cjm
Member

The thread you're referring to ("Woke autocannibalism") is specifically about "woke" progressives eating their own. Such "wokeness" is predicated upon viewing absolutely everything through the shallow identitarian lenses of race/ethnicity, sex/gender, physiology, etc. in order to determine the "intersectionalities" involved so that those may then be used to determine the moral worthiness (or lack thereof) of the object or target being "deconstructed" (I don't say "analyzed", because little to no rational analysis is actually involved). The internal "logic" of this, when applied, inevitably leads to a "victimization Olympics" mentality in which the only way to be "virtuous" is to be the "victim" of someone else (and the bigger - i.e., the more "intersectional" - the "victim" one is, the more "virtuous" one is). This creates a dynamic in which your own "allies" - if they are less "intersectional" than you (as they almost always can be found to be, in some way or another) - are as much a source of "victimization" (and thence, your "virtue") as anyone else. Thus, the "woke" are especially prone to "eating each other" in the cause of being "holier than thou". Anyway, none of that is really the same thing as leftists in general going after each other. That happens all the time. Competing factions feature in every ideological grouping of any significant size. (It happens on the right, too - as well as among libertarians, etc.) And although the "holier than thou" dynamic certainly can (and does) sometimes manifest in such conflicts, it usually isn't super-charged with the identitarian "virtue of victimization" fuel additive that "woke" progressivism insists on injecting into everything. I think that's a much better framing of what's going on in this case. It isn't "left vs. left". It's the "establishment" (i.e., the Bushes, Obamas, Pelosis, McConnells, Harrises, Cheneys, et al.) vs. those who refuse to kowtow to it (whether left or right) - and given the rampant militarism of our MIC-driven empire, the "anti-war" stuff is one of the most common fault lines.

:eyes:

WIth 284 million followers on social media, a mere 450K clicking on a link she shared really isn't that much. And how many of these 18 year old girls weren't already planning to vote for Kamala Harris? I sincerely doubt there is a strong overlap between impressionable Taylor Swift fans and independet / undecided voters.

Those explosions are more violoent than what I've seen of phone explosions but they also don't show any flame which is typical of phone explosions.

Wow! Excellent intelligence operation from the same Israeli security state that couldn't stop guys in paramotors, pick up trucks and motorcycles and using drones on October 7 executing a plan that Israel had a year in advance and was specifically warned was imminent in the weeks leading up to the attack.

She ain't president yet. But as vice president she's already acquiesed to Biden's prosecution and conviction of black people who went to the U.N. to speak out against African genocide. And yeah, I get it. It shouldn't matter. White people should be able to go to the U.N. and say whatever they want as well. But if she'll go along with doing that to a group she kinda / sorta claims when it's convenient, what will she do to anybody else? I know I'm preaching to the choir. But if you aren't connected to Goldman Sachs or Black Rock, these elites do not care about you.

The U.N. hadn't fully primed the world to expect white refugees back then. But they were working on it. Look at this commercial from 8 years ago. I remember when ^that commercial came out thinking "What are they prepping us for?" Now I know.

I didn't find the YouGov poll but I did find an Ipsos poll that came to the same conclusion. https://thehill.com/homenews/4881812-taylor-swift-endorsement-little-impact/ https://www.langerresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/1236a1AftertheHarris-TrumpDebate.pdf

And yet both assassins were white men. Maybe they were secretely gay or something?

True. And sometimes the person making the accusation of racism is white and the person being accused is black.

*sigh* I remember happier times on this forum. Like when someone posted the awesome animated commercial of the polar bear asking the lemmings "Why are you voting for McCain?" with their response "Because he can beat Obamaaaaaa." as they run of the cliff with their "McCain 2008" signs only for the same dialog to be repeated for Romney 2012. (Sadly I can't find that video now.) So some of us have now become what we used to mock. By all means vote for your "lesser of two evils." But that doesn't mean the evil itself can't be discussed. As Whitney Webb put it, vote for Trump or Harris or whoever you want but don't think that's going to actually fix anything. What happens between elections is the most important. And hopefully Rand will run in 2028. I'm seeing all the signs of that happening. He's running at least 3 commercials on YouTube right now. (Holding Fauci accountable. Stopping wasteful spending. Do something for real about immigration.)

