Octopus Overlords

El Guapo wrote: ↑Fri Nov 02, 2018 2:41 pm Why is there a splotch of blue tape on the left most "wall", and a splotch of red tape on the right most wall? Some kind of symbolism?

The alt-right have usurped both blue and red in that order, separated by several cardboard pieces. It doesn't have to be a MAGA wall, anything will do.

It's now a secret symbol used to communicate "we're dumbasses" between like minded members without the MSM being any the wiser.

El Guapo wrote: ↑Fri Nov 02, 2018 2:41 pm Why is there a splotch of blue tape on the left most "wall", and a splotch of red tape on the right most wall? Some kind of symbolism?

I think they might be quotation marks?

Defiant wrote: ↑Fri Nov 02, 2018 2:57 pm

El Guapo wrote: ↑Fri Nov 02, 2018 2:41 pm Why is there a splotch of blue tape on the left most "wall", and a splotch of red tape on the right most wall? Some kind of symbolism?

I think they might be quotation marks?

Look at that sea of white faces and tell me I'm wrong.

Also all those different colors at slightly different heights against a brown / tan background makes it very hard to read.

Did someone make a high-profile claim that the Left won't denounce Louis Farrakhan or something? Because right now Twitter is full of people on the Left roundly and without reservations denouncing Louis Farrakhan.

Holman wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 8:18 am Did someone make a high-profile claim that the Left won't denounce Louis Farrakhan or something? Because right now Twitter is full of people on the Left roundly and without reservations denouncing Louis Farrakhan.

35 million Russians can't be wrong!

The GOP talking point the last few days has been that there is more anti-semitism on the far left than there is on the far right. Their go-to example is Farrakhan and their claims that the left has never denounced him. Never mind that neo-nazis are the ones actually murdering Jews.

Holman wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 8:18 am Did someone make a high-profile claim that the Left won't denounce Louis Farrakhan or something? Because right now Twitter is full of people on the Left roundly and without reservations denouncing Louis Farrakhan.

Anecdotally, I've seen plenty of the opposite on social media, people saying that all the anti-Semitism is coming from the right, or that Farrakhan's anti-Semitism isn't a problem. There are high profile people on the left that are reluctant to or won't distance themselves from him, from Representatives to the leaders of the woman's march. And days after the recent attack, a Rabbi was harassed on a crowded subway by a Farrakhan supporter and the only person to get involved did so to support the harasser.

How many violent acts are directly traceable to the words of Farrakhan?

Fuck whataboutism. It's dishonest bullshit to distract from Trump's racism. Even Cohen admits it now that Trump no longer makes him money.

Zarathud wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 1:20 pm
Fuck whataboutism. It's dishonest bullshit to distract from Trump's racism.

It's not whataboutism when I have time and again called out the bigotry from the right. I just don't give my side a free pass when they do it, unlike some.

("Oh, hey, there's less directly traceable violence as a result of his words, so his vile dehumanizing anti-semitism and homophobia aren't worth being bothered about." )

Defiant wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 1:28 pm

Zarathud wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 1:20 pm
Fuck whataboutism. It's dishonest bullshit to distract from Trump's racism.

It's not whataboutism when I have time and again called out the bigotry from the right. I just don't give my side a free pass when they do it, unlike some.

("Oh, hey, there's less directly traceable violence as a result of his words, so his vile dehumanizing anti-semitism and homophobia aren't worth being bothered about." )

For sure. Farrakhan is a stain on the left and he's categorically awful. Has he been actually doing things recently, or is he just being brought up as the left's anti-semitic whackjob?

gbasden wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 1:58 pm
For sure. Farrakhan is a stain on the left and he's categorically awful. Has he been actually doing things recently, or is he just being brought up as the left's anti-semitic whackjob?

