Trump’s Gestapo in Portland

[Huckleberry 32705]

37 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

  

The passive aggressiveness is real. I don't know what your issue is, but if you want to engage me, go ahead and quote what you disagree with and engage it. And your summary is inaccurate. I specifically indicated agreement with Hugo after he echoed the same thing that I posted.

Discussion of current events within the broader context of our long-term fascination with militarizing our police force is relevant. The parallels to long standing abuses by federal three letter agencies, the role of the MIC, and the influence of our foreign policy posture on domestic LE posture are more than just relevant parallels, they are completely integrated issues. I think that these things need to be highlighted, at least if you actually want any of this to really fundamentally change in a meaningful way.

The acute problem is the Trump administration deploying federal law enforcement resources against US citizens exercising their first amendment rights. The broader issue is the very existence of those federal, domestically facing law enforcement capabilities in their current form. We never should have vested these types of powers in the Executive branch. Some of us, including yourself if my memory serves correctly, were inclined to warn about the potential for abuse and threat to liberty.  Well, here we are.  But Carter Page or something!

Not sure where you see passive aggression. I've had this discussion with you many times, @Anastasis. I didn't feel like bothering with tagging you when I started the post on my phone, apologies if that offends you. I was well aware that both of you would read it so didn't find it necessary. @Hugo Stiglitz is the other guy I'm talking about. Don't want to be passive aggressive, I guess.

Your last paragraph gets really close to understanding the point. Yes, you and I agree on this stuff as well. But you want to argue with people who agree with you. All I said was that's funny. Like right here, you're doing it again. You are correct that I agree with you on the broader issue. I look forward to your arguing with me because of our agreement.

[Huckleberry 32705]

17 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

There's a reason many of the police have left from Portland.

This is from 5 months ago where the camera man gets chased while being called a fascists, and runs into the police for protection, and the police say "We're not going out there to protect you."

I don't understand this post. How is this video a good explanation of why police have left Portland?

[workswithseed 2037]

Just now, Huckleberry said:

I don't understand this post. How is this video a good explanation of why police have left Portland?

I was showing that they're not doing much of anything.

[F250 28699]

8 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

So, instead of engaging with protest leadership and trying to forge a path forward that is best for all concerned, they are going to pout in their corner until everyone gives them a pat on the back and open-ended permission to crack skulls to their hearts' content.  I mean, it's a hard task -- but super manly men with tactical everything, down to their tactical underwear, should be able to handle it.  Instead.....Cowardice and petulance over leadership and courage.  Cool, cool.

Are there any other job fields that people can get away with "I don't want to deal with this shit so I am not going to try." I am sure that this happens with teenage Jack in the Box workers but I don't think many other careers allow for this type of behavior.

[Huckleberry 32705]

3 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

I was showing that they're not doing much of anything.

Okay, I get that. I get lost at the next step. So police officers have left Portland because they're not doing anything? Is that because they want to violently attack protesters and aren't being allowed to? Is it because their value system makes it uncomfortable for them to accept pay for just standing around?

That's where I get lost. And I'm asking seriously because you're closer to the situation than the rest of us knuckleheads who are discussing it.

[Wulaw Horn 18984]

1 hour ago, FondrenRoad said:

It was calming down. Protests were dwindling signifcantly in NYC, but are coming back now.  I think it was @Wulaw Horn who said that he thought all this would quietly go away with very little change in policing. I agreed and I think that had already started happening before the feds rushed in. Now, I think something will change because of it.  Whether it changes for the worse or the better remains to be seen. 

Yeah, that was me. That was my prediction for what would happen after a Biden win in November btw so we still have a little bit of time to run off the calendar to get there. 

[Brisketexan 104663]

4 minutes ago, F250 said:

Are there any other job fields that people can get away with "I don't want to deal with this shit so I am not going to try." I am sure that this happens with teenage Jack in the Box workers but I don't think many other careers allow for this type of behavior.

