
Originally Posted by
sugilite
YAWN, same applies to the right, same team player roles. But fucking hell, all I was saying is the vast population of voting constituents do not give a huge fuck about anything that happens outside of the united states, yet alone of reaching the threshhold of anything remotely like what levvit was calling them. Did you transfer this part of the conversation/move the goal posts to this drivel in order to bore me into submission? Serious question.
Except it doesn't. And just a simple experiment on this, assuming for the minute that Fascism is extreme-right wing - can you find a parliamentarian who is an open Fascist - as in says "I am a fascist" or belongs (or did belong) to a Fascist organization?
Because I can find plenty that are open Socialists and Communists.
Both ideologies have enough corpses buried under their name that both should be inexcusable.

Originally Posted by
sugilite
Compared to the VAST resources at the IDFs disposal, the other side has jack shit to fight back with in the first place. Removing 86 percent of the food crops then blocking aid is genocide. You can pretend it is not if you want.
And? They are still fighting back. If they stop fighting, then so will Israel, if they keep fighting, then so will Israel. Disparity of Force is not my concern.
Don't get me wrong - I am not happy about the situation, it's been going on my entire life and since the creation of Israel. When both sides believe the existence of the other is an existential threat to them - then there isn't much room for negotiation. So at this point - let them have at each other until one side emerges victorious.
Oh - and if you want - I would be more than happy to see not a penny more in Aid sent to Israel.

Originally Posted by
sugilite
Your point sure brings into sharp focus how your morals allow you to be such a fan of the criminal in chief.
According to you, it is not the super rich class that has had it's thumb on the political scale in ensuring themselves an endless supply of cheap migrant labor to exploit. Oh no, it is those loud mouth leftie windbags whose howling indignation's and protestations are about as effective as pissing into a headwind. Yep, they are the real problem huh

Let's for a moment agree (for the sake of this point) that yes, all the Billionaires are colluding to bring in foreign migrants.
The first question is which President tried to limit Migration (illegal and legal) and which one didn't? Between Trump and Biden, it's pretty clear.
The second question is which side is trying to impede the efforts of ICE to deport illegal migrants with criminal histories?
Double irony points for those same people opposing ICE will vociferously agree with you that it is the Billionaires rigging the system whilst doing the very thing that the Billionaires want.

Originally Posted by
sugilite
Maybe not in the prisons - but the Citizenry aren't getting murdered - which is pretty good.

Originally Posted by
sugilite
No masked agents in unmarked vans etc either. I have no problem with properly marked/uniformed officers nabbing and deporting them at all.
I get the sentiment here - and I agree, I do not like anonymous law enforcement on principle. However, given the actions of organized criminal elements (the Cartels) and how they are not above targetting people's families - this one I have to accept.
Of course - if the US was able to leverage it's Military power and eradicate the Cartels to the point that they did not dare target federal agents and their families - then maybe they could go openly.

Originally Posted by
sugilite
My point is, if trump goes to far, to fast in transferring his supporters wealth to himself and other billionaire mates - and he is at this point, it will be his own followers most likely to rise against a tyrant. Check this out, I can see a point in it where he lets his guard slip just for a moment. He is freaked out at just how many have turned against him already. A real reality check for him.
He looks more like a dad irritated at trying to do something important and being disrespected - but that's just my view.
There was a different clip I saw, about Chinese University students, I believe it was a Fox clip where the reporter was grilling him about it. He tried to make the business case that without foreign students some universities will fail - the reported replied 'And?' or something similar. Trump wasn't too happy.

Originally Posted by
sugilite
Hmm, TDL "Justice" is tiered , interesting.
But if course you are right, even though they were let out wholesale - all they did was smash in police heads with fire extinguishes and so on, started building a gallows to hang the vice president. I can see it from your view now, just minor stuff huh. Just let them face justice after another group of subhuman lefties get theirs first

Let's for a moment assume that this was an accurate portrayal of events - Someone with zero history of criminal offending being involved in one riot is not the same as someone with a well documented history of violent assaults.

Originally Posted by
sugilite
The fact is, the meat and potatoes of that was the actual interesting subject regarding presidents abuse of the pardon system and do they deserve to have that power if all they do is abuse it? But here you are whining about the left - again.
Pardons are, IMO, the final check and balance against the judiciary. If you want the philosophical view - it is that people can be technically guilty of a crime (as written by law) but morally innocent - and that the head of State has the ultimate delegated power to weigh that.
As such, I believe that Pardons for the January 6 rioters is well within a Presidents remit. Regardless how you feel about it.

Originally Posted by
sugilite
I deleted the your "if" statements and decided not to debate things I do not have a full understanding of - having never walked a mile in their shoes - something I suspect you have not done either - but somehow you feel you know enough to speak for an entire genre of people and psycho analyze all of them and pronounce judgement.
The If was there for a reason - it depends on how you quantify 'Different'.
We can talk about the baseline concept of Legal equality - whereby all people are equal before the law.
However if the goal is total equality between the Sexes, then the prescence of differences is a fundamental problem for this goal.
This is not speaking for an entire genre of people - this is talking about an incompatibility of the philosophy with reality.
And to make it clearer what I am talking about - The initial grievances of Feminism (Suffrage, Right to work, Equal Pay, Legalized discrimination) all fall under the idea of equality before the law - something that most people, including myself, agree with.
But take something like Sport - If you want to watch the absolute fastest/strongest human being, it will always be a Man. That holds a prestige that being the fastest/strongest woman will never have. That prestige has real-world consequences.
Can you equalize between the two? In some senses, you can - you can appreciate the drive and dedication from the top female athletes... But do you feel the same awe at seeing Lucy Underdown Deadlifting 325 KG as you do from seeing Eddie Hall being the first human to lift half a tonne?
And this is where I say Feminism has painted itself into a corner: If they admit that Men and Women are different - someone can make the argument of "Since Men are Y and Women are X, therefore Men should do A and Women should do B", That argument is anathema to Feminism so they are stuck saying there are no differences at all and therefore Men and Women are completely interchangeable.

Originally Posted by
sugilite
Just to reiterate, a huge percentage of your reply just came across as unbalanced whinging about the left as if the right does not have politically symmetrical pitfalls and failings. Look under the wiring, past the symptoms. Look at the class of the people that really run the show - and all their lovingly crafted hate packages they are pedaling and the ridiculous amount of people buying into said hatred. Do I need to say by both sides at this point? Sheesh.
You can have all the propaganda you want both Hate and Pride/Acceptance - but there is no smoke without fire.
For example:
People don't hate Immigrants, people don't like seeing negative changes in their community - caused by people who do not hold the same values.
Physics; Thou art a cruel, heartless Bitch-of-a-Mistress
Bookmarks