and cheaper higher education, etc. But they all think the world's kind of shit and they really don't care about everyone who's going to have to deal with it after they're gone. The GOP used to talk about fiscal and social restraint and conservatism but now they espouse this idea of washing their hands of any kind of responsibility for any issues and a real initiative to offer a different plan of action. Its just more "deregulate, defund, deflect" bullshit.

As much as I detest these neo Nazi shitheads and their rhetoric, we're already seeing domain services like Google, GoDaddy deregister hate group URLs, yes they are idiots, but free speech includes unpopular speech. I think this speaks to what Maher was saying about young people getting butt hurt to the point they want to sometimes ban what they don't agree with. That's still repression. Violence is not condoned on any level, but PC and SJW elements can't be allowed to dictate society, he is right about Generation Z coming up quickly, they will rebel against what they see as illogical, it will be an interesting next decade for sure. And now a historical quote for ya'll:

 

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" - Evelyn Beatrice Hall

 

 

Yeaaaah, but I think we can draw a line in the sand when it comes to Nazi salutes. Everything that comes after that usually means one thing.

[thawkins]

 

As much as I detest these neo Nazi shitheads and their rhetoric, we're already seeing domain services like Google, GoDaddy deregister hate group URLs, yes they are idiots, but free speech includes unpopular speech. I think this speaks to what Maher was saying about young people getting butt hurt to the point they want to sometimes ban what they don't agree with. That's still repression. Violence is not condoned on any level, but PC and SJW elements can't be allowed to dictate society, he is right about Generation Z coming up quickly, they will rebel against what they see as illogical, it will be an interesting next decade for sure. And now a historical quote for ya'll:

 

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" - Evelyn Beatrice Hall

 

 

Unless I am mistaken, the free speech thing applies specifically to government restricting speech. It doesn't mean that private companies such as Google, Facebook, et al. are obligated to give a platform for something they don't want to.

Also, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence - even though under freedom of speech a nazi can spout their bullshit as much as they want, nobody is obligated to stay and listen and be quiet.

And that's before getting into the issue of good faith - I don't think people should be able to claim freedom of speech if a) they don't respect others' freedom of speech and b) have demonstrated that they're not acting in good faith and actually want to curb the freedoms of others.

[Rubin Farr]

I agree with you guys, peaceful demonstrations are really the only thing the US should tolerate, but remember the white power type marches, rallies, etc have been going on for over a century, so let them have their say as long as they behave, but that seems lost on these types, they feel violence is justified. That crosses the line. It's the same as abortion protesters, if they stay off private property and don't physically threaten or harm anyone, they have the 1st Amendment right to peacefully assemble, and I emphasize peacefully.

 

As far as web domains, aren't all .coms set up by private entities in America now? I'm not super web savvy, not sure about .net addresses either. But gov, edu, etc. are pretty strictly regulated by the Feds I believe. If you violate terms of service agreed to upon @ setup, yeah you're SOL complaining that your rights have been violated. I would guess that's what happened here.

[Lada Laika]

Free speech is protected, hate speech is not. Especially when that speech incites violence.

[maitake]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNN2aU3ADdM

[doublename]

Who is Baked Alaska ? And who is that haircut in the video?

 

Edit - found the cunt, nevermind.

Edited August 15, 2017 by doublename

[sweepstakes]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNN2aU3ADdM

That guy seems really sincere but did you see that link to that Vic Berger tweet in the comments?

https://twitter.com/VicBergerIV/status/897093928150761472

What the fuck?

[maitake]

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNN2aU3ADdM

That guy seems really sincere but did you see that link to that Vic Berger tweet in the comments?

https://twitter.com/VicBergerIV/status/897093928150761472

What the fuck?

 

 

Hmmmmmmm it does seem suspicious. 

[joshuatxuk]

Free speech is protected, hate speech is not. Especially when that speech incites violence.

 

 

 

 

As much as I detest these neo Nazi shitheads and their rhetoric, we're already seeing domain services like Google, GoDaddy deregister hate group URLs, yes they are idiots, but free speech includes unpopular speech. I think this speaks to what Maher was saying about young people getting butt hurt to the point they want to sometimes ban what they don't agree with. That's still repression. Violence is not condoned on any level, but PC and SJW elements can't be allowed to dictate society, he is right about Generation Z coming up quickly, they will rebel against what they see as illogical, it will be an interesting next decade for sure. And now a historical quote for ya'll:

 

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" - Evelyn Beatrice Hall

 

 

Also, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence - even though under freedom of speech a nazi can spout their bullshit as much as they want, nobody is obligated to stay and listen and be quiet.

 

Yeah freedom of speech is a two-way street. Double standards and selective outrage are the issues that keep cropping up. Right-wingers who call folks snowflakes always, always have some ridiculous hypocrisy regarding at least one issue where they get outraged over something that offends them. 

 

On the left the issue is misguided and misfired outrage instead of proactive criticism. I think that's the point Maher was making, he wasn't apologizing / playing devil's advocate for right-wing assholes as much as he was saying how out of hand SJWs were in needlessly targeting, and often ruining, the lives of people for saying dumb and offensive shit online. That's partly why I was actually kind of glad Gawker finally got backlash - they and many of their peers went from attacking truly horrible people to almost taking this schadenfreude approach to shaming people we should probably just ignore. Things are finally evening out slowly but there's still such a mess. 

 

Ironically for a country with such freedom of speech laws and limited, even non-existent censorship laws in place, it's almost more risky to say or do certain things openly without risking backlash from the public and/or the cable news media...who often seem to pick at random what stories to chase. Hell if there's ever a time to just step back before saying shit via social media it's now. It doesn't make you complacent to wrongs of the world, it prevents you from easily entering a black hole of anti-intellectual, anti-productive, mob stupidity online.

[ambermonk]

I just don't get why US politics seem to be in a perpetual pendulum swing. It's either extreme right or extreme left anymore. Shouldn't there be a happy middle ground?

[koolkeyZ865]

I just don't get why US politics seem to be in a perpetual pendulum swing. It's either extreme right or extreme left anymore. Shouldn't there be a happy middle ground?

Where's the extreme left? The only choices I see are extreme right wing neocons owned by corporations and center right neolib bureaucrats owned by corporations. There are a few exceptions obviously but there's not really that much to choose from

[joshuatxuk]

 

I just don't get why US politics seem to be in a perpetual pendulum swing. It's either extreme right or extreme left anymore. Shouldn't there be a happy middle ground?

Where's the extreme left? The only choices I see are extreme right wing neocons owned by corporations and center right neolib bureaucrats owned by corporations. There are a few exceptions obviously but there's not really that much to choose from

 

 

Yeah besides a few NE states and much of California the US is nowhere near as liberal as much of Europe or most of the developed world for that matter, both in terms of public services/taxes going toward a higher quality of life as well as liberal attitudes in general. There's a big divide between cities (even cities in red states) and rural areas in that regard as well economically, socially, etc.

 

Hell, we don't even have anything close to a full blown free market, instead we have some of the most costly yet inefficient social programs in the world. We spend the most on healthcare with the least amount of benefit. There are countries with open corruption and bribery that arguably work more efficiently than the US as a whole.

Shouldn't there be a happy middle ground?

 

I can understand what you mean by this. We used to have a much more centrist set of choices by the GOP and Dems in the past as well as clearly defined and more reasonable platforms. The GOP keeps going right and the Dems keep doubling down on the wrong issues.