There aren't any.   And, the average teenager at JITB has more courage and integrity than the average cop (I mean, in fairness, he DOES have to make those mystery tacos that haven't gone up in price in 40 years).

Firefighters run into a fire, knowing every time there's a chance they won't come out.  Cops won't do their job if they have to listen to people saying hurtful things about them, and when they can't take a club to and gas those people (note -- nobody is saying that the cops can't defend themselves against any given protester who commits a violent act against a cop -- throw a brick at a cop, and the cop can take you down.  That's not what they're pouting about.  They want free-reign to beat the fuck out of people who don't "RESPECT MY AUTHORITY!")  Petulant cowards, proving the point every day.

[Anastasis 23398]

2 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

But you want to argue with people who agree with you. All I said was that's funny.

There was nothing particularly argumentative in that exchange between Hugo and myself, other than maybe me pointing out that whatever analogy he attempted to roll out about "racist democrats" was irrelevant to the exchange. 

I pointed out that the tactic he was claiming ousux was using was the same tactic used by the FBI to marginalize the civil rights movement.  He agreed, with a focus on the individuals within the organization.  I agreed, but elaborated on my focus on the institutional aspect broadly across federal LE and LE adjacent agencies.  He responded with an agreement on institutional reform. I agreed with him. 

I am not sure what you problem with that exchange is, but great contributions here none the less.  

[Hugo Stiglitz 23362]

8 minutes ago, F250 said:

It was on ToS. You were casting a pretty broad net (disinformation censorship) as you considered foreign election interference a major threat on social media platforms. We had a few heated exchanges on the topic. This was back when you thought everyone was a Russian asset like Glenn Greenwald.

Oh so it’s nothing specific, just general objection to the idea of using the government regulation. 

[Anastasis 23398]

15 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

You are correct that I agree with you on the broader issue. I look forward to your arguing with me because of our agreement.

Oh, and I am not the one picking a disagreement here Huck.  Sorry you are having a bad day. 

Edited July 23, 2020 by Anastasis

[Brisketexan 104663]

3 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Oh, and I am not the one picking a disagreement here Huck.  Sorry you are having a bad day. 

Dude.  America is having a bad day year four years half century.

[cactusflinthead 27594]

SWEATERGAWD y'all take it to the slap fight thread 

[Anastasis 23398]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Dude.  America is having a bad day year four years half century.

Which half-century was our pinnacle moment you think?  

[F250 28699]

4 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Oh so it’s nothing specific, just general objection to the idea of using the government regulation. 

Hugo you were never specific that's the point. You were just a reactionary calling for censorship while hero worshipping Comey. The feds will save us! Which is why I said you were no different than the fools cheering on the Patriot Act after 9/11. Yes, I am very skeptical of empowering federal law enforcement because of the situation we are in right now is inevitable.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23362]

An issue I have with libertarians is they love to throw stones from unestablished positions.  They are above it all, have everything figured out, and everyone else is either wrong or a hypocrite. They feel it’s their duty to remind everyone of their intellectual superiority while avoiding conversations about solutions to the very real problems in society. I’m almost jealous of their commitment to nothing. 

This isn’t directed at any one poster in this thread but several and it’s passive aggressive AF. 

[Brisketexan 104663]

4 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Which half-century was our pinnacle moment you think?  

Understanding that EVERY half century had a shitload of warts (most of them long-term carryovers), I'd go with 1940-75 (note, that ain't even a full half century).  We made significant economic and social progress (comparing the lot of ALL Americans from 1900-1940 vs. the lot of Americans by 1975, the leap forward was enormous).  Yep, we were still racist shits, but we even had and won a real fight on that front in the 1960s.  The theme for that era was definitely dominated by peace, prosperity, and progress. 

Again, plenty of spots for demerits (racism, foolishly letting the Cold War go hot in Vietnam, contrary to our declared values of letting a people determine their own fate, etc.), but it's our best overall score.

