/baw/ - General Discussion

The brave people of this thread will sure defeat the evil nazis by posting.

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. To wit, Trump's recent firing spree echoes the action of another time:

//youtube.com/watch?v=7Ipr6wBuDRY

>>413373

Time stamp that didn't translate in the auto-link: 2h26m34s

>>413372
Nazism can't be beaten by allowing it to be normalized out of apathy, no matter how much you like to pretend that not giving a shit about what's going on around you is a virtue.

Daniel Ragsdale, the acting director of ICE, has been replaced by Thomas Homan.

Ragsdale was targeted by Breitbart last year.

Once again, Steve Bannon is using Donald Trump as a tool to destroy the government.

https://twitter.com/BraddJaffy/status/826289204271411201

Trump is... Keeping Obama's protections of LGBT employees.

Good Donald. That's... A good Donald. Hm.

So let's see what the SCOTUS pick is like.

>>413377

He does not need an EO to undo those protections.

He needs only to sign the First Amendment Defense Act, which Congress will pass.

Also: The statement's bit about protecting LGBTQ people from "violence and oppression" is a dogwhistle — "we will kill Muslims and say it was to protect you", in other words.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/seal-american-girl-die-first-trump-era-u-s-military-n714346

Jeez, it's almost like this administration is militarily incompetent.

https://twitter.com/dorseyshaw/status/826536746011807744

That slow pan out at the end to reveal Giuliani is amazing

Gorsuch is another Scalia, and every D senator must stay mindlessly opposed until the filibuster is nuked, or face an immediate letter of condemnation from the rest. Mindless obstruction.

>>413372
>The brave people of this thread will sure defeat the evil nazis by posting.
Maybe if they smash passersby in the back of the head with a blunt object, like a padlock or a wrench.

Surely causing brain damage to strangers stops a political party from 1939, right?

>>413377
>protections of LGBT employees.
IM ORGANIZING A PROTEST AGAINST THIS IN WASHINGTON GUYS WE CANT LET THIS NAZI GET AWAY WITH IT. HE ALSO CANCELLED TPP WHICH PISSED OFF SO MANY INNOCENT BABY CEO! TRUMP STOPPED LOBBYING, CAN YOU IMAGINE? NO PRESIDENT WAS THIS EVIL!

>>413415

>IM ORGANIZING A PROTEST AGAINST THIS

So you plan to organize or join protests against the First Amendment Defense Act (a bill that will legalize anti-gay discrimination) either before Congress passes it or after Trump signs it?

>>413413
Well, that sucks. Who came up with the pipeline anyway?

Also, this whole story reminds me of Hitchhiker's Guide. Why weren't people aware of the project before it was approved?

>>413420

I imagine there was some opposition before the Native Americans started standing against it, but the whole "this pipeline will be running through Native American lands largely without their approval" thing and the subsequent protests raised visibility.

>>413420
Likely because their tribal government screwed them over for quick cash. Yeah turns out that leaving native americans alone in reservations didn't mean they would exactly develop the best systems of government possible.

And now they're complaining to the federal government, blaming white people, and not holding their own tribal governments to account. So this will happen again.

>>413422
This is very interesting to hear.

Can you back that up?

*and they followed procedure.

Jorge Castañeda Gutman threatens America with Cartel violence.
//youtube.com/watch?v=hoZEGd6lrxI
I think it's time we invade Mexico and overthrow their government.

>>413423
>Likely
It's a guess, I don't know anything about the problem.

>>413424
The pipeline will leak, it will cause massive damage to innocent people, and taxpayers will take care of the bill.

It's a law of nature at this point. Trickle down never works. The media will always be called pro-left no matter how unfair it is to Democrats. Pipelines will leak.

>>413427
>The pipeline will leak
Well someone is pessimistic. Or... maybe someone is planning to make it leak. I think I'm going to archive this website in case an Eco Terrorist should blow up the pipeline. Just in case.

>>413428
Bit tobacco and big oil are in it together? Never thought I'd see genuine hippie tinfoil again, I thought your drug fueled conspiracy theories ended in the 80s. Wonder what fresh powder is fueling them now.

>accusing anonymous image board posters of planning to sabotage the pipeline while calling them conspiracy theorists

Why do people still reply to /pol/-kun?

>>413430

Because he's dumb and we're bored.

>>413431
>>413430
Most terrorism is committed by Islamic terrorists.
Second most? Socialist eco terrorists.
Excuse me if I don't trust you.

>>413432
Now we're counting words? How many times did Obama say I, I, I, I, me, me, me, in his GTFO speech?

>>413433
>Most terrorism is committed by Islamic terrorists.
>Second most? Socialist eco terrorists.
lol nope
>Now we're counting words? How many times did Obama say I, I, I, I, me, me, me, in his GTFO speech?
the deflection is strong in this one

>>413427
I meant back up that the n.americans' government betrayed their own people.

>>413434
You've been deflecting for 8 years.

>>413438
Diplomats are never told the full picture for the same reason press secretaries aren't, plausible deniability and the fact that they literally can't know everything.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-congress-regulations-idUSKBN15G5QZ

my, how convenient

>>413439
The fuck are you on about? Do you not know who Frederick Douglass is either, Misha?

>>413441
I know he's a black dude the leftists worship, I don't really care about him beyond that.

I assume it's some cliche, black guy being normal, reading books, writing books, dressing normally, you know like everyone else.

Leftists lose their shit at the sight of it, because deep down leftists are racist bigots and think far less of blacks, leftists think its exceptional when black people act normally.

Am I close?

I just want to thank /pol/-kun for making us all feel better about our own intelligence by showing off how little he knows about literally everything every time he talks. This latest Frederick Douglass thing is a fine example of him showing off how the rise of Trump is really just a symptom of the failure of public education to reach idiots,.

>>413442

He was a former slave who escaped and became a leader of the abolitionist movement (not to mention a living argument against the idea that Black people were too dumb to be independent citizens). One minute of reading his Wikipedia entry could have told you that. You could not even bother to look him up on Wikipedia.

I would say you should feel ashamed, but we all know you have no sense of shame. You cannot feel embarassed or humiliated. You cannot even feel guilt. At this point, the only thing you seem to feel is nothing. Would you be willing to talk about how 4chan destroyed your sense of sincerity and made you a heartless shitposter who can only laugh at the pain and misery of others?

>>413442
Yes, you are exactly right. Frederick Douglass is still alive, just like Trump and Spicer seem to think.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/no-gday-mate-on-call-with-australian-pm-trump-badgers-and-brags/2017/02/01/88a3bfb0-e8bf-11e6-80c2-30e57e57e05d_story.html

Fucker can't even get along with Australia

So remember how Clinton's no-fly zone in Syria would lead to threats of invading Mexico and a war with all of Islam and maybe even China?

