Capitol building overrun by protesters

[Revoltingest]

Cute.
But I'm addressing directly what the poster initially claimed.
You're just tossing vapid general objections at me.
Why bother?
It's not going to win my affections.

 

[Debater Slayer]

But I'm addressing directly what the poster initially claimed.

Or what you assumed I claimed (understandably, since I hadn't provided further context or elaboration).

 

[Stevicus]

Cute.
But I'm addressing directly what the poster initially claimed.
You're just tossing vapid general objections at me.
Why bother?
It's not going to win my affections.

Well, if that's how you read it, then I guess you're right, there's not much more to say.

It's just that sometimes I just wish you'd address the points, rather than try to read into some possible ulterior motive you think I have. I just see it as we're just talking, it's an open discussion, and people are free to say whatever they want to say (within the rules of the forum, of course). Why does it have to be seen as anything other than that?

 

[Revoltingest]

Well, if that's how you read it, then I guess you're right, there's not much more to say.

Bingo!

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

It’s not that the Left often finds factual errors in Fox’s news reporting

Everybody finds factual errors with Fox except indoctrinated MAGA ideologues, who apparently don't care that Fox lies to them. They admitted they lie for ratings, and yet you still carry water for them.

they just don’t like hearing additional facts that often get omitted in the (D) dominated media.

There are no facts known only to Fox news, and no reason to take any information from that source. This the same argument used for rejecting creationist sources, whose ethics are also challenged, and so should never be one's source of information. I tell the creationists to find a mutually acceptable source or go home. Why? If it's true, it can be found in such a source, and it if can only be found on indoctrination sites, it's going to be a lie. You can bank on that.

Leftist media tends to overemphasize stories that buttress their agenda and deemphasize or ignore things that undermine their cause.

I guess "leftist media" means anybody that isn't a MAGA propagandist. That kind of language doesn't work except with the susceptible that listen to it, who then become vectors for the propaganda they so uncritically imbibe.

 

[Debater Slayer]

It depends on how you would define "hostile" and "USA." Some people might view the USA as the "US government," or maybe the ruling class of the US, while others support the common people of the USA. To me, the heart and soul of the USA rests in the common people, not in the government or the ruling class. Anyone who speaks negatively or supports policies which are harmful to the working classes in America is hostile to the USA.

I believe this distinction between ruling classes and common people is crucial and sometimes lost in discussions about different countries. I don't feel any differently toward the average American than I do the average Chinese, Egyptian, or British citizen. I have long assumed that speaking of "China," the "US," or any other country in a political context usually refers to its policymakers and other ruling classes, not the average person who is thinking about how to support their family and pay the bills every month.

In that context, I certainly have a highly skeptical and disapproving view of many American policymakers, especially those in charge of foreign policy. The former would include the legislators who have been brushing gun violence under the rug for years and are now seeing protests as a result of their negligence.

 

[Stevicus]

Add the climate crisis into the equation and the question becomes even more stochastic. We can try to extrapolate future conditions based on current circumstances, but this becomes highly unreliable when current circumstances may drastically change or become especially unstable due to climate change. I think climate migration may end up being a particularly salient example of this instability.

The environment and climate change are significant issues - and frankly, we've known about these issues for decades - along with many other issues. But since there didn't seem to be any immediate danger, such issues were placed on the back burner.

Even now, I don't believe things are going to fall tomorrow or anything like that. But I do believe that there are some key issues that do need attention and should not be neglected due to a certain level of societal apathy, complacency, and indifference which seem evident across the culture.

I don't really see it as fearmongering, as it's more at the level of "concern" more than outright fear - at least as I see it.

However, I do see that fearmongering as a general concept has been a significant phenomenon in the political culture for longer than I've been alive. The Red Scare was an example of generated fearmongering which dominated political thought and discourse for generations. A popular theme in culture was rooted in the public's fears, such as movies and TV shows depicting nuclear war or some post-apocalyptic dystopia. The ongoing War on Drugs and the War on Terror are also rooted in fear of the potential consequences if we do nothing. Every military action taken by our government was rooted in an underlying fear of "What would happen if we did nothing?"

So, if the public is predisposed to being vulnerable to fearmongering, I would attribute it much of that to an underlying culture of fear which seems to pervade every aspect of politics and society. Maybe we just like to be scared. I think of that when I see how horror movies get such a large following.

But I can see where it can also have more of a numbing effect, similar to that of the "boy who cried wolf." When people have heard stories of impending doom and disaster all their lives and nothing really happens, then it might not seem real or recognizable if we ever do get to that point.

 

[Stevicus]

I believe this distinction between ruling classes and common people is crucial and sometimes lost in discussions about different countries. I don't feel any differently toward the average American than I do the average Chinese, Egyptian, or British citizen. I have long assumed that speaking of "China," the "US," or any other country in a political context usually refers to its policymakers and other ruling classes, not the average person who is thinking about how to support their family and pay the bills every month.