And the fact that we've spent the better part of the last half century trying to undo damned near anything good that came out of that period makes it all the shittier.

[F250 28699]

16 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

There aren't any.   And, the average teenager at JITB has more courage and integrity than the average cop (I mean, in fairness, he DOES have to make those mystery tacos that haven't gone up in price in 40 years).

Firefighters run into a fire, knowing every time there's a chance they won't come out.  Cops won't do their job if they have to listen to people saying hurtful things about them, and when they can't take a club to and gas those people (note -- nobody is saying that the cops can't defend themselves against any given protester who commits a violent act against a cop -- throw a brick at a cop, and the cop can take you down.  That's not what they're pouting about.  They want free-reign to beat the fuck out of people who don't "RESPECT MY AUTHORITY!")  Petulant cowards, proving the point every day.

Cops think they have society over a barrel with their monopoly on violence. This is why they think they can get away with their shit. This is not the behavior of public servants.

I've worked in Critical Infrastructure and those people have society over a barrel but they don't act like they are owed any gratitude. You don't see this attitude with power plant or water treatment workers. They just quietly do their jobs making sure society has electricity and clean water at all times. Linemen climb utility poles to restore power in weather that has everyone else seeking shelter and they do it without a pat on the head. Those people are public servants.

 

[BearSchlong 8078]

1 hour ago, BearSchlong said:

He hasn't addressed this directly with his staff - but he is an Obama appointee, and his staff is investigating every allegation of violence against protestors.  I expect federal agents to be charged.

Anecdotally, his people hate what Trump did - especially since he's using them to get reelected.

@Brisketexan Here's a good watch.  Seems levelheaded.

https://www.koin.com/news/protests/oregon-u-s-attorney-talks-presence-of-federal-agents/

Edited July 23, 2020 by BearSchlong

[F250 28699]

8 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

An issue I have with libertarians is they love to throw stones from unestablished positions.  They are above it all, have everything figured out, and everyone else is either wrong or a hypocrite. They feel it’s their duty to remind everyone of their intellectual superiority while avoiding conversations about solutions to the very real problems in society. I’m almost jealous of their commitment to nothing. 

This isn’t directed at any one poster in this thread but several and it’s passive aggressive AF. 

You are just throwing shit at the wall. If you were a true Progressive your views on Civil Liberties wouldn't be in opposition to Libertarians.

[Huckleberry 32705]

28 minutes ago, F250 said:

You are just throwing shit at the wall. If you were a true Progressive your views on Civil Liberties wouldn't be in opposition to Libertarians.

This is 100% accurate. I am undergoing a shift from voting for Libertarians in national races to voting for Progressive Democrats where available because of this truth. Libertarians are never going to win, and I've always leaned a little more toward the Democratic (high taxes but socially liberal) than Republican (low taxes but socially conservative) Party because my civil liberties are more important to me than my wallet.

And then once I realized in my 20s that the Republican party isn't even fiscally conservative there's never been a reason to vote for them again.

When a Libertarian has a chance to win I will probably vote for them.

Edited July 23, 2020 by Huckleberry

[Anastasis 23398]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Understanding that EVERY half century had a shitload of warts (most of them long-term carryovers), I'd go with 1940-75 (note, that ain't even a full half century).  We made significant economic and social progress (comparing the lot of ALL Americans from 1900-1940 vs. the lot of Americans by 1975, the leap forward was enormous).  Yep, we were still racist shits, but we even had and won a real fight on that front in the 1960s.  The theme for that era was definitely dominated by peace, prosperity, and progress. 

Again, plenty of spots for demerits (racism, foolishly letting the Cold War go hot in Vietnam, contrary to our declared values of letting a people determine their own fate, etc.), but it's our best overall score.

And the fact that we've spent the better part of the last half century trying to undo damned near anything good that came out of that period makes it all the shittier.