>>413447

And how Hillary was planning to give white nationalists and militia groups in the US free reign to do whatever by concentrating all anti-extremism efforts on "radical Islamic terrorism"?

>>413448
At least you don't blindly follow one "side". Bravo, sire.

>>413444
>He was a former slave who escaped and became a leader of the abolitionist movement
>a living argument against the idea that Black people were too dumb to be independent citizens
What do you know, I was right.

>You could not even bother to look him up on Wikipedia.
Because why should I fucking care?

All leftists heroes are essentially minorities doing normal things.
All leftists suffer from the bigotry of low expectations.

>>413447
>>413448
Remember when Mexico threatened to invade us with cartel? Remember when the middle east was totally destabilized? Remember when antifa and blm thugs are going around torturing folks beating people up in the streets?

You don't have to try hard to remember, it's happening as we fucking speak.

It's really quite curious how Trump supporters all seem to have problems with famous black people and those opposed to fascism.

>>413450

>All leftists heroes are essentially minorities doing normal things.

Douglass escaped the slavery into which the majority of Black people were born or forced into at the time, became known as a great orator — better than even Northerners thought he could ever be because of his race — and helped lead the abolitionist movement. King marched against white supremacy and the gross mistreatment of Black people in America, knowing that he risked his life by doing so — oh, and he also preached non-violent resistance toward unjust laws and racist assholes like the cops that beat people at Selma. (A lot of people forget that "resistance" part.) You can look back on those things with the benefit of hindsight and say "that's normal behavior" or "you have low standards if you think that's heroic". But back in their respective times, Douglass and King did extraordinary things for men who were second- or even third-class citizens in a country built partially upon a disdain for Black people. You have expressed a grave ignorance of what those two men accomplished and who they were as both Black men and Americans. Find the courage to learn more about their lives, to learn why they are regarded as civil rights heroes and great Americans. Do not venerate them with blind (and vaguely racist) platitudes about "doing normal things" just so you can dilute their legacies and make them palatable for White people.

>>413451
It's funny how you label a racist everyone who criticizes you for being immoral.

>>413452
You have expressed a grave ignorance for the hundreds of thousands of European-Americans who didn't just talk about it, they fought and died to end slavery. None of these people are civil rights heroes, because their skin tone isn't dark enough for your expectations to be lowered.

Do you know how many British ships, and how much British gold was sunk into ending slave trade across oceans? Until 2007 Europeans have fought to stop African countries from practicing slavery, we bribed them until they officially stopped. Some Arab nations still OPENLY practice slavery. Which is ironic because you'll probably defend Africans, Arabs and Islam to your death, while spitting on the only culture to ever stop slavery. You want to fight fascism and slavery? Go to the Middle East and Africa, if you dare.

You're also probably misinformed enough to be surprised by this but, news flash, not all slaves are black throughout history. Blacks weren't all slaves even in America, where the majority of slaves were European or East Asian, two groups that are highest performing in American society today.

>>413454
No credit for stopping slavery you started. No credit for not starting slavery in the first place.

Military officials say Trump ordered Yemen mission without enough intel, ground support or prep. That Benghazi came fast.

>>413454
He didn't actually call you racist, you just inferred it because of the fact that you consider knowing important figures in civil rights history to be beneath you and are afraid that most rational people would consider that to be racist. Because deep in your heart even you know that your white supremacy isn't popular with the mainstream--it's why you come up with "secret terms" to mask your philosophy, like calling misogyny "Men's Rights" and calling racism "Ethnic Realism" and calling being sexually frustrated "GamerGate" and calling your fascist movement "the alt-right."

>>413454
sorry but i'm not buying any history lessons from someone who doesn't even know who frederick douglass is

>>413456
Don't forget calling sexism, misandry and mewling cynicism "evopsych".

>>413455
Are you seriously ignorant enough to think Europeans started slavery?

>Military officials say Trump ordered Yemen mission without enough intel, ground support or prep.
Which military officials? SEAL team itself says that despite being able to abort, they entered knowing the situation had changed, and weren't ordered in. This is what they do.

Although I'm sure you'd be just fine if he went the Obama method and carpet bombed the place.

>>413457
>american history is only history
Do you know who Julian Stachiewicz is?

>>413458
>newborn babies are misandrist because they choose colors/toys according to gender
>newborn babies are sexist because they choose colors/toys according to gender
I don't get what mewling cynicism is about.

>>413456
Funny how people I think you are also happen to be retarded. I'm not calling you retarded, just the entire group of people I think you're in. This would mean you're retarded by inference, I'm just not directly calling you that.

>>413454

>You have expressed a grave ignorance for the hundreds of thousands of European-Americans who didn't just talk about it, they fought and died to end slavery.

Allow me to steal a line from Paul Heyman circa this past Monday: "Yeah, but."

Did a White American end slavery? Yeah, but the settlers, colonizers, Founding Fathers, and White Americans up to the time of emanicpation were the ones who forced Africans and their American-born descendants into slavery. Does Lincoln deserve the credit for freeing the slaves? Yeah, but White Americans as a whole do not deserve credit for one man freeing slaves into lives of third-class citizenry. Has America made strides toward better treatment of Black Americans? Yeah, but consider how many Black people had to suffer and die to win both their freedom and the basic civil rights that all White people were guaranteed by law before the Civil Rights Movement — and how many Black people still suffer at the hands of racist policing, racist politicians, racist policies, and racist White people who still think Black people should have to sit at the back of the bus (if they even think Black people should be on the bus to begin with).

Are you going to rebut this with a bunch of bullshit that furthers the idea of you being a white supremacist? Yeah, but no one here is going to take you all that seriously. Now go on and be a little Richard Spencer wannabe. Maybe you might convince us not to report you for being a blight upon these threads, you alt-whiner.

>>413459
You don't really understand how inference works, so you? Not a surprise from someone who, given that he didn't know who Frederick Douglas is, probably didn't graduate high school.

>>413455
>Military officials say Trump ordered Yemen mission without enough intel, ground support or prep.

Hoping this story blows up tomorrow. I'm afraid it's been overshadowed by the hoopla over him leaving unannounced for an "off-the-record" location that turned out to be the return of the Navy SEAL's remains.

And the golf club lawsuit he lost today.

>>413462
And threatening war on Mexico

>>413463
And putting Iran "on notice." And pooping his pants over Australia. And radio silence on the fighting in Ukraine.

You know, it's starting to seem like this Trump guy doesn't understand his job.

>>413465
The more time you spend in this thread, the stronger that feeling gets.

>>413465

He does not have to understand it. If he delegates power to people like Bannon, Trump would not need to carry it out in full. He needs only to look like the man in charge while his cronies do all the work. His ego needs the appearance of having power to survive.

