Democrats Have Abandoned Civil Liberties

[Howel]

The point is the question, can one claim to be the party for "Restoring laws and norms" and "Fearful for the rule of law" when the parties own actions and deeds within just the last two decades entirely refutes those claims. Unless there is some normative form of gross corruption and civil liberties violation; in which case one has to prove that even the actions of the most recent Democratic president are somehow by some measurable sense more good? less bad? than what is currently happening. Or if we should accept this claim about being the champions of "Laws and Norms" when what they did when granted the power was abuse civil liberties and strip them.

Yes you can, just not this one. Truly, what amazing kind of nuance that is.
Also yes, there indeed hasn't been a time before where Democrats voted on online surveillance, so truly they have lost their ways. Or you know, it is because prior to that, online surveillance was a bit of misnomer because there was no online.

I am sure during the cold war they were very opposed to spying in other ways, I am sure they were paragons then...

[lockybalboa]

You guys need to stop hesitating and vote Amash to save the US.

[Theodarzna]

Yes you can, just not this one. Truly, what amazing kind of nuance that is.
Also yes, there indeed hasn't been a time before where Democrats voted on online surveillance, so truly they have lost their ways. Or you know, it is because prior to that, online surveillance was a bit of misnomer because there was no online.

I'm not claiming they lost their way, I'm claiming the rhetoric is nonsense and asking people to believe it is ludicrous. My position is the Dems can't claim to stand for something they categorically don't stand for.

[Machismo]

I'm not claiming they lost their way, I'm claiming the rhetoric is nonsense and asking people to believe it is ludicrous. My position is the Dems can't claim to stand for something they categorically don't stand for.

Do you stand for it?

[Howel]

I'm not claiming they lost their way, I'm claiming the rhetoric is nonsense and asking people to believe it is ludicrous. My position is the Dems can't claim to stand for something they categorically don't stand for.

I already spoke about that kind of purity politics, when duality exists, being one the most nonsensical parts of politics. Albeit not a conversation with you.

[beanman12345]

You guys need to stop hesitating and vote Amash to save the US.

I thought you were all in on Biden before you were banned, and then ban evaded, and now you are on the the Amash train? You know Amash dropped out right?

[lockybalboa]

I thought you were all in on Biden before you were banned, and then ban evaded, and now you are on the the Amash train? You know Amash dropped out right?

Oh he did? I have been leveling my wow toons hardcore for the past days and did no news reading for a week sorry. Ok, Biden it is then!

[Orange Joe]

In the end I really do think that if you strip away the kvetching and whinging, all their complaints about me and my posts are anxiety that everything I post must be a deception to shake their faith in the Democratic Party. Essentially anything negative or critical is just a proverbial Satan testing them and their resolve and commitment.

I'm sure it has nothing to do with you being a hypocrite. Nah... It can't be that... Theo a hypocrite??? That can't be possible....



/s

[Theodarzna]

I'm sure it has nothing to do with you being a hypocrite. Nah... It can't be that... Theo a hypocrite??? That can't be possible....



/s

I think you guys engage in some major projection. After Tara Reade's allegations made most of you into hypocrites for real. I'll need some proof of your claims.

In the end you are just prissy that I say basically "Democrats aren't actually great" and people scream bloody murder at such a tepid criticism. Even whilst themselves acknowledging "Lesser of Two Evilism". It's like you guys acknowledge the "Lesser of Two Evils" case when it suites you but then demand brand loyalty and nothing negative ever be pointed out so you don't get demoralized.

- - - Updated - - -

I already spoke about that kind of purity politics, when duality exists, being one the most nonsensical parts of politics. Albeit not a conversation with you.

Purity politics is fine to criticize but then how can you with a straight face kvetch and whinge when someone points out that lack of purity? You have a contradiction here mate, on the one hand you chide me for expecting purity--which I don't--but seem to also imply that the negatives of at least one party shouldn't be addressed. If we are acknowledging a lack of purity, why is pointing that out cause for such anger by some people?

[Orange Joe]

I think you guys engage in some major projection. After Tara Reade's allegations made most of you into hypocrites for real. I'll need some proof of your claims.

In the end you are just prissy that I say basically "Democrats aren't actually great" and people scream bloody murder at such a tepid criticism. Even whilst themselves acknowledging "Lesser of Two Evilism". It's like you guys acknowledge the "Lesser of Two Evils" case when it suites you but then demand brand loyalty and nothing negative ever be pointed out so you don't get demoralized.

Now trying to paint yourself as a victim. lmfao....

Just curious. What is my stance on the Tara Reade allegations?

What is your stance on any one of the allegations against Trump?

Why do you believe anything from the Trump administration without proof, but demand evidence against him?

What is your opinion of this statement?

