Deserving of opprobrium, but marginally less so than the “Die,” speaker, only because of the lack of blatant violence. So, two percent less scummy than “All fags must die.”
Did somebody actually say that? That would be beyond harsh.
Chambliss did, at least according to the OP.
It was in a meet & greet when asked his views on the social implications of Lawrence v. Texas when he was a new senator; I haven’t looked for a cite because I remember him saying it as it was well reported at the time, but I will when I get a chance. (Chambliss is one of the “activist judges hurt Amurrca” crowd.)
Not a very good cite, that.
This from somebody who said that a campaign ad that said Cleland didn’t have the courage to lead and “has a record of voting against the armed forces” didn’t qualify as questioning his courage or patriotism.
I’ve found Sampiro’s posts to generally be reliably accurate. It’s second-hand information, obviously, but I don’t have any particular reason to believe its incorrect.
You’re so full of shit it isn’t even funny. The ad you linked bore no resemblance to your description of said ad in the OP. The ad in question was pretty much a common sentiment expressed throughout the country after 9/11, and was highlighting the fact that Cleland didn’t support Bush’s Homeland security nonsense. You and a bunch of others turned it into a “Oh noez!! They’re questioning the bravery of a guy in a wheelchair, y’all!!!”, which was about all Cleland’s entire campaign consisted of. It was bullshit then, and it was bullshit now.
ETA: My comment to Miller wasn’t questioning you personally, just that “the OP said so” is a shitty cite.
I disagree. There’s a fantasy that the people who just troll message boards and type “Gays should die!” are the real bigots, and that, consequently, using one’s considerable political power to disrupt our lives, devalue our families, endanger our mental and physical health, and put our young people in jeopardy is not “real” homophobia because it uses polite language. That’s dangerous and false and should be called out. In fact, it should be called out with greater vigour than the first, because it affects thousands and thousands at once.
The kid who called me a fucking faggot bitch and threw a beer bottle at my head a few months ago, though a threat to me personally, is much less a threat to me and my community than the Prime Minister is. And the Prime Minister mustn’t get a pass on his homophobia because he’s able to propose anti-queer laws without using the word “faggot.”
Besides, I’m well past the point of considering my human and civil rights, my dignity and my full humanity as matters on which reasonable people can disagree. A position that devalues queer people and considers them and their lives inferior to straight people is homophobic, as is a person who holds such a position, regardless of what language it’s cloaked in.
I don’t think the fact that this was a common tactic makes it any more acceptable.
I haven’t found politics on either side of the aisle to be “acceptable” in over 30 years, which is why I’m rolling my eyes at the whole “Won’t somebody please think of the poor politician???” thing. Neither Saxby nor Max were any better or worse than the average distinguished gentleman in that regard.
Depends. IPs are assigned by the ISP to each client depending on the contract, and usually businesses and companies only buy a few “slots” to be assigned to their servers. That’s what the outside world sees, and that’s as far as an outside inquiry will go : a handful of servers handling masses of traffic.
However, if the local network’s sysadmin is a) competent and b) cooperative, he should be able to pinpoint the comment down to the specific machine on the intranet it came from. That’s what logs are for.
Oh, and Bricker, dynamic IP addressing isn’t an issue : ISPs track which client gets which IP from day to day and keep logs of it (precisely in case the client is involved in some “crime” or the RIAA comes to town), as do competently administered company servers/routers (because it’s always handy to know which employees look up pr0n during working hours ;))
It’s quite possible that Max Cleland is as big a scumbag as Saxby Chambliss. However, unlike Sampiro, I don’t know you well enough to take you at your word on this matter, so do you have any evidence of Max Cleland being a scumbag that you’d like to present?
Depends on a whole bunch of stuff we don’t know.
Again: maybe.
If the local office uses a low-end, home-class router connected to a local ISP, then all the ISP knows is the public-facing IP address assigned to the router. And that low-end router is not keeping tracking of the internal, private IP addresses that are assigned. I’ve seen offices where the private, internal IP space was just a series of 169.254.x.y addresses- no DHCP server used.
On the high end, we could imagine a carefully-configured DHCP server that keeps logs and dumps to an external syslog as well. And even then, our “Fags die” poster could have statically assigned his own IP, dodging the DHCP record-keeping requirements by picking an unused IP in the local VLAN. Sure, a strong NAC solution would stop that, but in my experience, that’s VERY rare. Possible to imagine ARP resolution done periodically by a SolarWinds type product, but, again, that’s not standard fare in a small office – is it?
Guess they pre-empted your “it wasn’t us” defense by admitting it came from their office, so you’re hard at work crafting the “no way to know who did it” defense, eh? Well, damage control is damage control.
I’m not here to argue that Cleland is a scumbag. If you’d followed the thread, you’d probably have picked up on that by now.
Then, you agree that Chambliss’s attack ads were a scummy tactic?
That’s some spectacularly terrible logic.
I thought the emphasis was a bit less on the “faggots” part than on the “death” part? It’s a comment that could honestly be construed in so many different ways. Yeah, it’s probably snark. Or Jimmy-Bob-Roger could be sitting in his’ mom’s basement, stomach bulging under his wifebeater, bloodshot eyes fixed unblinkingly on the screen while his hands were fervently loading buckshot into his pump-action shotgun, the date and location of the next Pride rally tattooed on his left forearm.
“Death to X” depends on context. I think the public-face reaction was just to wash themselves clean of the potential nutbag scenario. (And of an employee who thought writing a “death threat” to a sensitive and politically affluent group during work hours and on work equipment, while working in politics, was a good idea.)
Sorry, I was trying to communicate on your level. Let me give it another shot.
You claimed that there’s no difference between the tactics Chambliss used, and the tactic Cleland used. I asked you for evidence that Cleland had done something as scummy as Chambliss, and you said you weren’t here to run down Cleland. So I assumed you were going back on your original claim. If that’s not the case, why don’t you point out where Cleland did something on par with Chambliss’s attack ads?