He went to a prayer breakfast and asked people to pray for The Apprentice because ratings bad. And non-aggressively and casually told a chaplain "To hell with it" in response to something.

That raid that killed an 8-year old American and a SEAL? Obama refused because of discouraging intel.

I expect the BENGHAZI people to demand a full hearing withing the week.

>>413460
Rival tribes captured and enslaved those Africans, and forced them into slavery, Europeans had nothing to do with it.

Lincoln did not "free the slaves", one man couldn't have possibly freed slaves against the wishes of ALL OTHER AMERICANS.

I've considered how many Africans had to suffer and die to win their freedom.
Now you consider how many Africans kept suffering and dying in Africa for centuries after African-Americans gained their freedom, because their fellow Africans would not die to free them.
Now you consider the far larger number of Europeans that had to suffer and die to win freedom for slaves everywhere and of all colors. Isn't it nobler to fight for someone elses rights than your own? One is altruism, the other is just self interest.

Actually non-blacks weren't guaranteed civil rights, as I said before most slaves were European and East Asian. European men did not have universal right to vote until 1870, when they received it along with men of other ethnicities.
European women were enfranchised at roughly the same period, starting in west coast in 1869 until the last state holdout in 1920.
In 1965 European-Americans gained the right to vote without paying a poll tax, along with African-Americans.
In 1971 European-Americans gained the right to vote after 18 years of age, along with African-Americans.
Most of the civil rights strides happened concurrently with all races and sexes, with a ridiculously small variance in time period for different group, in 99% of cases no variance at all.

And the civil rights movement didn't emancipate slaves, moron.

>BLM bullshit
What's the number of unarmed blacks that get shot. What's the number of unarmed whites that get shot. What's the number of police interactions for each subgroup.

>racist White people who still think Black people should have to sit at the back of the bus
Do you want to have an honest discussion about the Leftist obsession with segregation?

>>413466
Ironically also true of exposure to other hallucinogens.

>>413468
>That raid that killed
The raid didn't kill the 8 year old girl or the SEAL, terrorists killed them both. The SEAL volunteered knowing the danger, and that girls mother took her into an Al Qaeda headquarters, I'm not seeing where Trump gets the blame for their deaths.

Also ironic considering you're perfectly fine with Obama executing that girls American father without a trial, where he actually does get the blame because it wasn't a terrorist that pulled the trigger but Obama ordering a drone operator to do it.

Just a question: Would it have been better if Trump bombed the place from a drone, Obama-style? Then there'd be no dead SEAL, and the girls remains (as well as a few hundred other civilians) would be vaporized so you wouldn't know about that.

Ignorance is bliss.

>Jerry Falwell Jr. to lead education task force, expected to focus on campus sexual assault regulations

White male incel libertarians and fascists are going to be real happy. Millions of White men that are left useless and unwanted (because women are allowed to have jobs and don't need to sell their bodies through marriage to low-grade men to survive) are going to be able to force their way into the gene pool.

>>413469
Don't argue with Mr Stephen on politics, he is currently high on political debate, and "fighting the evil racist sexist nazis". It gives him purpose in life.

Yes, you are correct, but he will not listen.

>>413469
>The SEAL volunteered knowing the danger

And ultimately Trump killed him by being unintelligent and unfit. Or rather, Trump's voters did by being unintelligent and unfit for democracy and American citizenship.

>Also ironic considering you're perfectly fine with Obama executing that girls American father without a trial, where he actually does get the blame because it wasn't a terrorist that pulled the trigger but Obama ordering a drone operator to do it.

I am. Drones are a bad business but still the best way to deal with terrorists from an ethical and economical standpoint. Don't be such a weakling.

>>413468
>I expect the BENGHAZI people to demand a full hearing withing the week.

I don't expect this because I don't give them enough credit to assume they were motivated by anything but naked partisan politics.

//youtube.com/watch?v=p3fT6pnhjJA

>>413472
So wait killing civilians and terrorists in a drone strike is morally different from killing civilians and terrorist with a SEAL strike? How?

Do you realize those SEALs recovered vital documents from the headquarters?

>>413474
>>413473
Benghazi is the State Department refusing to send protection to a beseiged embassy.

This is a SEAL dying while performing his duties.

If you think the second is a scandal you're fucking retarded.

It is a scandal because the cracker sent them in with insufficient intelligence because it thinks it knows more than the generals, and you other crackers and submental dirt-movers and liabilities believed it because it was White and wore a suit.

Also, an Osprey that could have paid for the NEA budget got destroyed.

>>413476
>If you think the second is a scandal you're fucking retarded.
>
If you think an incompetent president getting SEALs killed unnecessarily because he doesn't understand basic strategy and doesn't listen to intelligence briefings isn't a scandal then you're an awful human being.

He was tweeting while the raid was going on, instead of being in the situation room.

When SJWs, the educated and non-Whites get their way, the president is admired all over the world and radiates dozens of positive qualities everywhere she goes.

When non-educated Whites prevail, the president is a treasonous, lazy, infantile rapist without a single redeeming quality that is only appreciated by the subhuman congregation of cultureless apes that call themselves "Russians". The White western part of the world is irrevocably lost and that is for the better. Evolutionary selection is coming for us.

>>413479
>non-educated Whites prevail
If supposedly dump people got in power, where were the "smart" ones? Doesn't that make smart people into idiots?

>>413480
Smart people are rare. The redeemable, non-retarded ones got duped by Comey.

>>413480
>If supposedly dump people got in power, where were the "smart" ones?
Gerrymandered in such a way to ensure that three million of their votes got thrown away.

>>413476
>This is a SEAL dying while performing his duties.

No, it's an incompetent sending troops into a mission that was doomed to fail from the start because he has no attention span and doesn't give a shit about doing his job if it's not immediately self-gratifying, which is why we have military officials leaking about it and laying the blame at his feet.

>>413484

>be more respectful towards the president

If criticizing Trump somehow equates to "treason", what were all those effigies of Obama with nooses around their necks — "mild suggestions about public policy"?

>>413485
Come on, two wrongs don't make a right.

They make a left.

>>413486
>two wrongs don't make a right.

It does all the time. For example, maceing White subhumans that don't deserve California and teaching Berkeley the financial and reputational costs of inviting nazis to campus ensured Milo couldn't tell the SS where the undocumented students are on stage. That's a "wrong" response to a wrong situation, resulting in something wonderful.

So retract, you milk-hearted cuntsoul.

>>413487

On the other hand, it brought shitloads of attention to Milo, who will now be held up as something of a martyr of his cause.

(If Berkeley had never approved his appearance in the first place, however, he would not have gotten nearly as much attention. So that shit is on them.)

Arkansas just passed a law that will let a rapist sue his victim for having an abortion.