He comes up fairly regularly because he spouts this garbage regularly (at times with notable figures of the left in the audience). Most recently, he's come up in the news a couple of weeks ago, when he gave a speech calling Jewish people termites (and then put it on twitter, which didn't do anything regarding it, even though they had announced a new policy against dehumanizing language a month prior, because they hadn't yet implemented the policy).

Defiant wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 1:28 pm

Zarathud wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 1:20 pm
Fuck whataboutism. It's dishonest bullshit to distract from Trump's racism.

It's not whataboutism when I have time and again called out the bigotry from the right. I just don't give my side a free pass when they do it, unlike some.

("Oh, hey, there's less directly traceable violence as a result of his words, so his vile dehumanizing anti-semitism and homophobia aren't worth being bothered about." )

It absolutely is whataboutism, particularly in a discussion where the President of the US has directly supported websites that lean heavily into consipracy and alt-facts, many of which lead directly to racism and bigotry, and that racism and bigotry has very clearly lead to murders.

My brother is a racist fuck too, but I don't bring him up in defense of the President either, because that would be moronic. Personally, I don't even know who Farrakan is, but I accept that the name means something to those on the left. That the Right are talking like he's some sort of equivalent th the president of the USA, and that the Left need to clean up their own backyard before making accusations of racism and bigotry is assinine.

I don't give a shit if Farrakan is a KKK wizard in his spare time, talking about the national message of hate and fear that comes directly from the GOP and the President, does not require that all racists everywhere need to be addressed beforehand. Worse, we can find 25 examples of rhetoric with zero effort from the right that's at least as vile as the ONE (1) FREAKIN' example that is suppose to somehow counter criticism of the president.

It's absolutely insane to discuss the accusations of the Right in the same breadth as the accusations on the Left, because that is the very definition of whataboutism, particularly when the scale, power, reach and acceptance are so completely out of whack.

Zarathud did NOT give the Left a pass. He identified whataboutism in it's worse form. That Farrakan is/isn't an anti-semitic fuck is not in debate here. Should he be as part of a national discourse on racism? Sure. Should he be somehow a counterpoint to criticism of the President and many on the Right? Are you fucking kidding me?

When the Right bring up Farrakan in, omfg, defense of the President of the USA, it's the very definition of whataboutism. They aren't equivalent, they don't have the same reach, they don't have the same impact and they don't match in scale.

I get that you think he's a piece of shit and that you're pissed when those on the Left sit quietly while he spews his gibberish. You should be. That doesn't make the Right using him as some sort of counterpoint to the President valid.

You want a discussion on Farrakan? Have at it. Currently he's being used to excuse similar behaviour on the Right, from people with significantly more power, that almost certainly lead to the deaths of Jewish people. That's not the time to evaluate the merits of criticism of Farrakan. Farrakan is being used to distract from a much more significant problem, and you're letting it distract you.

I know that there are occasionally photos of some politician or other caught standing next to Farrakhan at some event or other, but I have never in my entire life heard anyone defend his positions or espouse something because he supports it. He commands all the political respect of a Lyndon LaRouche, except that people consider him hateful rather than ridiculous.

Aside from his anti-semitism, is he known for anything at all other than being involved with the assassination of Malcolm X?

Holman wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 5:07 pm Aside from his anti-semitism, is he known for anything at all other than being involved with the assassination of Malcolm X?

Off the top of my head, his homophobia, The Million Man March, the Nation of Islam, etc.

Yes, it’s definitely the left that needs to disavow Farrakhan’s support...

GreenGoo wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 4:35 pm
It absolutely is whataboutism, particularly in a discussion where the President of the US has directly supported websites that lean heavily into consipracy and alt-facts, many of which lead directly to racism and bigotry, and that racism and bigotry has very clearly lead to murders.

