Jump to content

GW Hayduke

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    1702
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by GW Hayduke

  1. Culture war, scary angry different people, and fear-based identity politics are 85% of the GOP's platform. The other 15% are tax cuts for the rich. Hopefully, folks start to understand that the 85% is just a distraction for the 15%.
  2. Didn’t he swing at a black lady?
  3. Again. I must be kind of slow. Can you run it by me again? You keep mentioning something about the surveillance of Congress, and I honestly don’t know what that means or how it fits into the equivocation. It seems to me that you and Capt. Both Sides are equating Trump’s DOJ’s surveillance of journalists reporting on investigations into Trump’s White House and Trump’s campaign with Obama’s DOJ’s surveillance of journalists reporting on North Korea’s nuclear test plans and a Yemeni terror plot to bomb a commercial airliner.
  4. I’m referring to 2013 investigations into leaks surrounding North Korea’s nuclear test plans and a Yemini terrorist plot to bomb a commercial airline. I am considering those to be national security issues.
  5. You guys area equating national security issues with investigations into the White House and trump campaign?
  6. I must be slow. Can someone explain to me the “legit” both sides argument here?
  7. The issue with Trump and Trumpism aren’t the policies. They don’t have policies except for tax cuts for the rich and to stop progress. The issue with Trumpism are the lies and misinformation, the fear-based identity politics and white nationalism, the disdain for the rule of law, the fascist/authoritarian tendencies, and the disregard for the constitution. Cheney wants to cut taxes on the rich, block health care reform, and all that small government jazz. Cheney isn’t someone I would vote for but she isn’t a fascist/authoritarian who would lock up her political enemies if she could. Cheney and Trump are worlds apart.
  8. You feel the others have views, beliefs, and positions that are not legitimate. Insightful stuff. If only they were acting in good faith, everything would be gravy. Except those darn others are "basking in the possibility" to "piss the living hell out of the powerful" and make them "squirm" -- when all the good folk of the world want is to just sing a song they "truly love." The good folks are victims here. Won't someone think about the good folks? Or maybe, instead of dumbing down and delegitimizing their position as a simple exercise of misguided power, folks could at least acknowledge the others would just rather have a song that unifies the whole school and isn't one with a tainted origin story. And if you really need to think about things in terms of power, maybe instead of being concerned about the supposed "power play" by students and athletes, you should take a look at the "power play" by donors going on. I bet there are some emails somewhere you can take a look at.
  9. I understand the Robert E. Lee/confederacy origin issue hasn't gone away because the Commission's report did not handle it well. The section on Lee in the below linked article addresses the issue better than I could. It is apparent to some that the commission report's executive summary whitewashed the Lee issue. https://almartinezut.medium.com/true-origins-of-the-eyes-of-texas-3f2188569f0e
  10. No one thinks you are a racist. This isn't about what people think about your identity or whether you are a victim. This is about a song, the origins of the song, and whether we should have a song that unifies the whole school or not.
  11. It is just a culture war rallying cry using the typical fear-based identity politik the right uses over and over. Nothing new. I’ve seen a wide range of responses to CRT that include things like “we can’t solve racism with more racism,” “my children are going to be labeled racists,” and none of them require any understanding of CRT
  12. No one is attempting to salve over all evils through the use of “identity politics.” I know that maybe you or Greenwald or Tucker think you have cracked the code, but this is simply an agency attempting to pull in diverse recruits and compose a competent workforce. That agency (along with nearly every other institution) is able to serve their function better with a diverse and competent staff. Hold the CIA’s feet to fire on torture but understand the blame mostly lies with the Bush admin who approved those interrogation technique. Hold the Obama admin accountable for not prosecuting. But none of that has anything with the commercial or having a diverse workforce. The idea that all the CIA does is torture people is as stupid as the idea that they all drive Aston Martins.
  13. I don’t have much of an opinion on this but Bernie came out in favor of ending patents https://www.businessinsider.com/sanders-drug-companies-should-relinquish-ip-rights-to-covid-19-vaccines-2021-5
  14. The Rudy situation described in first 13 minutes of the rational security podcast. https://www.lawfareblog.com/rational-security-oops-rudy-did-it-again-edition
  15. My point is that without a commonly accepted definition to work from, these conversations are pointless and simply contribute to it being a wedge issue. There is a reason the GOP response to Biden included that narrative
  16. Sure. It can be considered obviously contradictory from the perspective from within one bubble. A view from the other bubble might be analogous to equating “a racist country” to something like an “evil country” in that sure maybe might dad yells at me sometimes but he isn’t evil. There isn’t a commonly accepted definition for “a racist country.”
  17. The question of whether the US is racist is a perfect wedge issue since it comports to the narratives of either side. The issue is there is not a commonly accepted definition for “a racist country” or an accepted threshold between “a racist country” and a “non-racist country.” So we have groups functioning in information bubbles. One bubble listens to talk radio, watches tucker, participates in the DT threads, identifies with Trump, and has been told over and over again that they are the real victim and the other side is prone to overreaction that is dangerous to them. They think racism doesn’t exist or if it does it is really minor or maybe they are even fine with it. They mock racism with sayings like, guns aren’t racist, covid isn’t racist, etc. Grasping complex ideas like systemic racism isn’t easy for them. There is a reason the question is being posed by the right.
  18. Wow. These guys are desperate. I don’t think I’ve seen a clip from him worse than that. Remember a few days a when he was psychotically laughing at the guy who disagreed with him about the Chauvin conviction. The right seems to be spiraling right now. There must be internal poll numbers out there with bad news.
  19. Poor Chuck getting owned by the intellectual right.
  20. Mathews was a silent to us! This makes no sense! Why did he commit to LSU?
  21. Is the vote threshold in the Senate 50 or 60 to allow admission of a state? I don't see it listed as an exemption to the filibuster.
  22. It says a lot of things. You are correct in your understanding of what the executive summary says. My point is that the executive summary doesn't jive with page 11, which also seems to have left out some evidence. The executive summary appears to ignore Prather's own words (along with the words of those around Prather) which linked the phrase to Lee. The point about Lee's statements at the university and the executive summary's focus on Taylor's memoir is a sleight of hand thing IMO. The section on Lee in the below paper addresses some of the specific Lee-related deficiencies with the report, but my overall point is that the report didn't appear to adequately address it https://almartinezut.medium.com/true-origins-of-the-eyes-of-texas-3f2188569f0e
  23. From page 11 of the report:
  24. An when someone in TA is able to stand up in front of the room and acknowledge they have a problem, that they were wrong on something, everyone stands up and cheers.
×
×
  • Create New...