All good points. The lingering implications and the persisting blow back of foreign policy during the time should also be acknowledged I think.  I am not sure that peace, prosperity and progress are the terms that I would use to describe the period holistically.  As you allude to, the American experiment has always been a complex thing to judge. It remains so.  

[Brisketexan 104663]

1 minute ago, BearSchlong said:

Here's a good watch.  Seems levelheaded.

https://www.koin.com/news/protests/oregon-u-s-attorney-talks-presence-of-federal-agents/

Sure.  But we all know what the result of the following will be:

Quote

On Monday afternoon, Williams released this statement:

“Per U.S. Marshals Service protocols, their internal investigation of this weekend’s incident has now been referred to the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General. We must respectfully decline further comment on this matter.”

It will be this, when they beat the fuck out of a USNA grad and veteran, with his arms peacefully at his side:

Quote

The U.S. Marshals, whose officers were involved in the incident, told ABC News in part that their actions were based upon the circumstances at the time of the incident and that the deputies believed that the force used was necessary to protect themselves and others from physical harm.

It will be their response to every one of them.  Because free Americans who do not submit to and cower before their authority -- peacefully standing their ground and addressing their employees (that's what these paramilitary irregulars are -- our employees) --- are A THREAT.

Fuck these lawless cowards.  All of them.

[Bozo_Casanova 26298]

4 minutes ago, F250 said:

You are just throwing shit at the wall. If you were a true Progressive your views on Civil Liberties wouldn't be in opposition to Libertarians.

I'm not a progressive, my views are more or less in line with libertarian views on civil liberties, and I agree with Hugo about libertarians. Good luck driving your toaster to Alepo, if you can find it. 

Edited July 23, 2020 by Bozo_Casanova

[Brisketexan 104663]

2 minutes ago, F250 said:

You are just throwing shit at the wall. If you were a true Progressive your views on Civil Liberties wouldn't be in opposition to Libertarians.

How about this take - my problem with both "true believer" progressives and "true believer" libertarians is that they are identical in the most important respect: they mount their lofty perch to pronounce nifty principles.....but don't get shit done.

Take your academic shit to the professor's lounge, where y'all can sniff each other's pipe smoke and pat each other on the back about how erudite you are and toast the grand purity of your position.

Meanwhile, everyone else will be out there trying to actually bring about real change.

[Bozo_Casanova 26298]

22 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Which half-century was our pinnacle moment you think?  

1946-1994ish, peaking in 1972. 

[F250 28699]

4 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

I'm not a progressive, my views are more or less in line with libertarian views on civil liberties, and I agree with Hugo about libertarians. Good luck driving your toaster to Alepo, if you can find it. 

Yeah but you're the status quo guy.

[F250 28699]

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

How about this take - my problem with both "true believer" progressives and "true believer" libertarians is that they are identical in the most important respect: they mount their lofty perch to pronounce nifty principles.....but don't get shit done.

Take your academic shit to the professor's lounge, where y'all can sniff each other's pipe smoke and pat each other on the back about how erudite you are and toast the grand purity of your position.

Meanwhile, everyone else will be out there trying to actually bring about real change.

Weren't you a Dubya Republican defending the actions that brought us to this point?

[RDCanecutter 26290]

4 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

1946-1994ish, peaking in 1972. 

Hotwheels cars, spider bikes, 20 cent comic books, and for fun we went back to the railroad tracks and threw rocks at each other.

So I guess I agree.

[Brisketexan 104663]

7 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

All good points. The lingering implications and the persisting blow back of foreign policy during the time should also be acknowledged I think.  I am not sure that peace, prosperity and progress are the terms that I would use to describe the period holistically.  As you allude to, the American experiment has always been a complex thing to judge. It remains so.  

Don't disagree with any of that.  Our Cold War policy was a mistake and a failure (that said, based on the times....I have a hard time crafting a viable alternative -- it was a shitty conundrum).