No, it fucking isn't. Whataboutism is when you try to minimize the argument from the other side. But I haven't been trying to minimize the argument from the other side, I have been making it .Over and over and over I've been condemning or pointing the bigotry coming from this administration, and it's allies. I would hope that would be enough to give me the leeway to talk about other anti-Semitism without being attacked for pointing out anti-Semitism from other sources. Because there is a lot of other anti-Semitism out there, and it isn't all from the right, and it's all dangerous. for example:

Contrary to what are surely the prevailing assumptions, anti-Semitic incidents have constituted half of all hate crimes in New York this year, according to the Police Department.

If anti-Semitism bypasses consideration as a serious problem in New York, it is to some extent because it refuses to conform to an easy narrative with a single ideological enemy. During the past 22 months, not one person caught or identified as the aggressor in an anti-Semitic hate crime has been associated with a far right-wing group, Mark Molinari, commanding officer of the police department’s Hate Crimes Task Force, told me.

“I almost wish it was sometimes more clear cut,’’ he said. “It’s every identity targeting every identity.”

that the Left need to clean up their own backyard before making accusations of racism and bigotry is assinine.

Did I fucking say that? Meanwhile, I'm not allowed to bring up Farakhan (actually, technically, I responded to someone else bringing him up (Edit: although I did refer to him on the previous page so, whatever)), even when I don't bring up Trump at all, and have repeatedly condemned him in the past. Sorry I didn't instead post another fucking attack of Trump.

Zarathud did NOT give the Left a pass.

Yes, he fucking did. He dismissed Farrakhan because there weren't as many violent acts directly traceable to him.

You want a discussion on Farrakan? Have at it.

I tried to do that and got attacked for it with the absurd claim that I was engaging in whataboutism , so fuck that.

Farrakhan is a racist asshole. I think we can all just agree with that, if nothing else. But he doesn’t belong to, support or even identify with democrats. He’s a straw man used by Fox News and and their ilk.

Obama rejected and denounced Farrakhan during his presidential debate with Hillary. So not only is it whataboutism, it's bullshit and lies.

Name one person even possibly motivated by Farrakhan to commit violence against anyone other than Malcom X. You can't. Farrakhan was maybe relevant in the 90s when he and a number of other civil rights organizations marched against voter suppression and for black equality. But Farrakhan isn't relevant anymore even though the issues he fought for are.

If Farrakhan is still an issue for Republicans, perhaps that speaks more to their overtly racist message than anything else.

hepcat wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 7:53 pm Farrakhan is a racist asshole. I think we can all just agree with that, if nothing else.

I don't think we can. Apparently it's "bullshit and lies"

But he doesn’t belong to, support or even identify with democrats.

I mentioned individuals on the left. Like the leaders of the women's march who have associated with him and refused to condemn him. I don't blame the party for the actions of those individuals.

Zarathud wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 8:26 pm Obama rejected and denounced Farrakhan during his presidential debate with Hillary. So not only is it whataboutism, it's bullshit and lies.

I neither brought up Obama nor, for that matter, Trump. That you can't recognize the validity that an individual that's followed by hundreds of thousands if not a million or more repeatedly talking vile, dehumanizing anti-Semitic and homophobic bigotry is a relevant issue to be discussed, that says a hell of a lot about you.

*plonk*

I think you’re overestimating his support even with the left.

"960,000 followers" seems big enough to be alarmed to me, especially when a few of them are notable figures.

(And sure, not all of those might be from Teh Left, but it still gives him a damned big bullhorn.)

You've agreed to it. One person has called it bullshit and lies. And two people have accused me of whataboutism, even though I hadn't brought up the GOP or Trump, and in no way was I trying to minimize their responsibility in empowering anti-Semitism. So..

I actually removed my reply as I don’t want to argue about this.

Defiant wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 7:21 pm

Zarathud did NOT give the Left a pass.

Yes, he fucking did. He dismissed Farrakhan because there weren't as many violent acts directly traceable to him.

You want a discussion on Farrakan? Have at it.

I tried to do that and got attacked for it with the absurd claim that I was engaging in whataboutism , so fuck that.

Whataboutism is "both sides are equally guilty". That's it. Any discussion of criticism is ended by saying the other side does it too.

