That was my first thought.
They are our ally. They’re currently punishing the bad guys. If they’re not your ally, then you’re not on our side.
This is an issue I see with you a lot. You often ignore the wider issue to get into fights with people whose side you’re supposed to be on.
Attacking Facebook right now helps Trump and his narrative that they did him wrong. So don’t do that.
So these people have no issue with Don’s rallies being ‘no weapons’, but their own seat of government, def need to be armed?
My first thought is, they KNOW something is about to go down. Something they’ll need their gun for!
They should segregate them into a special enclosure inside the chamber, inside some bullet proof glass maybe! That way they get to keep their guns, no violation of their rights, everybody feels safer.
What will they do for the inauguration? Let armed Republicans walk up and congratulate the Prez and VP? Sit up close with a great view?
I wonder if Kamala and Joe will be kitted with vests?
And what I see with you a lot is that your obsessive desire to lecture people, and your paranoid narcissism, leads you to assume that my genuine arguments about my beliefs and my positions are somehow specifically designed and formulated with you in mind.
Let me be clear: they are not. Let me also be clear about something else: you don’t get to tell me what side I’m on; that’s something I determine for myself.
So why don’t you go fuck yourself and put me back on mute. Better still, on ignore.
When was the @BigT coup again?
This be funny.
You don’t even notice how you are attacking an actual ally and defining many of us out of what you consider “our” side.
Bubbelah you be confused. You sound like a Trumpist calling those who don’t go along with everything a traitor.
MY side allows reasoned dissent and does not conveniently ignore all the dangers that the enemy of my enemy presents.
Fool yourself about the nobility of FB if you want. Demand the rest of us be the same fool? Get laughed at.
Sorry. While I don’t like to make people angry at me, I’m not going to stop replying to you to tell you when I think you’re wrong. I may be trying to be less confrontational than I used to be, but I do have my limits. I still do not believe in rewarding those who try to get away with throwing a tantrum in an attempt to shut people up.
If you were someone else, I might think you were having some sort of hard time and were not being yourself. But you love to pretend like you’re better than me, and then freak out if I disagree. You’ve done it back since I disagreed with you on whether attendance should be a significant part of one’s grade as long as they understand the material.
Nothing in your reply addresses what I said. It’s just ad hominem, and of a rather ridiculous kind. You’re calling me a narcissist, when most of my posts are about others and how we need to put them first.
I continue to argue that you should back off attacking Facebook when they’re finally doing what we want. It’s a bad idea to attack at that point, to get all bent out of shape over whether they were on our side before. What they are doing is a good thing.
That you see Facebook as the enemy right at the time when they’re actually acting the way we want is bad logic and harmful, and I stand by that.
And, no, @Dseid, I attacked no one. All I did was disagree with someone. I went out of my way not to attack anyone. That is, in fact, one of the ways I’ve been trying to be nicer.
But my niceness still does have limits, and harassing me or bullying me to try and force me to shut up or stop disagreeing with you is my limit. Someone disagreeing with me may get me to reevaluate my position. Someone who doesn’t assume bad faith and points out how I might have been misunderstood may get my attention.
I’m not going to become the guy who just goes along with whatever the loudest or most angry person says I should do. I’ve had enough of having to do that in my real life to allow it to happen online.
And what you can’t seem to grasp is that I might, in good faith, actually disagree with your last sentence. That is, I’m not especially sure that it is a good thing for the virtual monopolists of social media to be blocking or closing accounts. And this position has absolutely nothing to do with what you think; it is a position I hold based on a wide range of competing claims.
I face some considerable internal wrangling on this issue, because it’s one where a whole lot of different concerns run at cross-currents with one another - questions of free speech (not just the First Amendment, but the more general principle), corporate power, government regulation, social pressures, and moral values.
It’s not an easy set of questions, and it’s one that I spend quite a bit of time thinking and reading about. I completely respect that people might disagree with me on this issue, and think that there is value in talking these things out precisely because people who might share broadly similar political positions could very well disagree on how to deal with the questions surrounding corporate social media entities.
You fucking miserable, puling hypocrite.
You’re the one who, in this very conversation, said to me:
And you also said:
Who, then, is telling whom what to do in this thread? Who is telling whom to shut up and stop disagreeing?
One of my fondest memories of the first Trump impeachment was Stefanik’s grandiose references to the PRESIDENT!! of the UNITED!!! STATES!!! As if to say, how dare you pick on somebody who is so darned important. I wonder if we’ll hear that this time.
Emphasis added by me
Can I just say the bolded phrase gives me a little, joyful feeling in the cockles of my heart? Maybe even in the sub-cockle region.
The Republican Lieutenant Governor of Georgia has stripped three Republican state Senators of their committee chairmanships because they signed on to vote fraud conspiracy theories.
Maybe in the liver, Maybe in the kidneys.
Aye, but:
Maybe even in the colon … we don’t know.
On a lighter note, I just learned that there is a 2003 Rudy Giuliani biopic starring James Woods in the titular role, and now I have the next two hours of my life planned out.
Maybe she’s born with it. Maybe it’s Maybelline.
The Congresswoman from QAnon says she’s going to file impeachment charges against Biden for abuse of power the day after the Inauguration.
You could have just posted
Congresswoman from QAnon and precog? Quite the woman she is!