When you realize that any nation's history is fraught with complexity, flag-waving patriotism becomes all but impossible.  Your goal has to become keeping the ship of state generally pointed in the direction of progress.

As for us, we have our engines in full reverse, as the crowd cheers.  It's fucking maddening.

[Brisketexan 104663]

1 minute ago, F250 said:

Weren't you a Dubya Republican defending the actions that brought us to this point?

I voted for him.....but quickly criticized a shitload of his actions.  I admit that I (wrongly) supported action in Iraq, but I also opposed the Patriot Act like a mofo, and I quickly soured on Iraq when I saw what our (non) strategy turned out to be.

I've damned well ALWAYS been an early warning siren on the destruction of the 4th amendment, things like civil asset forfeiture, and the pitfall of qualified immunity.

My positions on things have evolved, for sure.  Which I'm proud of -- all I can do is try to do better each day, and to accomplish something each day.  And I learned long ago, from a career spent in the world of conflict (it's literally my job), that ideological purity is not just not helpful, it's destructive to accomplishing anything meaningful.  There's a reason that 98% of lawsuits SETTLE, as opposed to fight on to total and pure victory or defeat -- because that's how shit gets done in the real world.

[UpperWestside 6136]

37 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

How about this take - my problem with both "true believer" progressives and "true believer" libertarians is that they are identical in the most important respect: they mount their lofty perch to pronounce nifty principles.....but don't get shit done.

Take your academic shit to the professor's lounge, where y'all can sniff each other's pipe smoke and pat each other on the back about how erudite you are and toast the grand purity of your position.

Meanwhile, everyone else will be out there trying to actually bring about real change.

I will say that if the last two months has reinforced and taught me nothing else (It has, but for the purposes of this discussion I will focus on protesting) that getting your ass out there and actively protesting against police brutality will eventually turn the tide and the people will get what they want. The rub of it will be convincing people that a month or two spent in the streets does not mean the fight is over. You have to keep going. You have to keep pressuring the politicians and forcing them to enact change. If the collective voice of the people is still not being heard you further organize and back candidates in local elections to get what you are demanding.

The time for being nice and saying pretty please mr. or ms. representative could you maybe think about changing how the police operate in regards to the citizens they are supposed to protect is over. You fucking demand that these are public servants working on OUR DIME and I'll be damned if I am going to continue contributing my tax dollars to primordial shitheads who shoot first and ask questions later. Until there are complete overhauls (and not the NYPD rearranging of the Titanic deck chairs we got July 1st) in policing I will keep advocating for change out in the streets.

Edited July 23, 2020 by UpperWestside

[Bozo_Casanova 26298]

9 minutes ago, F250 said:

Yeah but you're the status quo guy.

I am not a status quo guy at all. I just grew up in the counter culture as it was dying, so I know what jive-turkey bullshit artists look like, and how to tell them apart from the real thing. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23362]

I believe most of us want many of the same things and we’ve all made dumb mistakes in the past.  Realizing those mistakes is important but beating each other up over them doesn’t make anything better.  There is no correct ideology, just some that are less worse than others when it comes to governance and society. 

[F250 28699]

7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I voted for him.....but quickly criticized a shitload of his actions.  I admit that I (wrongly) supported action in Iraq, but I also opposed the Patriot Act like a mofo, and I quickly soured on Iraq when I saw what our (non) strategy turned out to be.

I've damned well ALWAYS been an early warning siren on the destruction of the 4th amendment, things like civil asset forfeiture, and the pitfall of qualified immunity.

My positions on things have evolved, for sure.  Which I'm proud of -- all I can do is try to do better each day, and to accomplish something each day.  And I learned long ago, from a career spent in the world of conflict (it's literally my job), that ideological purity is not just not helpful, it's destructive to accomplishing anything meaningful.  There's a reason that 98% of lawsuits SETTLE, as opposed to fight on to total and pure victory or defeat -- because that's how shit gets done in the real world.

