News and Politics 2017 (General Political Discussion thread)

[wonderfly]

Here's how conservatives/Trump supporters view what occurred last night:




"Loyal" Republican John McCain strikes again.

In other news, Reince Preibus is out as White House Chief of Staff. This following the Scaramucci tirade against Preibus, (in regards to the White House leaks to the press), but I think this is also a reflection on the collapse of the Obamacare repeal bill, and it's just utterly apparent: Trump is once again sick of working with "inside the beltway" type Republicans (aka "Swamp Dwellers").

I'm reminded of back in October when Paul Ryan said "Forget Trump, we're going to focus on electing Republicans in Congress" and Trump said "Fine, I'll keep on campaigning without you". Well, Trump won that battle.

And now John Kelly (retired General) is the new Chief of Staff. What did I say previously? That Trump loves the military and Ex-military leaders (and the populists, aka the Steve Bannon and Scaramucci types). What did working with the "regular" Republicans get him? Early on, he ended up caving to concerns from the Preibus wing of his cabinet (aka the "regular" Republican wing), and so he fired Michael Flynn (another retired military guy, whom he really didn't want to fire). That started the Comey fiasco. So Trump fires Comey, and because Jeff Sessions (another "regular" Republican) stupidly recused himself from Russian investigations, the deputy FBI director (a Democrat) appointed the Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who is on a witch hunt.

The "Regular" Republicans have given him nothing but grief. Thus, we now witness the completion of the rise of the military generals and the "populists" like Bannon.

We'll see what happens next.

 

[MDawg]

The sociopath couldn't even last a month before he got fired.

Also, don't forget this important fact.

 

[stephane dumas]

Youtube really wants to jump the shark or even nuking the fridge by going into 1984 mode. https://www.engadget.com/2017/08/01/youtube-isolate-offensive-videos/
Vlogger Styxhexenhammer666 posted some interesting points then I agree on it.


Am I the only one who have fun to see how William Shatner expressed his distaste for social justice warriors(SJW)?

 

[MDawg]

GQ has the best headline to summarize what that fat, disgusting, old scumbucket baby is gonna be doing for over two weeks.

Newsweek pairs that up with an appropriate magazine cover for that foul slob of a non-human.

 

[stephane dumas]

The firing of a Google employee named James Damore due to a internal memo had created a big Streisand effect at Google.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech...ffices-response-controversial-memo/559603001/
The Wall Street Journal had a interview with James Damore.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-i-was-fired-by-google-1502481290

 

[CoolEric158]

A reminder to everyone Charlottesville is having a Neo-Nazi rally today, while our chauvinist pig of a president will be completely silent about ethnic cleansers parading on the streets. Is there even a reason to continue living?

 

[Peter Paltridge]

Behold the MOST OFFENSIVE MAGAZINE COVER EVER
https://www.yahoo.com/style/breitbart-editor-freaking-latest-vogue-cover-liberals-174958691.html

 

[Red Arrow]

What's offensive about it?

Does the US have many neo-nazis?

 

[MDawg]

The man I'm happy to call governor tells white supremacists to get out


Meanwhile, Nazi-appeasing baby does the spineless, cowardly act of saying "both sides are bad" and never mentions it was a terrorist act by white supremacists.

Such a weak, fat, disgusting blob of a reprehensible sub-human.

Even that ultimate of limp noodles, Marco Rubio called out the baby on this crap.

It's embarrassing when you're bottom-grader throws a shot at you. Of course he'll be running to sit at his side again within hours.

Oh and if you want to know about all the "brave" nazis and white supremacists who were at the rally, this thread is doing its best to identify each one so that everyone can properly know who these "heroes" are.

 

[ToonLoon]

Free speech should always be non-violent, and when there's terrorist groups like white supremacist, Neo Nazi's, BLM, and Antifa who want to do nothing but cause chaos and destruction, then these groups should not be protected under the first amendment.

While I think you go too far here, people have the right to demonstrate about whatever they want with the proper permits, it needs to be recognized that for the last year police have been refusing to do their jobs and keep the peace at nation-wide protests. They instead stand back and let the fireworks spark between opposing factions. Often because the cowardly mayor or police chief doesn't want bad press so they tell the police to stand down which allows protesters to do whatever they want and people get badly hurt (or killed) as a result. Maybe that will change, for the safety of everyone.

 

[MDawg]

The white supremacist terrorist (don't let them call it anything but terrorism, especially those who were adamant about "Radical muslim terrorists") who murdered a person and caused multiple injuries to others has been arrested. As much as I detest it, my state still has the death penalty and he definitely deserves it. Don't bother saying his name though. He doesn't deserve that attention. He should be forgotten as the trash he is.

In light of recent events, this clip from the anti-fascist movie made by the US military titled "Don't Be a Sucker" is incredibly relevant.

 

[Red Arrow]

Why did white supremacists kill a white person? Did she stand up for black people or something?