But let's make sure we fight radical islamists so they don't make life worse for our precious females.

>>413484
>Please be more respectful towards the president, you racist.
As the BEST president (Teddy Roosevelt) said, criticizing, ridiculing, and in all ways disrespecting the president is not only the right of every American, but a form of patriotism.

It's no coincidence that the worst president (Donald Trump) is working so hard to undo the great work of the best president, like downsizing the national parks program.

>>413489

The bill (now law) bans the most common form of abortion in the second trimester by turning the performance of such an abortion into a felony. Oh, and it gives a woman's spouse, parent, or guardian the right to sue an abortion provider to prevent the woman from ever having an abortion (and win monetary damages, if possible). And as implied by your post, the bill contains no exceptions for rape or incest. While the bill prohibits a father from winning monetary damages in the event of rape or incest, it does not prevent that father from suing to have the abortion stopped.

Under this law, a husband could rape his wife, file a lawsuit to force her into giving birth, and keep his parental rights if he is not convicted of raping her. And Arkansas just made sure that is now a situation that could actually happen. I can only hope the ACLU and other legal groups get that law stopped before it goes into full effect.

>>413487
>So retract, you milk-hearted cuntsoul.
Alright, lets be honest, I agree. No one deserves California, hell itself has banned that punishment.

>>413491
>Under this law, a husband could rape his wife, file a lawsuit to force her into giving birth, and keep his parental rights if he is not convicted of raping her.
Gee, who in the current administration would have a personal reason to want to see marital rape laws still allow him to push around the wife he raped but wasn't convicted for thanks to a technicality of law?

>>413493

In the tiniest bit of fairness to the living Cheetoh, his being in office only emboldened the Arkansas legislature to pass this bill into law. He did not write it or personall help pass it. I understand the desire to rip on Trump for every little thing, but do not act as if he personally had something to do with this one. (That said, I doubt he would disapprove of this law.)

https://twitter.com/joesonka/status/827344429086289921

where were you when bowling green massacre was happen?
i was at home eating cereal when kellyanne ring
"green bowling is kill"
"no"

>>413495

How dare she bring up the Bowling Green Massacre just to score political points. What a fucking bitch.

>>413491
>a rapist could
>if he is not convicted of raping her.
Wow so if a criminal gets away with a crime, that's actually bad?

I didn't know that.

We should make a law that makes it illegal for criminals to get away with crimes!

>>413497
This will incentivize juries and judges to declare rapists not guilty in case he seems like the only one ready to sue to save the fetus. Southern Christians, even judges, can't be trusted with any civic duty or decency.

>>413498
This is your personal opinion, and weird conspiracy theory.

You realize just thinking about it doesn't actually make it real, right?

>>413499

It is really not a conspiracy theory. If people who are anti-abortion will literally kill people to stop abortions, I can believe they would let a rapist go free to prevent an abortion — doubly so in a case of spousal rape.

>>413500
I get it.

We should disbar all christian judges because of anti abortion assaults, disbar all muslim judges because of islamic terrorism, disbar all jewish judges because of gaza, disbar all latino judges because of cartels, and disbar all black and female judges because of assata shakur.

Great plan, you're a genius, only white, male, atheist judges allowed.

Because people that look similar think the same thoughts.

>>413502

The "pro-life" side of the abortion debate has a long history of going beyond mere debate. They have harassed women trying to get an abortion, bombed abortion clinics, and — in a few rare instances — actually killed abortion doctors. To believe that someone who is against abortion might help a rapist go free to prevent an abortion is not a stretch; it is an extrapolation of the varied lengths to which some people will go just so they can prevent abortions.

Even if this were not the case, a trial on spousal rape might still go in favor of the rapist. (A not-zero number of people believe you cannot rape your spouse, after all.) A situation where a husband can rape his wife and legally force her to birth the child conceived from that rape is no longer a frightening hypothetical or a relic of the past — not in Arkansas, anyway.

Man, pol kun is so consistently on the side of rapists. And he voted for a rapist. Really makes you wonder about his own proclivitissues.

Wonder if he's an actual incel or if he just never had a consenting partner.

>>413504

Being a virgin is no excuse for being on the side of rapists, anon.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/03/business/dealbook/trump-congress-financial-regulations.html

STICKING UP FOR THE LITTLE GUY

SENDING A MESSAGE TO WASHINGTON

>>413503
I totally agree man, no need to argue, only white, male, atheist judges allowed.

>>413504
>>413505
>actual fedora virgins accusing others of being virgins

>>413506

And that message is, "Rob them. Rob them so blind. Do it while I am still in office and Pence will make sure you can keep robbing them after I'm gone."

>>413506
Thank god. Kind of sick of Obama's corporatism.

>>413509
Yes, welcome to a whole new era of ACTUAL corporatism, not that diet stuff of occasional bailouts and free trade.

Apparently all it took to destroy the left was find all the White males in it and teach them the words "corporatism" and "globalism", and suddenly they became more inane, irritating and cynical than the average libertarian.

>>413511
That.

>>413511
>>413512

And you can go with this, and you can go with that, and you can go with this, and you can go with that

>>413511
>>413512
>>413513
Apparently all it took to destroy the left was for a bunch of Frankfurt schoolers to come to America and teach them words like "critical theory" and "social justice".

>>413514
Found the Sanders supporter who thinks Donna Brazile dissolved 3.7 primary votes for Bernie in acid. You feel like you're knowledgeable over there, throwing around terms from the Reddit's Non-normie Guide to Political Theory 101? You're the one who always kept up to date with current events and news in school while the other sheep talked about hanging out and going to movies together, right?

But you're right, some people on the left talk a bit too much about tiddies in videogames or toxic masculinity. You know who don't? Leftist politicians.

The reason I don't vote for rightwing politicians is not because I find their supporters so disgusting I want to jam their heads into the fryers at a fastfood place every time I have the misfortune of encountering them. It's because said politicians are dumb and want dumb or bad things.

What is retarded is the White guys who thinks preventing misogyny is a distraction and "identity politics" while giving cheaper college to poor people is NOT identity politics. How you're treated by society and the people around you is just as material as how much money you have.

If you're going to have a spergy fit and swear off the left forever the instant someone starts discussing stuff like racial inequality or birth control availability instead of "How do we get all the sad White dudes in the factory towns new 'proper' jobs so they can feel like men again?" then you don't have as much of a roadmap for the left as you think.

But burying neoliberalism and demanding higher taxes on the rich together with massive infrastructure investments and reeducation efforts, that I can get behind.

>>413515
>some people on the left talk a bit too much about....toxic masculinity
That's something you can only really say when your life and freedoms aren't directly assailed by toxic masculinity. Or if you don't notice your life and freedoms being directly assailed by them--in many ways, men are affected the worst by the culture of toxic masculinity, but most men don't see their lives being affected that way. The same way so many women in the 40's didn't see society only seeing them as housewives and mothers as a problem, because most of them were raised and indoctrinated into that culture and saw it as natural and unchangeable.