Well, at least you came around.

By the way this isn't an issue of ideological purity for me. Yeah I am a Libertarian but there is a reason my favorite U.S. Senator is Wyden, he doesn't compromise for the sake of bipartisan compromise but does it in a manner that maximizes the benefits for the citizens.

 

[Brisketexan 104663]

Just now, F250 said:

Well, at least you came around.

By the way this isn't an issue of ideological purity for me. Yeah I am a Libertarian but there is a reason my favorite U.S. Senator is Wyden, he doesn't compromise for the sake of bipartisan compromise but does it in a manner that maximizes the benefits for the citizens.

 

Oh, and I'm a big believer in the truth that you don't get anything you don't ask for, and you have to push beyond all boundaries to get shit done.  But when it comes to nut cuttin' time, you have to take the path that accomplishes SOMETHING.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23362]

And for the record, I have no idea if I’m a progressive and it’s not that important because it is the current movement that has a chance of accomplishing many of the things I’d like to see done.  Because you know, that’s how shit gets done, with collective action and movement politics.

If you want to play the game, you have to join a team.  Thems the rules. 

Edited July 23, 2020 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Anastasis 23398]

42 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

And I learned long ago, from a career spent in the world of conflict (it's literally my job), that ideological purity is not just not helpful, it's destructive to accomplishing anything meaningful. 

  

25 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Oh, and I'm a big believer in the truth that you don't get anything you don't ask for, and you have to push beyond all boundaries to get shit done.  But when it comes to nut cuttin' time, you have to take the path that accomplishes SOMETHING.

 

 

When you start a negotiation, do you initiate by arguing from the soft and squishy middle as your starting point? Of course not.  And sure dogmatic adherence to a rigid ideology is counterproductive to compromise. But if you just start the discussion in the soft and squishy middle and don't have some core guiding principles that you will not waver on, you end up with things like a bipartisan Patriot Act train ran on your ass. Because we have to do SOMETHING!

Edited July 23, 2020 by Anastasis

[Yuk 1509]

I'm at the point where I don't care about left/right, progressive/libertarian, low taxes, high taxes, if you were onboard with Iraq war, if you voted for Trump in 2016--I don't care about any of that.  We're at a very dangerous precipice right now.  Both our Constitution and constitution have been weakened.  Everything is motivated by fear.  Americans see each other as enemies.  There's no shared mores, no shared vision for decent governance (whether we agree with it or not).

I think one of the very telling things of the past 4 months of chaos has been the pushback on masks.  You don't wear a mask to protect yourself, you do it for others.  And by doing it for others you benefit yourself.

We need a big injection of decency, empathy, and common purpose.  That is of the upmost importance at this time in history.  And hope.  We need hope.   Give me hope, then we'll talk about taxes.

[Brisketexan 104663]

2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

And for the record, I have no idea if I’m a progressive, but it’s the current movement that has a chance of accomplishing many of the things I’d like to see done.  Because you know, that’s how shit gets done, with collective action and movement politics.

If you want to play the game, you have to join a team.  Thems the rules. 

Another thought I've had -- y'all know how those pussy libtards at [checks notes] the Pentagon and the War College all acknowledged that military action needs to be careful so as to NOT cause unnecessary civilian casualties, because brutalizing civilians is a 100% guaranteed way to radicalize them and turn them against us forever? (Not that we do this worth a shit, but we know it's a thing).

That's exactly what's happening, right now, here in the US.  The GOP and their fascist regime isn't just turning people against them -- it is radicalizing them against the GOP/fascists.  Ordinary folks -- moms, dads, just regular people -- aren't just going to vote against the GOP.  They HATE the GOP.  They are willing to risk their lives to protest the regime.

If the GOP wanted to create a massive movement of people who will HATE them for eternity, they couldn't execute a better plan.  They are in the process of radicalizing tens of millions of Americans who will dedicate their lives to working against them.