 

[Nobodyman]

Why did white supremacists kill a white person? Did she stand up for black people or something?

In a cosmic sense, it's because they're weak, desperate, confused people.

But to be more specific, it was actually one man who drove a car into the counter-protestors, so he wasn't targeting her specifically.

 

[wonderfly]

A reminder to everyone Charlottesville is having a Neo-Nazi rally today, while our chauvinist pig of a president will be completely silent about ethnic cleansers parading on the streets. Is there even a reason to continue living?

To start with, no matter what violence is committed in America, and no matter who is in the White House, I implore you to find that there is always a reason to live. We must find value in our lives outside of political/social upheaval. Enjoy time with friends or family, devote yourself to a hobby, discuss a cartoon on Toonzone.

To put it another way (and yes, I'm on the opposite end of the political spectrum): If I made it through 8 years of Obama, I urge you to endure making it through Year One of Trump.

Anyway, my thoughts on the reaction from the media and from Trump: I had heard about the incident and was shocked and saddened, but then I went to the CNN website on Saturday evening, and I was struck by the headline, which loudly proclaimed "TERRORIST ATTACK IN CHARLOTTESVILLE!". Or something like that. "TERROR!!!!" was definitely sprawled all over their website.

And I couldn't help but think: These are the same news outlets that would never proclaim an attack by Islamic fanatics was terrorism until all the facts were in. A guy with a machete chopping up people and yelling "Allah Akbar"? The mainstream media's approach has always been "Sorry, we need to wait and confirm this is Islamic extremism, because, you know, it could be "workplace violence" or it could be somebody that's mentally deranged, and we don't want to portray our news outlet as hateful towards Muslim minorities." And yet here, when it was a crowd protesting against white nationalists that gets struck, within minutes of it occurring, NOW the media's ready to shout the word "TERRORISM!!!!!!" ?? The double standard is strong with you, CNN.

And then there's the media's reaction to Trump, who openly condemned violence on all sides (because, you know, I do recall seeing both sides swinging punches in those videos of the riots) and yet somehow, because Trump doesn't use the words "White Supremacists", he didn't mean it? I mean, I get it: Obama never used the words "Islamic Extremist" or "Islamic Terror Attack", and was lambasted for it by conservatives, and so this is payback...it's petty and juvenile, and it's payback.

EDIT: A CNN article today: When is a crime a "hate crime", and when is it "terrorism". It's written from the left leaning point of view, so I don't agree with all of the conclusions, but it does reference a buch of the recent attacks from the last few years (from the Ft. Hood shooting back in 2009, to the killing of 9 people at a black church in South Carolina back in 2015).

There seems to be a push to call this incident in Charlottesville an act of "domestic terrorism". I would say if anything, it's a hate crime, like the Dylan Roof shooting of the black church. Classic "Terrorism" is when foreigners are attacking U.S. citizens, to try and get us to change our way of life, or to change our policy on interaction with other countries (like Bin Ladin flying a bunch of planes into buildings with the hope of having the U.S. pull out of the Middle East and let the terrorists take over). Similarly, "Domestic Terrorism" (like the Oklahoma City Bombing and the Atlanta Olympics bombing of 1996) are with the goal to get the U.S. government to change it's stance on whatever issue is bugging the terrorists.

But this...this is just some punk 20 year old racist driving a car. It belittles the horror of terrorist attacks to try and lump him in with Bin Ladin or Timothy McVeigh. Charge him with a hate crime and let's never see his face again.

 

[MDawg]

: If I made it through 8 years of Obama, I urge you to endure making it through Year One of Trump.

False equivalence in action. Obama didn't have a cadre of nazis and white supremacists in his cabinet and as his personal council and aides. He didn't have a dad who supported the KKK. "Oh no! I had to deal with a black president! Life was so hard for me! All those gay people getting the right to marry! It was a nightmare!"

it's petty and juvenile, and it's payback.

Standard GOP playbook crap hurts when it's directed towards your side, huh?

There seems to be a push to call this incident in Charlottesville an act of "domestic terrorism". I would say if anything, it's a hate crime, like the Dylan Roof shooting of the black church. Classic "Terrorism" is when foreigners are attacking U.S. citizens, to try and get us to change our way of life, or to change our policy on interaction with other countries (like Bin Ladin flying a bunch of planes into buildings with the hope of having the U.S. pull out of the Middle East and let the terrorists take over). Similarly, "Domestic Terrorism" (like the Oklahoma City Bombing and the Atlanta Olympics bombing of 1996) are with the goal to get the U.S. government to change it's stance on whatever issue is bugging the terrorists.

Someone willfully and purposefully plowed their car through a crowd of people just because they support support the rights of others and don't ascribe to the beliefs of the Nazis. I'd say that's terrorism, but you know, both sides are equally awful. Even that racist pile of garbage Jeff Sessions says it is domestic terrorism and he's still the US AG for the time being.