As a man who wants the freedom to be my own person rather than being just another "bro," I find that feminism--and the people working toward it and not being swayed by people who try to belittle their accomplishments--to be doing far more to advance the cause of my own liberation from gender roles than so-called "men's rights" activists ever dreamed of. MRAs want to eliminate the advances we've made in freedom for men to be who they want to be because they think so little of men that they think we're all fucking neanderthals and those of us who aren't like themselves are only deluded by feminism into thinking that there's more to life than pussy. And even that seems to be more about gaining status amongst other bros than it is about what it purports to be about--I can respect a man slut. But I can't respect a man who uses his sex life as a bargaining chip for enhanced social status.

NOTHING that Trump supports is supported by the public, if explained to them in words they can understand. Repeal Dodd-Frank? Make it legal to poison your customers or their rivers? Make it possible for states to force women to carry rape-babies to term? The wall? None of it.

It's a big problem for democracy when appealing to the lowest instincts in the most degenerate and low-quality cohort of the electorate (White men and women without real educations) can give an exhaustively and thoroughly unpopular platform carte blanche, even in the extremely anti-democratic and racist system that the USA has picked.

>>413517
You are correct and I am sorry for being sweeping.

When I say some on the left talk "a bot too much" about toxic masculinity, I should say "Some on the left are too focused on toxic masculinity or describe too much behavior as 'toxic masculinity' as if it applying a technical term to something makes you wise and competent".

I am a cishetero man, and living in the world of men that MRAs and /pol/-vermin want me to live in sounds like hell.

>>413520
don't worry, you won't have to live in it long because there's no healthcare in it

>>413521
Plus we're going to war with everyone.

>>413522

And the banks and the rich are going to tank the economy for everyone but themselves. (Again.)

the one upside is if you can last long enough, you're probably going to see the hardest political pendulum swing you've ever imagined

>>413524
Only if the left manages to get the votes of the LGBT-Americans, young women and non-Whites *without* appealing to them.

Because if you do that, millions of White men (especially the lonely and less wealthy ones) suddenly think they have a right to turn into murderous nazis.

>>413525
If people actually show up, white men don't make up the majority of voters anymore. The issue with this last election wasn't that white people (because let's be honest here--the majority of white women also voted for Trump) were a majority that couldn't be fought. It was that the only people who showed up were the people who usually show up--older white people who have spare time and nothing better going on in their lives.

There's a fairly good chance that after the complete shitshow that the Trump Presidency is turning out to be, people are going to show up in 2020, and voter turnout is the worst thing for Republicans.

>>413526
and this has served as enough of a wakeup call that the Dem base is finally putting guns to heads and making the Dems in Congress actually grow a spine, and with Ellison at the front of the DNC chair race the NDC's decrepit organizational skills won't command the DNC anymore

>>413526

Now now, do not assume that White people were the only ones who showed up. Remember that voter suppression techniques and partisan gerrymandering also played a role.

>>413525
>millions of White men
White men are like a third of the country, and a bit less of the voter base actually.

Also you're forgetting the legions of virginous cuckold Hillary missiles like Stone and YOURSELF, who I bet have a shade of skin slightly on the lighter side of talcum and at least a portion of an appendage resembling a penis.

>>413529

Wait a minute.

How can I be both a virgin and a cuckold? Because, like, I am pretty damn sure I would need at least a girlfriend to be a cuckold and all. Can someone explain this logic to me? My brain is pretty fried right now thanks to the past couple of weeks.

>>413529
...I want to be a Hillary missile now.

>>413530
Same way Obama can be an atheist AND a muslim. Because words have no meaning to the alt-right.

>>413530
>>413532
Are you trying to work out how someone insulted you? Wow you really are a bunch of cucks.

>>413531
It's a shit job, you only get fired at le ebul brown people from a drone, and you always miss and hit a wedding party.

It's fun how everyone on the right is pretending they are upset about drones all of a sudden. When you all actively support coal mine refuse in water and letting mentally ill people buy guns, it's pretty obvious civilian deaths is really not a big deal.

>>413535
We've always been against drone strikes, Bush's support eroded because of it, his brother was unelectable because of it. In fact if Obama stopped drone strikes a lot more people would be on his side.

>support coal mine refuse in water
>letting mentally ill people buy guns
>civilian deaths is really not a big deal
Are you insane? Do you think conservatives mix in coal dust in their morning cereal because they think coal dust is cool? We disagree on the best way to preserve the environment, moron.

This is a whole new level strawman.....

>>413536

>Do you think conservatives mix in coal dust in their morning cereal because they think coal dust is cool?

Well, conservative politicians get conservative voters to vote in favor of things that help companies pollute the environment, so…maybe?

>We disagree on the best way to preserve the environment, moron.

Preventing the environment from ever being polluted in the first place sounds like a good start.

>>413536
>We disagree on the best way to preserve the environment, moron.

Like how when your unclefather conceived you without your auntmother's consent, the two were disagreeing on the definition of rape.

>>413538

>You're misconstruing being against the EPA, a mismanaged incompetent out of control government agency which does shit like pic related, with helping companies "pollute the environment".

So you are against the government institution tasked with protecting the environment, but you want to protect the environment. What, do you want it privatized? Because I am pretty sure privatizing environmental protection is…not going to work out like you think it might.

>>413540
>What, do you want it privatized?
They want everything privatized. They believe Free Market Jesus will solve all the world's problems based on....zero evidence in favor of that belief and numerous examples of it being untrue.

Because conservatives don't believe in evidence-based decisions.

>>413541
>It's like a video game boss having a meltdown

Appropriate considering he's effectively Porky Minch.

>>413542
Trying to live in a functioning nation that people want to impose trickle-down, supply-side and free market policies on is a bit like iving in a secular nation that ululating beardy pigfuckers want to force into Sharia. There is no real empiricism behind what they want the nation to emulate, but they don't actually care about what happens to the nation as long as they "win".

>>413540
>So you are against the government institution tasked with protecting the environment, but you want to protect the environment.
Are you implying all government agencies fulfill their mandate perfectly? Be careful what you claim, your BLM/Antifa buddies might kill you for it.

>>413542
>Because conservatives don't believe in evidence-based decisions.
Do ho ho, funny words coming from a big government socialist.

>>413549

>Are you implying all government agencies fulfill their mandate perfectly?

I would be a fool if I said that. But if you believe privatizing the protection of the environment would be a better approach, you would be the bigger fool.