I'M dismissing Farrakan too then, if that wasn't clear.

If you want to discuss Farrakan, then start a Farrakan thread. That's what new threads are for. If you want to discuss how Farrakan fits into the current climate of fear and hatred, start a thread about the current climate of fear and hatred.

It's like trying to have a discussion specifically about Nazis and having a Nazi bring up Stalin, and then suddenly the discussion isn't about Nazis any more.

What on earth does Farrakan have to do with anything the Right is doing now? The Right really seems to be super interested in Farrakhan right now, so Farrakan must have done something even more noteworthy than usual to warrant all that attention. What was it?

I don't even know who Farrakhan is, I can't even spell his name. I sure as hell know who Drumpf is. He's the subject of the conversation, because he's the president of the USA, and he's stoking the emotions that lead to the killing of people in Pittsburgh.

It's not about giving Farrakhan a pass, or the Left a pass, or even about an analysis of how you guys got to where you are. You want that discussion, then start that discussion. But then the discussion should be labeled as such and the scope of it much clearer.

For example, we have a thread about drumpf's appointments, but we don't immediately start talking about all the other questionable appointments that have ever happened, ever, because those aren't relevant to drumpf specific corruption. It's not called "systemic corruption regarding appointments" and then discussion of 100 years of problems. It's this. Here. Now.

Being derailed and distracted is exactly WHY they are bringing up Farrakhan. And you bit, hook, line and sinker, because he's a villain you are particularly vexed by. And that's fine, you should be. But that doesn't mean that in a discussion of the promotion of hate and fear in the current political climate Farrakhan deserves to even be mentioned in the same breath as drumpf and co, let alone given equal time. The very notion is ridiculous.

When specific criticisms are brought up, "They do it too" is not a valid response. For either side. About anything. Unless, somehow, it's sprouting from the same source, say for example, lobbying and lobbyists.

There are a LOT of hate filled people in the world. And way more homegrown than was suspected. We don't need to talk about all of them when talking about one of them. The Right doesn't want you talking about their particular one, so they bring up your particular one. Just tell them that you agree, but you'll deal with that topic later, right now we're talking about your guy in power and why what he's doing is bad. Not some random other dude on the other side of the aisle that engages in similar shitty behaviour.

hepcat wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 7:53 pm Farrakhan is a racist asshole. I think we can all just agree with that, if nothing else. But he doesn’t belong to, support or even identify with democrats. He’s a straw man used by Fox News and and their ilk.

Thanks. I should have just said that, but I never seem to be able to do so.

It's just frustrating to watch someone get knocked off track so easily because someone mentions a boogeyman that the person readily recognizes.

It's "I know you are but what am I?" at a national discourse level and it's far more effective than it has any right to be.

Farrakhan is an asshole, even beyond the anti-Semitism. I've talked with people who have met him. I've avoided talking about him with several people who probably like him.

But for every Farrakhan on the left, there has been a Falwell and Robertson and Graham on the right. Their audience has always been wider. But, you know, that's not my real issue here.

hepcat wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 9:23 pm I actually removed my reply as I don’t want to argue about this.

Seems reasonable.

Drumpf's behaviour whips up the deplorables and when the deplorables do some serious heinous shit and drumpf gets called on it, the Right mention someone else who is also deplorable and now the forum is fighting amongst itself.

Personally I don't think this is the right thread for discussion of drumpf/GOP era hatred and violence, let alone all hatred and violence, so whatever.

GreenGoo wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 9:40 pm
Whataboutism is "both sides are equally guilty". That's it.

1. I didn't fucking say that. Point to me where I fucking said "both sides are equally guilty", or STFU.
2. The whole point of whataboutism is to discredit the other side. But here it appears to be used to try to dismiss any discussion, at all, outside of that bigotry begins and ends with Trump.

If you want to discuss Farrakan, then start a Farrakan thread.