That's why I say they should keep this shit up.  They should gas MORE women, and MORE children.  Every attack, they create more of us.  Every move they make, we win.

[Brisketexan 104663]

11 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

  

When you start a negotiation, do you initiate by arguing from the soft and squishy middle as your starting point? Of course not.  And sure dogmatic adherence to a rigid ideology is counterproductive to compromise. But if you just start the discussion in the soft and squishy middle and don't have some core guiding principles that you will not waver on, you end up with things like a bipartisan Patriot Act train ran on your ass. Because we have to do SOMETHING!

Are you looking for me to disagree with that?  Shit, it's one of the reasons I like the AOC types -- she performs an important role, expanding the discussion beyond its natural boundaries.  That's essential.  But the pipe-smoking finger-sniffing bullshit from libertarian types in particular has proven to be radically ineffective for generations.  They should fucking stop, it's goddamned pointless.

Wanna know one of my other favorite negotiation strategies?  Stake a claim to a position that, while strong on my end of the issue, is defensible as reasonable.  Then....wait out "regime change" on the opposite side -- that is, wait for the unreasonable people who are personally invested in the dispute to be forced out, retire, etc.  Then, when new, reasonable minds take over, they look at the viable solution I've had staring them in the face, and they jump on it.  Patience works.  It's worked to the tune of multi-billion dollar settlements for me.

9 minutes ago, Yuk said:

I'm at the point where I don't care about left/right, progressive/libertarian, low taxes, high taxes, if you were onboard with Iraq war, if you voted for Trump in 2016--I don't care about any of that.  We're at a very dangerous precipice right now.  Both our Constitution and constitution have been weakened.  Everything is motivated by fear.  Americans see each other as enemies.  There's no shared mores, no shared vision for decent governance (whether we agree with it or not).

I think one of the very telling things of the past 4 months of chaos has been the pushback on masks.  You don't wear a mask to protect yourself, you do it for others.  And by doing it for others you benefit yourself.

We need a big injection of decency, empathy, and common purpose.  That is of the upmost importance at this time in history.  And hope.  We need hope.   Give me hope, then we'll talk about taxes.

All of this.  Especially the bolded.  We are utterly and completely broken....and I have serious doubts that we can ever be put back together.

Edited July 23, 2020 by Brisketexan

[workswithseed 2037]

1 hour ago, Huckleberry said:

Okay, I get that. I get lost at the next step. So police officers have left Portland because they're not doing anything? Is that because they want to violently attack protesters and aren't being allowed to? Is it because their value system makes it uncomfortable for them to accept pay for just standing around?

That's where I get lost. And I'm asking seriously because you're closer to the situation than the rest of us knuckleheads who are discussing it.

So they started leaving after Trump came in office. The clashes of citizens in the middle of Portland started to ramp up. The mayor supports the demonstrators, so he tells police to not to do anything of substance to keep the peace.

They're also having a hard time filling in roles to replace the retired/quitting cops. Even the Portland police chief quit her job and gave it to a black lieutenant over the Floyd death. I just don't think the Portland police, or at least the top is fascists.

 

 

https://www.kptv.com/news/portland-police-bureau-struggling-to-fill-vacant-positions/article_e4312e76-55aa-11e9-a310-1b87376f8357.html#comments

 

https://nypost.com/2020/06/08/portland-police-chief-jami-resch-quits-taps-black-cop-as-replacement/

Edited July 23, 2020 by workswithseed

[Brisketexan 104663]

3 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

The mayor supports the demonstrators, so he tells police to not to do anything of substance to keep the peace.

Sounds like they could try diplomacy instead of the only thing they know: cracking skulls and gassing people.  Turns out they are unwilling to do so.  Fuck em.

[Huckleberry 32705]

4 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

So they started leaving after Trump came in office. The clashes of citizens in the middle of Portland started to ramp up. The mayor supports the demonstrators, so he tells police to not to do anything of substance to keep the peace.