>>413549
>Are you implying all government agencies fulfill their mandate perfectly? Be careful what you claim, your BLM/Antifa buddies might kill you for it.
Only an idiot lets the perfect become the enemy of the good. No solution is going to work perfectly. But of our long list of imperfect solutions, government agencies fulfill those mandates best in many cases.

>>413550
>privatizing the protection of the environment
Where did anyone actually say that? You just pulled the accusation out of your ass and pretended that the discussion was about that.

Why do you enjoy raping hedgehogs Stone? Why? They're so innocent you monster!

>>413551
Yeah the problem is it's not not even good. EPA has worsened environment significantly since it's creation. Besides they have way too much power for it to do any good, their own ignorance about the environment is hurting it.

Imagine if one EPA retard decides that cats are cute, and therefore feral cats should be protected.... feral cats that have made 33 species extinct so far. It's not even far fetched considering some other shit they've done.

For example - EPA protects mustangs (wild horses) which are an invasive species that endangers multiple native species. They protect mustangs because some EPA officials are (mentally) five year old girls that still like ponies.

This is your "good".

>>413552

>Why do you enjoy raping hedgehogs Stone?

I dunno. When did you stop beating your wife?

>>413553
Stop?

>>413554

So you admit that you beat your wife. Good to know, domestic abuser.

It is nice to see the democrats forced to put a little sand in their sack finally.

>>413555
Hint: not actually him, was making joke.

Though really Stone, do you think that women would actually go near /pol/Lyn?

>>413556
I think we can all agree the democrats have had sandy holes for awhile now.

>>413557
>>413555
>>413554
>>413553
>virgins again accusing others of virginity

>"Forget that!" Trump says when O'Reilly presses him for data to prove that millions of people voted illegally.

Can we all agree that no non-lefty will ever be allowed to criticize any lefty for anything from now on?

>>413560

The bit in that interview about Putin's critics turning up dead (read: being murdered by Putin's regime) and Trump brushing it off is…worrisome.

The main reason the non-left are trying to normalize Putin's dictatorship is both because they want to be on his good side and because they want to normalize his methods in advance of using them against their enemies and critics.

Now that Trump is pretending his travel ban is meant to make people safer and has screamed that judges are to be blamed if there is another terrorist attack, all it takes is one FSB-style operation and the GOP will be able to undo the constitution and the republic by subjugating the independent judiciary.

>>413562

And Trump supporters will pat themselves on the back for subverting the rule of law despite the judiciary putting the US back on the same immigration/travel/visa standards of the past eight years.

(How many refugee-led terrorist attacks did we have over the past eight years, again?)

If my mother was as hopeful of winning the lottery as much as republicans are afraid of being killed by refugees, I wouldn't let her keep control of her savings.

>>413564
They're not actually afraid of the refugees. Who could be? They're a tiny, tiny fraction of the population and most people are unlikely to ever meet a refugee, and those who do are unlikely to be that threatened by displaced families.

They're just using "fear of a terrorist attack" as the excuse for their bigotry. They don't give a shit about anything but the supremacy of the white, straight, christian anglosaxon males without accents.

>>413567
Meh, a photo-op before Putin decided he wanted a Greater Russia. There is a difference between being blind-sided and trying to divide the world between Moscow and Washington again, which is what the non-left is happily doing but can't openly admit.

>>413569

>lose popular vote in state
>throw hissy fit over it
>"threaten" to cut federal funding to state
>State provides Federal Government with a lion's share of its income

Mmm, another brilliant plan from bad hairpiece. What a fucking joke.

/pol/-kun you should drop the emphatic bolding

i know you think you're dropping these hot GOTCHAs but it just makes you look even stupider

Pity /pol/-kun, he's merely furious that Cheeto isn't actually a King and that lies can't defeat the judiciary.

>>413572

>BUT OBAMAAA

I thought you hated Obama, why do you keep justifying what Trump does with what Obama does?

>>413575
Whataboutism is the key tenet of the Redcap faith. They have no actual reason to worship in the carrot demon, they can only point to other things and say that they disapprove it to justify trying to bring about the apocalypse.

>>413573
>stupider
Tell me more knower man.

>>413575
I thought you hated Trump's actions, why do you vilify them but glorify Obama's?

>>413576
And for eight years of Obama you were whatabouting Bush.

People are tired of your hypocrisy, enjoy losing the next election.

>>413578

>I thought you hated Trump's actions, why do you vilify them but glorify Obama's?

Obama tried to govern the country as a president. Trump is trying to rule it as a king.

>>413579
>Trump is trying to rule it as a king.
And failing quite miserably at that.

>>413578
>And for eight years of Obama you were whatabouting Bush.
No, I absolutely wasn't. Nor were most people on the left.

You're not amongst your cronies here. You can't just rewrite reality and history to suit you here.

>>413579
For the last few presidents of each party, 457 executive actions by republicans, 640 by democrats. Lately presidents on your side have been acting like kings. Trump could sign 410 orders and still be behind.

Obama acted like a king more than anything, fundamentally changing immigration, national health, education, banking, science and aerospace, transportation and our foreign policy for the worse.... appointing 45 people to replace elected officials for gods sake.
You don't even have the right to cry if Trump unilaterally replaces elected democrat Governors.

In fact every bit of power Trump has was put into his hands by Obamas unconstitutional actions, so like I said, enjoy the next 8 years.

>>413583

>Lately presidents on your side have been acting like kings.

Gee, I wonder why Obama had to sign so many executive orders. I mean, it obviously has nothing to do with how the Republicans decided to stonewall Obama for nearly his entire presidency. Obviously.

>You don't even have the right to cry if Trump unilaterally replaces elected democrat Governors.

Governors, I am not worried about. The judiciary, on the other hand…well, Trump has already said he will blame that branch of government in the event of another terrorist attack within the US. Why would Trump supporters (and the GOP) object to removing the judiciary's power or independence if said supporters believe the judiciary must be held responsible for a terrorist attack?

>every bit of power Trump has was put into his hands by Obamas unconstitutional actions

So you have no problem with Trump using what you would call "unconstitutional" power, then?

>>413583
>You don't even have the right to cry if Trump unilaterally replaces elected democrat Governors.
The courts would likely take umbrage with that.

The reason Obama's actions are okay is that he did objectively good things, elected as he was by real Americans, not wannabe-central Asians that want a stronk leader and glory to big brave fatherland. The more things are taken out of heartlanders' hands, the more grateful they should be.

>Bamer forced priests to marry gays

The constitution did that, says SCOTUS. Kill your family, then yourself.

>>413586

Obergefell legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, but the ruling did not say "you can force a priest to solemnize your wedding". The Constitution does not allow the state to tell a priest that they must do that "or else". Please do not make arguments that have no basis in actual fact.