Great! Now do you really think RFK Jr. will have more influence in the seond Trump administration than vice president J. "Deep State" Vance? We'll see I guess.

Something else to consider Swordsmyth. The article pointed out Trump's preference for "Christian refugees." However Ukraine wasn't in a refugee crisis while Trump was president. But the immigration of Chritains who were being persecuted, like in Syria and Iran, was cut under Trump. Trump even went after Iraqi Christian refugees who had been here for decades. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/despite-trump-s-promise-protect-them-christian-refugees-struggle-enter-n908501 At the 2017 conference where Pence made his speech about Christianity being under siege, including in Syria and Iraq, two Christians from Syria were scheduled to take part in a panel. But the two men were denied U.S. visas, according conference organizers, and could not attend after all. While Christian refugees face difficulties securing U.S. visas, hundreds of Iraqi Christians already in the U.S., many of whom fled their home country years ago, are now facing the threat of deportation.

Obama : "Blow up Libya and Syria for democracy." Trump : "Make sure you get the oil or don't do it." That's about the extent of the improvement.

The article does not admit what you claim it admits. Quite the opposite. It says that the Trump phone call to Ukraine had nothing to do with Ukrainian immigration, but it also said that Trump seemed to be purposefully letting more Ukrainians in because of his demographic preferences.

Work on your reading comprehension. Important parts in bold: There is no indication that Trump’s relationship with Ukraine — which is at the center of his impeachment saga and an alleged quid pro quo involving military aid in exchange for pressure on a domestic political foe — has played a role in the rise in Ukrainian refugees admitted into the United States. But the demographic shift does appear to be the byproduct of Trump administration policies that have restricted access to the U.S. refu*gee program, experts said. Trump has repeatedly stated his desire to block Muslim refugees and to prioritize persecuted Christians from around the world. And his administration has successfully implemented a travel ban and expanded vetting scrutiny for the nationals of several predominantly Muslim nationalities — a program that officials said could expand to bar people from additional countries this year. The impact is clear: Though Syria, Afghanistan, South Sudan, Myanmar and Somalia drive more than two-thirds of the international refu*gee crisis, now numbering more than 26 million according to the United Nations, Ukrainians in 2019 outnumbered Syrian refu*gee arrivals in the United States 8 to 1. They outnumbered Afghans nearly 4 to 1, Sudanese 12 to 1 and Somalis 19 to 1. “This is unprecedented, and it represents a shift away from the refu*gee program’s historical foundation, which is a needs-based, vulnerability-based program,” said Nazanin Ash, vice president of public policy and advocacy for the International Rescue Committee. “There has been a reordering of the nationalities, and not on the basis of need. The administration’s policies lock out many of the most vulnerable refu*gee populations.”

What's unsubstantiated is the part about Trump being the one who fed the "anonymous tip" to the police to arrest Epstein. Trump has never publicly said that. The police have never publicly said that. But the same book author who said Trump gave the tip gave the reason why. Are you saying Michael Wolff couldn't write a book without exposing who was the "anonymous tipper?" Because that makes no sense. Source? So....on the one hand you admit that Trump was into financial dealings with shady people through his connection with Jefferey Epstein, yet on the other hand you deny the statement by the same Michael Wolff that you're relying on to say that Trump had Epstein arrested when Wolff says Epstein was going to expouse Trump as a financial fraud? You didn't think this through did you? Yes. Trump dealt with shady people. I agree. That's not the only way to make money, but that's how he chose to make his money. One of those shady people threatened to expose Trump's shadyness and, according to Michael Wolff, Trump tipped off the authorities. Okay.