In that context, I certainly have a highly skeptical and disapproving view of many American policymakers, especially those in charge of foreign policy. The former would include the legislators who have been brushing gun violence under the rug for years and are now seeing protests as a result of their negligence.

I think many Americans are brought up with the idea that the people and the government are one and the same: "Of the people, by the people, and for the people." Of course, on a realistic and practical level, most people know that it's a lot more complicated than that in practice, largely because "the people" are not a singular monolithic group or faction. But at least on a basic, practical, and physical level, the people are needed to maintain the structures, systems, and general operations of the nation as a whole. As has been the case so many times in history, if the people are unhappy, exploited, underpaid, unappreciated - then systems start to break down. Or other strange things might happen, such as the election of certain figures which might be incomprehensible to many people.

As for our policymakers, particularly in the area of foreign policy, they seem to operate along a completely different track than what might be perceived about domestic policy and US government's treatment of its own citizenry. For a time, it seemed as if the US government wanted US citizens to have better lives, at least in the sense that the government started thinking more in terms of social programs, social security, public education, housing, recognition of labor rights, civil rights, etc. There was a general trend in that direction, as there were loud cries to end poverty, end racism, end discrimination and social injustice - and the government, at least on the surface, appeared to be answering the call and taking action.

However, at the same time that our government was working to make sure the home folks were happy and contented, they were involved in overseas activities as well. They told the American people that it was all about containing the communists. There were communists everywhere, apparently, so our foreign policy was geared towards fighting communists wherever they may be. And if we can't find any, we'll just start calling random people communists to stir things up. Allende and Arbenz weren't communists, but we called them that anyway.

I can't really guess at their motives, to be honest. I don't know if there was any nefarious hidden agenda behind it, although some conspiracy theorists might believe it to be so. Or it could be that they really did believe that America was in mortal danger from communism and had to engage in morally questionable acts solely out of necessity, using the "lesser of two evils" argument.

 

[metis]

Feel free to show how any part of this particular story is incorrect.

Follow the lawsuit being submitted and now going to trial by Dominion and how Fox has been so dishonest in how they reported their supposed voting machine irregularities. But if you get your "news" from Fox itself, you'd never be aware of this: Dominion’s historic defamation case against Fox News will go to trial, judge rules, in major decision dismantling key Fox defenses

Note that Dominion has thousands of e-mails from Fox, including Murdoch, whereas they knew that they were telling lies. Maybe do your homework instead of allowing yourself to be led astray by that propaganda channel.

 

[metis]

It’s understandable, from the beginning of Trumps presidency the RESIST movement conspired to overturn the first election of Trump with a fake Russian collusion claim.

That simply is not true as Mueller never would have picked it up if that is all it was. Also, a reminder that some Pubs voted for impeachment, although not removal.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Oh there's no doubt....conservatives live in a completely different reality than the rest of us. Even this protest is a good example, where in right-wing world the protesters were bused in from other states and fought with police. Is there any evidence of those things? Of course not, but that doesn't matter in conservative alternate reality.

Meanwhile, for everyone else it was an occupy/sit-in type protest, mostly comprised of kids, where about the worst thing that happened was a couple of lawmakers chanting over megaphones.

Megaphones?!? Why didn't cops break out the pepper spray?

 

[Subduction Zone]

That simply is not true as Mueller never would have picked it up if that is all it was. Also, a reminder that some Pubs voted for impeachment, although not removal.

In the second impeachment trial seven Republican Senators voted guilty.. which would have resulted in removal. The actual impeachment is done by the House. It is almost the same as an indictment. An indictment is not a conviction. Trump was "indicted" (or 'indicated" if you are a Trumpista) twice. He was not convicted either time. The first time was a pure kangaroo court where the Republican Senate did not even allow any evidence to be presented.

 

[We Never Know]

More like bussed in out of state I'll bet by the leftest rabble.

I'm curious as to how many in that mob actually lives in Tennessee?

"Many of the protesters traveled from Memphis and Knoxville"

Tennessee House Republicans expel Democrats who participated in gun protest

Tennessee’s GOP-dominated House on Thursday expelled the first of three Democratic members who were at risk of being thrown out of the Legislature for their role in a demonstration calling for gun control after the Nashville school shooting.

www.pbs.org

 

[fantome profane]

"Many of the protesters traveled from Memphis and Knoxville"

Tennessee House Republicans expel Democrats who participated in gun protest

Tennessee’s GOP-dominated House on Thursday expelled the first of three Democratic members who were at risk of being thrown out of the Legislature for their role in a demonstration calling for gun control after the Nashville school shooting.

www.pbs.org

Memphis is where Justin Pearson was born and the district he represents includes much of that city. These are the people being denied representation. They have every right to protest.





WWED.

What Would Elvis Do.

 

[metis]

On the international news this morning out of London, what happened in Tennessee yesterday was the lead story.