“If we had had confidence that” President Donald Trump “clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so,” Robert Mueller says

[beanman12345]

I think you guys engage in some major projection. After Tara Reade's allegations made most of you into hypocrites for real. I'll need some proof of your claims.

The Tara Reade allegations didn't make most of us into hypocrites, it just further exposed your fraudulent posting. You played yourself.

[Theodarzna]

The Tara Reade allegations didn't make most of us into hypocrites, it just further exposed your fraudulent posting. You played yourself.

Lol, I see I touched a nerve.

- - - Updated - - -

Now trying to paint yourself as a victim. lmfao....

Just curious. What is my stance on the Tara Reade allegations?

What is your stance on any one of the allegations against Trump?

Why do you believe anything from the Trump administration without proof, but demand evidence against him?

What is your opinion of this statement?

You guys just say words without knowing the meaning of what you say.

You miss the entire point and failed to cite anything, Gosh its like Machismo.

[Yuujin]

OP post and responses reek of "your side is just as bad/worse than mine!"

[Felya]

Lol, I see I touched a nerve.

Now complain about Biden doing it...

[Howel]

Purity politics is fine to criticize but then how can you with a straight face kvetch and whinge when someone points out that lack of purity? You have a contradiction here mate, on the one hand you chide me for expecting purity--which I don't--but seem to also imply that the negatives of at least one party shouldn't be addressed. If we are acknowledging a lack of purity, why is pointing that out cause for such anger by some people?

I have fully acknowledge that it is a full on douchebag move, it is in this very thread. I don't have a horse in this game, so I am very much free to say as much, because I don't like either party. But equally I am also going to give it the nuance, that it is a bit more than just voting against something, however much that would be in contradiction to whatever buzzword they are running with it (which I have to say, if you seriously demand purity on buzzwords, then I got bad news for you). I don't demand that it isn't touched upon, my criticism has been, that it is not news, nor that it is a common consensus; frankly I am in agreement I just don't agree that it happened now, when it has been a default.
As for why people are angry, I also addressed that in this thread, and that is ultimately because the politics and person is interlocked on some stage. You don't go into a room and call people shitheads, and then be surprised that they get angry. Also it is you after all, Theo, like even I know that you have this weird posting history of addressing only Democrats' problems, and never ever touching Republicans (even when it is things, like this very topic, where it is Republicans that are objectively more in opposition to what you propose as a problem). So it is a twofold thing; and you do not have the trust of people, to address such a topic without being reprimanded for it, and it is a touchy subject.

It is like Zenkai, or whatever he changed his name to. Like no one buys it, because it is not believed to come from a place of concern, but more so with alternative motives.

[Theodarzna]

OP post and responses reek of "your side is just as bad/worse than mine!"

What is my side?

[Calfredd]

How am I "posting in Bad Faith", what deception am I running? Either you claim everything Matt Taibbi said is a complete lie, despite numerous citation links provided, in which case I eagerly await you actually proving what Matt Taibbi wrote is all completely made up, or I invite you to accept that you are merely just playing Partisan Water carrier and have nothing to say except to impotently scream "MY PARTY GOOD, OTHER PARTY BAD!!!!" like a religious mantra.

You know we can look at your Thread Started history and see that what you posted about back then is wildly different than what you post about now; the topics are almost completely opposite of each other.

[Machismo]

Lol, I see I touched a nerve.

- - - Updated - - -



You guys just say words without knowing the meaning of what you say.

You miss the entire point and failed to cite anything, Gosh its like Machismo.

Yeah... like when I proved you to be a lying, plagiarizing ethno-nationalist who supports apartheid?

Good times.

I noticed you ignored all that, to push lies.

[Orange Joe]

You guys just say words without knowing the meaning of what you say.

You miss the entire point and failed to cite anything, Gosh its like Machismo.

Hypocrite

hyp·o·crite

/ˈhipəˌkrit/
Learn to pronounce



noun
noun: hypocrite; plural noun: hypocrites


a person who indulges in hypocrisy.
"the story tells of respectable Ben who turns out to be a cheat and a hypocrite"

hy·poc·ri·sy

/həˈpäkrəsē/
Learn to pronounce



noun
noun: hypocrisy; plural noun: hypocrisies


the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.
"his target was the hypocrisy of suburban life"

So now that we have those definitions out of the way. Lets try this again.

Why are you so upset about Bidens sexual assault allegations but aren't about Trump?

Why do you believe Mueller investigations proves Trump was innocent when Mueller specifically said

“If we had had confidence that” President Donald Trump “clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so,”

Why do you demand proof but provide none yourself?

Why do you accuse others of not knowing what words mean when it's clearly you that doesn't?

[Machismo]

OP post and responses reek of "your side is just as bad/worse than mine!"

Except, the OP literally supports apartheid... so she's not actually trying to say that. She's just slinging shit, pretending to actually care, when it's all just to shill for Trump. That's been her thing for 5 years and counting.