Have you read your own article yet? President Donald Trump played a central role in launching the 2005 criminal investigation of Jeffrey Epstein by the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office. Michael Wolff, who was close with both men in the early aughts, writes in Fire and Fury that Epstein was outed to authorities soon after he threatened to expose Trump as a financial fraud. It all started in 2004 when Epstein, who was still friends with Trump at the time, invited the real estate scion to see a foreclosed property in the tony enclave that he planned to purchase and then flip.

Okay. So does the large number of Ukranians that Trump let in during his administration warrant his deportation? I mean he didn't marry all of them.

Did you read your own article? According to your article, which sources the book "Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump Whitehouse" by Michael Wolff for the claim that Trump is the one who turned Epstein in, Trump only did it because Epstein was going to expose Trump as a "financial fraud." But...okay let's go with that. Trump still let Epstein come to Mar-A-Lago for two years after the initial arrest. (See: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/04/trump-banned-jeffrey-epstein-from-mar-a-lago-for-hitting-on-girl.html) Now maybe you have a source that says Epstein was banned before 2004. If so please share it. And then Trump let's a deal stand where Epstein got off with a slap on the wrist until 2019? Okay.

Fair enough. I am a free trade agnostic. I think it's a great idea in theory but I'm totally against NAFTA, GATT and pretty much every other free trade "deal" that's been proposed in my lifetime. Even when I voted for Bill Clinton, something about NAFTA didn't sit right with me. If I had to do it all over again I would have voted for Ross Perot.

LOL. More Swordsmyth fan fiction. There is zero evidence Trump had Epstein arrested the first time. But this is what we DO know. Epstein and Trump were friends until they fell over a property they both wanted. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/donald-trump-and-jeffrey-epstein-partied-together-then-an-oceanfront-palm-beach-mansion-came-between-them/2019/07/31/79f1d98c-aca0-11e9-a0c9-6d2d7818f3da_story.html Apparently someone tipped of the police some months after that. In "Trump is a hero" land that must of been Trump making the tip! Only problem is that Epstein was allowed to come party at Mar-a-largo after charges were filed against him and Trump only banned him from coming to Mar-A-lago some 2 years later because Epstein hit on one of the members' daughter. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/04/trump-banned-jeffrey-epstein-from-mar-a-lago-for-hitting-on-girl.html

Anyone who disagrees with SS obviously doesn't count as a person and should be deported.

Byllshyt. I posted the actual facts from the actual timeline. You're just making up Trump fan fiction.

LOL. So logic circuits are broken as hell. I talk about what Bill Clinton did wrong, you respond to me with saying "All of a sudden no tarriffs and foreign dumping are bad now?" and somehow you come back and pretend my "reading comprehension doesn't exist" when I point out to your lying butt that I've never argued that no tarriffs and foreign dumping are bad? GTFO with that nonsense! You made a straw man argument. I never said you weren't in favor of tariffs just like I never said I was against them. Edit: And for the record I didn't even initally post in this thread. You copied my attack on Bill Clinton's trade policy with respect to Haiti over to this thread for reasons only you can fathom.

Okay. So you're fine with deporting Melania then? And Trump too I guess since he's for letting (some anyway) foreigners in to this country.

:rolleyes: Whoever had Epstein arrested only did it so they could murder him in jail and call it a suicide. And it was the Miami Herald dredging the case up again in 2018 that led to the arrest. https://apnews.com/article/epstein-maxwell-timeline-b9f15710fabb72e8581c71e94acf513e November 2018: The Miami Herald revisits the handling of Epstein’s case in a series of stories focusing partly on the role of Acosta — who by this point is President Donald Trump’s labor secretary — in arranging his unusual plea deal. The coverage renews public interest in the case. Advertisement July 6, 2019: Epstein is arrested on federal sex trafficking charges after federal prosecutors in New York conclude that they weren’t bound by the terms of the earlier non-prosecution deal. Days later, Acosta resigns as labor secretary amid public outrage over his role in the initial investigation.