(And yes, I am aware of the law that says clergy cannot express support for a given political candidate, but that has to do with skirting campaign finance laws and the idea of a "captive audience". Clergy can still express support for specific ideas and values, then let the congregation make up their own minds.)

In point of fact, no priest has ever been forced to perform a wedding they didn't want to in the entire history of the United States (not by the government at least). Marriage rights are entirely the matter of secular authorities i.e. clerks, justices of the peace, etc, that DO have to perform the functions of state for our citizenry because they're government employees and not religious officials.

>>413584
>Gee, I wonder why Obama had to sign so many executive orders. I mean, it obviously has nothing to do with how the Republicans decided to stonewall Obama for nearly his entire presidency. Obviously.
Whataboutism.

I hope you'll feel the same way when Trump signs 1000 executive orders because Democrat blockage.

>>413585
>The courts would likely take umbrage with that.
Like they did to Obamas appointments of elected officials? I think not.

>>413586
>The reason Obama's actions are okay is that he did objectively good things
>objectively
>good
>objectively
>good
>objectively
>good
>objectively
>good
Thank you for creating the American empire, truly. We will do objectively good things from now on.

>>413589
>Thank you for creating the American empire
That was Truman, actually.

>>413589
>Like they did to Obamas appointments of elected officials? I think not.
These officials were constitutionally provided governors?

>>413589

>when Trump signs 1000 executive orders because Democrat blockage

The GOP controls both chambers of Congress. The Democrats refusing to vote for Trump's bullshit does not equal a "blockage" when they cannot block much of anything. Compare that to how Republicans used their majority control of just one chamber of Congress starting in 2010 to stonewall Obama. Oh, and last I checked, Trump has been signing EOs since damn near the immediate start of his term — he has not even had any proposed bill go through Congress, much less had one "blocked" by Democrats.

I certainly hope Democrats do try to block appointments that all presidents before got approved as a formality.

>>413592
Bup bup bup, all blockage counts as blockage.

Including Democrats sending threats to electors, including Democrat congressmen trying to block the election, including the 24/7 vilification by liberal fake news...
>much less had one "blocked" by Democrats.
Including using Obama appointees to attempt to block executive orders despite the fact that his term expired.

The man is still controlling parts of the government after his term is over and you accuse TRUMP of being a nouveau king?

>>413594
>Including using Obama appointees to attempt to block executive orders despite the fact that his term expired.
Do you think that every federal judge should be replaced when the president that appointed them leaves? Also the judge who properly shut down the order was a Bush appointee.
>Democrats sending threats to electors
A hoax
>including Democrat congressmen trying to block the election
Ditto
>including the 24/7 vilification by liberal fake news...
When you fuck up, you can expect to be called on it, and Trump never does anything but fuck up. It's to the point where even Fox struggles to defend him, which is hilarious to watch.
>>413593
>I certainly hope Democrats do try to block appointments that all presidents before got approved as a formality.
A complete lie.

>>413596
>Only those that were political appointments, and still take orders from the DNC.
One scarcely need imagine what qualifies for such in your head.
>And this means what exactly?
That he's not an Obama appointee, which is what you were trying to argue. Trump's EO wasn't shot down because Obama is the secret puppetmaster of the judicial branch, it was shot down because it was unconstitutional. He's failed the appeal so far too, eat shit.
>A bunch of Republicans claimed the big scary dems were after them
yaaawn
>Guiz I broughtz a pretty picture from /pol/!
do you ever have any new tricks?

>>413596

>Only those that were political appointments, and still take orders from the DNC.

So, to you, Republicans do not make political appointments, and thus Republican/conservative judges do not require replacement when the president that appointed them leaves office? Nah, fam, shit don't work that way. Republicans are as much politicians as Democrats no matter how much you believe otherwise. That you actually think Democrats are politicians and Republicans are infallible divine angels shows the kind of delusional thinking associated with cults, though. Did you drink your Kool-Aid today, son?

Retrumplicans, do you fucking hate Sean Spicer? I'm curious if his complete lack of the charisma of Trump's more colorful cabinet members are enough to make you dislike his....just fucking disgustingness.

>>413597
>Guiz I broughtz a pretty picture from /pol/!
Do you think that's a photoshop? I got it from the google and double checked, those are real articles.

>>413600
Not to interfere with your permanent amnesia and attempt to dehumanize your enemies, but Sean Spicer is just a press secretary, all press secretaries are this way.

>>413598
>Republicans do not make political appointments
They absolutely do, and they will need to be removed as well. You seem to think this is a partisan issue. You seem to think Trump is... Republican. Despite being attacked by the republican establishment.

If he isn't republican why do they allow him to break the emoluments clause and kill a SEAL while failing to kill the target without a peep?

>>413601
Enemy? I just think the guy is an exceptional schmuck.

>>413601
>They absolutely do, and they will need to be removed as well.
You don't know how the judiciary works, do you?

DeVos got through, so now the boomers get to rape our kids' brains together with our environment and our geopolitical safety.

>>413601

>You seem to think this is a partisan issue.

You made it one when you mentioned "political appointees" and linked those only to the Democrats. Also,>>413604 is right — you really do not understand how the judiciary works.

>>413605

And to think, all the Democrats voted against her. What was that about "obstruction" again, /pol/-kun? Or did you forget that the Republicans still hold a majority in the Senate?

>>413605
At least this will probably drive Trump's numbers further down and hurt some R Senators' reelection chances. DeVos really hit the "I only care if it directly affects me/my kids" crowd.

>Trump only agreed to botched Yemen raid because officials said Obama would never do it, intelligence sources say.

This is why SJWs are superior human beings.

>>413608

>At least this will probably […] hurt some R Senators' reelection chances.

If by "some", you mean "the two Republicans who voted 'no' and forced Mike Pence to break the tie", then sure. (Incidentally, Mike Pence being the tie-breaker vote is why Republicans will still have a majority in the Senate even if a vote splits like the DeVos vote did.)

https://www.thenation.com/article/house-republicans-just-voted-to-eliminate-the-only-federal-agency-that-makes-sure-voting-machines-cant-be-hacked/

B-but voter fraud! Rigged elections!

>>413611
Those two only broke ranks after a closed meeting, wherein it would have been determined that they had enough votes to make a show of it.

>>413612
The agency is clearly compromised and needs to be drained.

>>413613
Yeah. If they actually cared to stop DeVos, Collins and Murkowski could have voted against her in committee. But now they get to look like they tried taking a stand.

So, the left calls people racist too much, and all of the GOP supports silencing a senator because she reads a letter from Coretta Scott King during Black History Month.

Why did you bother fighting Hitler again?

>>413620
>and all of the GOP supports silencing a senator because she reads a letter from Coretta Scott King during Black History Month
And one that was directly apropos to the question at hand, about the suitability of Sessions. They used a technicality of Senate rules that stops senators from criticizing other senators even though it wasn't in the context of criticizing him as a member of the senate but of vetting him for a position in the cabinet, which has no such protections.