Yes, far be it from me to discuss Farrakhan in a thread titled "POLITICAL RANDOMNESS" (even more hilarious, I didn't raise him).

He's the subject of the conversation

No, the subject of the conversation is "political randomness".

Defiant wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 10:00 pm

GreenGoo wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 9:40 pm
Whataboutism is "both sides are equally guilty". That's it.

1. I didn't fucking say that. Point to me where I fucking said "both sides are equally guilty", or STFU.
2. The whole point of whataboutism is to discredit the other side. But here it appears to be used to try to dismiss any discussion, at all, outside of that bigotry begins and ends with Trump.

I said that. That's what "whataboutism" is. It's literally in the name of the thing. You suck. What about you sucking? Ta da, whataboutism.

The rest is all you buddy. I've made my point clear. If you think Fox News bringing up Farrakhan is valid and useful to the discussion, you're on your own. With a little luck tomorrow someone else with engage you, otherwise you're gonna be talking to yourself.

GreenGoo wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 11:46 pm

Defiant wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 10:00 pm

GreenGoo wrote: ↑Sat Nov 03, 2018 9:40 pm
Whataboutism is "both sides are equally guilty". That's it.

1. I didn't fucking say that. Point to me where I fucking said "both sides are equally guilty", or STFU.
2. The whole point of whataboutism is to discredit the other side. But here it appears to be used to try to dismiss any discussion, at all, outside of that bigotry begins and ends with Trump.

I said that. That's what "whataboutism" is. It's literally in the name of the thing. You suck. What about you sucking? Ta da, whataboutism.

Again, you accused me multiple times of "whataboutism", so cite where I stated or implied "both sides are equally guilty" or shut the fucking hell up. But then, I didn't bring up or cite Fox News either, so maybe you're just seeing things.

(Edited out the name calling)

There needs to be a calming down and an immediate cessation of name calling. I won't lock a randomness thread, but if there's a continuation of name calling, there may be a time out for anyone doing the name calling.

Whattabout:

Khaaaaaan!

Is there a way to make these embedded youtube vids smaller? I wish I could make them smaller.

Buddy Guy!



How's that for randomness?

Esquire

Right-wing master of disguise James O’Keefe sent one of his would-be 007s into Beto O’Rourke’s Senate campaign. The operative posed as an O'Rourke supporter and secretly filmed her interactions with his staff. For all this effort, the damning scoop O'Keefe found was that staffers spent around $300 on campaign debit cards to buy food and supplies for a charity working with asylum seekers sheltering in El Paso churches. Truly nefarious stuff indeed:
...
O'Keefe is a veteran dirty trickster who made his name when another one of his selectively-edited videos forced the shuttering of ACORN, a nationwide community organizing group that worked on behalf of the poor. Since then, his stings have had more misses than hits. O'Keefe last made major headlines in 2017, when he was caught trying to dupe The Washington Post into publishing the account of a fake Roy Moore accuser.

Yeah, I saw that the other day, pretty sure. I'm confused. I thought he had been outed several "exposés" ago, and wasn't the court involved? How is this guy still doing this kind of smear job? Obviously there's still a market. He should check out Wohl. Maybe collaborate on some actual blackmail. That would be great.

GreenGoo wrote: ↑Mon Nov 05, 2018 3:09 pm Yeah, I saw that the other day, pretty sure. I'm confused. I thought he had been outed several "exposés" ago, and wasn't the court involved? How is this guy still doing this kind of smear job? Obviously there's still a market. He should check out Wohl. Maybe collaborate on some actual blackmail. That would be great.

Raw material for the right-wing echo chamber. It doesn't really matter how many times he's shown to be a fraud. His influence outside of the right-wing echo chamber is getting close to zero, though, FWIW.

BREAKING: CREW discovered that Ivanka Trump’s business just won approval for 16 new Chinese trademarks, even though the brand shut down this summer. One of the trademarks covers voting machines.

What the Fucking Fuck??