A bit of a reading comprehension issue there, Darren?
So you must agree with everything everyone on your side says? Liberalism, love it or leave it? If you aren’t with us you are against us? There are people on the left that are unhinged. There are people on the left that are crackpots. There are people on the left that are nitwits.
True enough.
But if you, like that other clown, want to rail about how “unhinged” everyone who thought poorly of Smirky McLawsuit is, then I have reason to doubt that you’re actually a liberal.
I haven’t said a thing about the lawsuit, just the initial kneejerk lynchmob.
Why, because they can fathom using their mental faculties outside of ‘groupthink’?
Liberals are decent in many cases, but that reaction is bandwagon progressive nonsense.
People quite literally wanted to kill this kid because of his hat and facial expression.
Same thing with my side of the aisle.
I’m guilty as hell of partisanship too so that statement is hypocritical at first glance.
Many of us actually know better than to judge all liberals for the actions of a few. If only that sentiment was reciprocated. It never is. Ever.
Thanks for thinking for yourself, Darren.
Hard to find here.
Oh that term again. People on the right, while ignoring their own groupthink pushed by Fox News and other media, tend to ascribe this term to others who share positions they don’t like. As in “oh, you don’t really think that, like us, you’ve only been taught to think that”.
And did they do so? Did they advocate for such in any legitimate media? Were there liberal opinion pieces and media statements calling for his death? Is there some poll of which I am unaware that shows that any significant number of people wanted him killed for wearing that hat, or is that just another right wing media claim?
Or maybe in itself is that extreme hyperbole and finger pointing? Using that claim as an excuse for violent thought and words against Democrats?
“But see? You’re the really violent ones, so that justifies all of our violent threats and actions!”
Bullshit.
Yes it is. The mentally ill here have succeeded in making this site almost a pure example of group think or hive mind that one could find.
Never even touched on any of that here.
You’re reaching here.
Ever used Twitter, Facebook or other media. Did you have eyesight at the time this happened. There you go.
It’s actually fascinating in some sick way.
Because of the configuration of his damn head he had to go through so much shit. Not to mention being defamed and called a bigot, for a smirk.
Then the hyperbole about Nazi’s and KKK hoods… It’s exhausting. It’s like the words “racist” and “nazi” are being used so casually that it’s like ordering a cup of coffee. (Don’t order it “black”!!)
The insults have lost all meaning to those us who are just annoyed and exhausted.
I yearn for a another godwin about using the term racist. If someone calls somebody it, they automatically lose the argument.
More hyperbole.
Real adults don’t fret hard about unwarranted insults from random strangers. When I was a security guard, I regularly got called a racist by people who were being ejected from venues for being shit heads. I didn’t take it to heart, I didn’t rant about it to my friends, I didn’t engage in hyperbole about people who throw around the term.
I certainly never threatened or implied that violence would occur if they didn’t stop calling me that.
You people are such whiny little fucks.
A peculiar use of the term “faced down”, which typically means something like “to prevail against an opponent by stalwartly confronting them”, on the part of somebody who’s actually leaving the boards because he doesn’t like you confronting him. He sounds a little mixed up about who “faced down” whom here.
Also, while I’m being the Usage Nazi (oh no! the bad word!!) around here, I’ll just note that anomalous1 is mistaken about the actual nature of Godwin’s Law. It doesn’t mean that whoever uses the term “Nazi” “automatically loses the argument”: it just means that Nazi comparisons become increasingly more likely as online arguments continue.
Even Godwin himself maintained that some Nazi comparisons are valid and relevant, even in online arguments.
There is never going to be a time when it becomes truly meaningless to accuse somebody of being racist, because so many racist shitweasels are going to go on being genuinely racist, and we’ll always need a word to describe that.
Exactly. He’s a fucking moron in addition to advocating violence against people who call him names.
**Godwin’s Law: As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1.
**
Nothing about anyone automatically losing an argument.
Bunch o’ Godwin Nazis in here!
CMC fnord!
Way back during my early years as a Doper, ISTR reading a corollary to Godwin’s Law that suggested that loss of the argument was the penalty for being the first one to mention Hitler.
It was what made this xkcd funny.
That said, yes, Godwin’s Law emplaced no such penalty.
My reading of LBJ was that he was a racist. In the sense that he was never actually comfortable with black Americans. Difference being, I think, that he acknowledged it in himself and struggled to set it aside, to advocate and work for an equality he could never entirely share. In my estimation, that counts, that matters. (I am aware that not all historians or other students of the man agree with my assessment.)
Trump is a racist who does not believe it, when he says he doesn’t have a racist bone in his body, he thinks it is true. A rich black American is equal, so far as he is concerned. He does not struggle with it because he thinks he doesn’t have to, he has no such obligation. He thinks white people should call him “sir” because he is, clearly, their superior. Notice how often the relates ordinary Americans engaging him in conversation and addressing him as “sir”. (He meets these ordinary Americans same way the rest of us do, at the grocery store, the gas station, the PTA meeting, etc.)
Are any of us, of any stripe or conviction, entirely innocent of racism? That question is over my pay grade. Had to guess, I’d think somebody must, there are millions of us, after all. But the point is not where we start, but where we go. Are we trying to do something about it, like LBJ, or according ourselves unearned virtue, like Trump?
Pretty funny repeating stale and overused right wing talking points to try to accuse your opponent of groupthink.
As that “few” are those legislators that are elected by your “side”, and their actions are that of passing legislation that affects all of us, then judging your “side” based on that seems far fairer than your tendency to judge liberals by what someone said on a blog somewhere.