>>413622

And in the process, Mitch McConnell basically created the perfect rallying cry for both Elizabeth Warren in particular and women in general: "She was warned. She was given an explanation. Nevertheless, she persisted."

>>413623
And the video Warren recorded of her reading King's letter outside the Senate chamber now has over three million views on Facebook.

I'm not sure what McConnell was trying to accomplish with this move.

Also, Sen. Jeff Merkley wound up reading the letter uninterrupted anyway.

>>413624
>Also, Sen. Jeff Merkley wound up reading the letter uninterrupted anyway.
Well he has a penis.

Incidentally, that gag rule invoked against Warren? There is a nasty bit of precedent for it:

https://twitter.com/grimmelm/status/829180207257022465

>>413620
You're saying they shut the letter down because the author is black?

I don't know anything about this story, what was the content of the letter?

From what this poster >>413622 says it was a point of order, not an attempt to shut it down because the writer was black.

>>413625
//youtube.com/watch?v=bWeyUTBkTss

>>413632
>I don't know anything about this story, what was the content of the letter?
Google things yourself.

>>413633
Did.

Rule XIX says "no senator will accuse another of conduct unbecoming of a senator", and this letter is a textbook case of it.

http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/3456961/Scott-King-1986-Letter-and-Testimony-Signed.txt

The letter is basically a libel case waiting to happen.

It's a long sob story about how Sessions successfully prosecuted a few of her friends, in a case where Sessions actually didn't prosecute at all. The trial in question (Selma voter fraud case) was prosecuted by his two assistants.

>>413632
>You're saying they shut the letter down because the author is black?

Or for saying Black people get to vote like White people. You can't really tell with non-leftists.

>>413634

>Rule XIX says "no senator will accuse another of conduct unbecoming of a senator"

You do realize that the rule was invoked only to prevent Warren from reading aloud a letter from Coretta Scott King that accused Sessions of being a racist, right? I mean, Ted Cruz once called McConnell a "liar" on the Senate floor nearly two years ago, and nobody invoked Rule XIX then. This bit by McConnell was done for at least one of two reasons: Warren was a woman, or the Republicans wanted to prove they had a way to break Democrat filibusters.

But moreover, the rule was used to silence dissent and criticism of a cabinet appointee who also happens to be a sitting senator. It was a sleazy tactic used to silence Warren, and if the reaction to it is any indication, it backfired in a spectacular manner.

The rule was also created to protect an advocate of lynching from criticism, because that is the core of where the GOP came from and they're getting nostalgic.

Trump wants Easy D.

He said so himself.

Since POTUS on Twitter retweeted Trump's blubbering about Nordstrom, it is now officially USA policy that retailers must stock a Dear Leader's Family Member's clothing line regardless of demand.

Thanks, rurals. I hope the next meth/opioid epidemic coincides with a dustbowl and kills all of you.

Yemen Withdraws Permission for U.S. Antiterror Ground Missions

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/07/world/middleeast/yemen-special-operations-missions.html

Good job, fucko.

>>413636
>You do realize that the rule was invoked only to prevent Warren from reading aloud a letter from Coretta Scott King that accused Sessions of being a racist, right?
Yes I do realize that Warren broke a rule and got punished for it.

>>413641
I'm sure Obama sending a warship to shell their country had nothing to do with it.

>>413643
>I'm sure Obama sending a warship to shell their country had nothing to do with it.

Yeah, it literally didn't. How long are you going to fall back on your "b-b-b-but Obama" deflections?

>>413643

>Warren broke a rule and got punished for it.

Do you even know why she broke the rule invoked to silence her? She was discussing the nomination of Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III to the position of US Attorney General. McConnell shut her up in the chamber because she dared to criticize an acting senator who was also being considered for a cabinet position. Why should legitimate discussion of a nominee's qualifications (including past actions and words) be stifled because he is a senator? What makes that "rule" worth defending? And why was another senator allowed to read, in full and without reprimand, the exact same letter that Warren tried to read?

If the letter reciting actual history was "accusing him off behavior unbecoming of a senator" isn't that a tacit admission that his behavior is unbecoming of a senator? And therfore probably unbecoming of a cabinet level position?

>>413646
To be fair, he'd be in the cabinet of someone whose behavior is unbecoming of the presidency.

>>413644
For as long as you keep being a hypocrite.

>>413645
He's still a senator, and the rule still applies.

>because she dared to criticize
She didn't criticize, she insulted. Senators can be criticized by other senators without ASCRIBING MOTIVES.

She can't see inside other peoples heads, therefore any claim of what she thinks is going on in there is a pure and unvarnished insult... and no it doesn't matter what fanfiction she's reading from.

ALLOWED - "this act that he did is unprofessional"
ALLOWED - "he did this because of corruption <insert evidence here>"
NOT ALLOWED - "he did this because deep inside his mind, he's a cunt"

>>413648
>"this act that he did is unprofessional"
It was certainly considered so in 86.

>>413648

That you view the words of Coretta Scott King as "fanfiction" is far more of an insult than Senator Warren ascribing motives to the actions of Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III. There is more than enough evidence on the record about Sessions's actions and words to infer intent and motive from them. He is a flat-out racist; he has made that clear enough. There is little reason to believe he would defend a law such as the Voting Rights Act, given his opposition to the idea of black people voting in elections. And there is still the matter of Warren being silenced from reading the letter but other (male) senators being allowed to read the letter without rebuke.

Oh, and you failed to answer why discussion of Sessions's actions and words should be silenced in the chamber only because he is a sitting senator. Ted Cruz called Mitch McConnell a "liar" without reprimand, and "liar" is as much a claim of motive as anything Warren said about Sessions.

On the bright side, McConnell's reprimand of Warren was a nice Streisand Effect for her — at least a few million more people saw her reading the letter outside the chamber than would have ever seen her read the letter on the Senate floor. It also gave women in general a new rallying cry ("Nevertheless, she persisted"). Yeah, I would say all this worked out for the best in the end…as long as your name is not Mitch McConnell.

>>413649
Let's be fair, 1986 was a more progressive and civilized time than 2016. We can't be holding ourselves to the civil rights standards of 1986.

And because the GOP is what it is, Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III has been confirmed to the office of Attorney General by the Senate.

>>413652
Like I said before: 1986 was a more civilized time.

But Democrats take advantage of black voters, remember? Welfare plantation and such.

I wish the Knockout Game was real.

Only one Democrat voted for Sessions: Joe Manchin of West Virginia, whose state went red in the national election.

>>413656
Then let him be a marked man for the Primary Gun.

>>413657

It is something to consider. So is this: http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/02/manchin-2