But this...this is just some punk 20 year old racist driving a car. It belittles the horror of terrorist attacks to try and lump him in with Bin Ladin or Timothy McVeigh. Charge him with a hate crime and let's never see his face again.

Calling him a punk and you probably wanted to say "kid' also is a way of trying to mitigate his actions. This man (and I use that term lightly cause he is anything but) purposefully and with full intent plowed a car into a crowd of people with the intent to cause terror. He is a full supporter of Hitler's ideas and actions and your side encourages and these actions by supporting or turning a blind eye to the growing problem in the red house.

The way out is simple, fully denounce, reject and attack anyone with Nazi, white supremacist or fascist thinking. Drive them out of your party and your lives. (Superman did it in the 1940s when they revealed actual secret KKK information on the radio show, making a mockery of the group) Don't let them gain a larger foothold because you don't like black people or gays or women or anyone else getting the same opportunities you have. Pettiness and "I got mine" philosophies that drive the current GOP platforms are never going to "Make America Great Again." Be better for the next generation so they're not poisoned by this way of thinking like those before. This political cartoon from Dr. Seuss in the 1940s rings true more than ever today. Don't let it happen again because of your choices.

 

[wonderfly]

False equivalence in action. Obama didn't have a cadre of nazis and white supremacists in his cabinet and as his personal council and aides. He didn't have a dad who supported the KKK. "Oh no! I had to deal with a black president! Life was so hard for me! All those gay people getting the right to marry! It was a nightmare!"

And yet we were told Obama's attending Reverent Wrights Anti-White, Anti-America church for 20 years was a non-story, and the Obama Justice Department refusing to prosecute Black Panthers involved in voter intimidation had nothing to do with race.

But I wasn't speaking in terms of specific actions with that quote, I was just speaking in general about "living your life while a person you don't like is President over your country".

Someone willfully and purposefully plowed their car through a crowd of people just because they support support the rights of others and don't ascribe to the beliefs of the Nazis. I'd say that's terrorism, but you know, both sides are equally awful. Even that racist pile of garbage Jeff Sessions says it is domestic terrorism and he's still the US AG for the time being.

I disagree with the attorney general. I can see no difference in the actions here compared to the actions committed by the man who shot up the black church in 2015, and that wasn't considered "terrorism".

 

[ToonJay723]

And then there's the media's reaction to Trump, who openly condemned violence on all sides (because, you know, I do recall seeing both sides swinging punches in those videos of the riots) and yet somehow, because Trump doesn't use the words "White Supremacists", he didn't mean it?

To solve a problem, you have to be able to state what the problem is, or at least say the name. ...but the name is there, it's radical Islamic terror, and before you solve it you have to say the name.

I repeat, "...before you solve it, you have to say the name." Donald Trump did not say "White nationalist terror", or "Nazi terror" therefore he does not want to problem to be solved. So either Trump supports these groups, or he just wants to watch America burn.

You too need to say the names. I've already called them out (both opposing sides) as terrorists. You need to do so too, like Donald Trump suggested last October.

 

[MDawg]

I disagree with the attorney general. I can see no difference in the actions here compared to the actions committed by the man who shot up the black church in 2015, and that wasn't considered "terrorism".

The difference is this encourages and enables nazis. The deafening silence from the orange scumbucket means he approves in their opinion.

 

[wonderfly]

I repeat, "...before you solve it, you have to say the name." Donald Trump did not say "White nationalist terror", or "Nazi terror" therefore he does not want to problem to be solved. So either Trump supports these groups, or he just wants to watch America burn.

He called for all sides to stop the violence. Now you may say that didn't go far enough to address it, but I fail to see how that correlates to Trump supporting Nazi's or that he just wants to watch America burn.

The difference is this encourages and enables nazis. The deafening silence from the orange scumbucket means he approves in their opinion.

We were also told that Trump's words during the Presidential campaign encourage ISIS and the KKK. I maintain such organizations are going to carry on with their plans regardless of who's President.

I think this is the media playing "GOTCHA!" word games with the President, an example of a person not speaking as eloquently as a normal crafty politician, and then inserting a hidden meaning from what was left unsaid. But that's just me.

At any rate, he today came out and condemned White Supremacists, KKK, and the Neo-nazis. Now you may say it took him almost 48 hours to come out and denounce them, and that's too long, but the Presidency is hardly ever that reactionary. A President doesn't just give a speech, goes into the backroom to see how it's being interpreted on the news, and then rushes back out to the podium to say "Sorry, to clarify: Neo-nazis are evil". It doesn't really work like that.

 

[ToonJay723]

A President doesn't just give a speech, goes into the backroom to see how it's being interpreted on the news, and then rushes back out to the podium to say "Sorry, to clarify: Neo-nazis are evil". It doesn't really work like that.

So you're just going to pretend this never happened?