Isn't that last sentence exactly what police should do? If people are protesting then stand back, let them protest, and address only illegal activities when they happen.

Have they been instructed not to address any crimes against people? Just property crimes? 

Seriously trying to get a better picture of the whole situation before the feds turned it up past 11.

[Bozo_Casanova 26298]

45 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

There is no correct ideology, just some that are less worse than others when it comes to governance and society. 

Zen is not to meditate as one peels potatoes, but to peel potatoes. 

[BearSchlong 8078]

Last night the protestors started breaking windows on the 5th and 6th floor of the federal courthouse, apparently with large ball bearings. CS gas wafted into the offices and now everyone is working remotely.

 

And the civil service types are all royally pissed at Trump. I think it's safe to assume they're all voting for Biden. Apparently the Hatch act went out the window with rule of law.

[Captainant 27472]

3 minutes ago, BearSchlong said:

Last night the protestors started breaking windows on the 5th and 6th floor of the federal courthouse, apparently with large ball bearings. CS gas wafted into the offices and now everyone is working remotely.

Feds wanted a reason to bring out the big guns, now it sounds like they have it. Super.

[Anastasis 23398]

21 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Are you looking for me to disagree with that?  Shit, it's one of the reasons I like the AOC types -- she performs an important role, expanding the discussion beyond its natural boundaries.  That's essential.  But the pipe-smoking finger-sniffing bullshit from libertarian types in particular has proven to be radically ineffective for generations. 

Well, that seems quite selective, but unsurprising given your current inclinations. You want expansion of the discussion from one extreme but not the other. I appreciate the role and perspective that an AOC provides, as well as the perspective that a Justin Amash provides. Given me those two in a legislative debate duking it out on ideological terms and maybe throw a centrist like Butti or Klobuchar (or your alternative pick) in there for contrast and to shore up the middle.  I think that America needs all of these perspectives represented by articulate individuals in Congress.  You think that only the social democrats and aligned parties along with centrists should have a role. 

Edited July 23, 2020 by Anastasis

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11668]

police: use indiscriminate methods like gassing

 

gas: doesn't discriminate who it gets.

 

police:

 

[Brisketexan 104663]

Just now, Anastasis said:

Well, that seems quite selective, but unsurprising given your current inclinations. You want expansion of the discussion from one extreme but not the other. I appreciate the role and perspective that an AOC provides, as well as the perspective that a Justin Amash provides. Given me those two in a legislative debate duking it out on ideological terms and maybe throw a centrist like Butti or Klobuchar (or your alternative pick) in there for contrast and to shore up the middle.  I think that America needs all of these perspectives represented by articulate individuals in Congress.  You think that only the social democrats and aligned parties along with centrists should have a role. 

No, I think they can and should all have a role.  I just see libertarians as the ultimate ineffective fart-sniffers.  Which is hugely disappointing, as my beliefs significantly overlap with a lot of libertarian positions.  It just turns out that in practical terms, libertarians turn out mostly to be Ron Paul wingnut types, with a shitload of dope-addled brains and racism thrown in for fun (and don't forget the lizard people who control us from underneath the Denver airport).  What is Aleppo?

What I'd love is to hear some actual effective, practical libertarians.  Amash provides some helpful perspective....but ultimately, the result of his stand will most likely be strengthening Trumpism because he won't get the fuck out of the way and let real, effective opposition do its work.

It's a bunch of "now, now, let's cogitate on Mises" tweed jacket fart-sniffing, and it's fucking maddening.

[Beau Vine 54008]

2 hours ago, F250 said:

Are there any other job fields that people can get away with "I don't want to deal with this shit so I am not going to try." I am sure that this happens with teenage Jack in the Box workers but I don't think many other careers allow for this type of behavior.

I'm currently trying this tactic at work, hoping that my superiors will think, "He's retiring in two years. and it will be easier to ride out those two years than to fight this shit."