newguy wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 7:31 pm
Why do you all think trump is quick to offer a "but" right there.
I will condemn white supremacy BUT.......
Sure....I "would" say that BUT.......
Serious question.
It would seem like a fine answer would be
"Yes. White supremacy is bad."
And again....what the hell is the point of right then and there directly calling out proud boys. No one was talking about them. No one was saying anything about them.
It's all right there people. It shouldn't take mental gymnastics to figure this shit out.
Biden saying antifa is not malicious is lame, but he didn't name a charter or organization and tell them to be ready. If Biden had said anything like "Black Lives Matter, get ready" or "Rose City Antifa, let's do this" some of you all would be oiling your muskets and preparing for war in the streets.
Both of these bozos make Kanye West look like a very fine choice indeed.
LOL tits or GTFO you must be a woman, ruminating about use of a conjunction in a sentence. Here, I'll help you little lady:
"A conjunction (also called a connective) is a word such as and, because, but, for, if, or, and when. Conjunctions are used to connect phrases, clauses, and sentences. The two main kinds are known as coordinating conjunctions and subordinating conjunctions."
"But" is a coordinating conjunction! So when you're tall enough to go on the big kid rides at Disneyland, you too can forge sentences with two or more co-equal clauses. Now go to church and stay there.
Listen Dr. Dictionary.... "but" is a conjunction with a specific purpose, which is to contrast came before. Or to qualify something you just said. It doesn't just "connect" phrases like "and" does.
There is a difference between saying
white supremacy is band AND antifa is bad
vs.
Sure, White supremacy is bad BUT antifa is bad.
He won't come out and condemn white supremacy because is his sympathetic to groups which get labeled white supremacists, but which he sees as just proud americans and is counting on them to keep them in power for when he loses the rigged election.
Grab a Midol for your menstrual cramps and go review the three examples, in this very thread, with both video and transcripts of Trump rejecting white supremacists. And by the way, proud Americans get labeled as racists and white supremacists daily, so why shouldn't he be sympathetic?
By the way, I have noticed that neither you nor SPELLS have condemned white supremacy here or elsewhere on this forum. Silence = Violence.
"I have longed for shipwrecks, for havoc and violent death.” - Havoc, T. Kristensen
Talking earnestly as if white supremacy has any actual content other than a failure to get with the neoliberal program of depressing wages by demographically replacing whites is cringe and honestly a mark of low intelligence.
I don't give a shit what either of those two think about white supremacists. It is what it is.
My issue with what is going on is the continued attempt to create a narrative that de-legitimatizes our election process AND reinforces the idea that the "right" citizens need to take things into their own hands.
I didn't vote for trump. I won't vote for trump. Democracy means I do not always get my way. That's how shit works.
As president, continuing to suggest the election is rigged, to suggest there will not be an exchange of power, telling armed militias to stand back and stand by is nazi level shit.
If trump wins, trump wins. Democrats should have done a better job. If biden wins, biden wins. That's how these things are supposed to work.
Hold fair elections, do your campaign thing, and keep all the bullshit and corruption under the radar like it is supposed to be.
Bennyonesix1 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 2:05 am
Talking earnestly as if white supremacy has any actual content other than a failure to get with the neoliberal program of depressing wages by demographically replacing whites is cringe and honestly a mark of low intelligence.
Here is what is meant by "white supremacy."
Black people are inherently bad and deserve to be lynched.
Take it at that base level.
These guys are running for president. They are not presenting an in depth thesis on the post socialist neoliberal distortion of traditional economic patriarchy.
It is a softball question. David Duke would have been able to answer it.
Yes. I condemn white supremacy.
And I also condemn the violence of antifa.
Done.
This is not rocket science here. The fact that neither of these two nimrods are able to effectively condemn these things does not bode well.
Grandpa's Spells wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 8:01 pm
Don't break law, don't go looking for trouble, don't brandish, don't shoot somebody
You're talking about the rioters, right? Like the guy that tried to shoot Kyle? Right?
I don't think anybody is making good choices, but I believe the whole point of the CCW fetishists is they can help if they see an active shooter.
The whole point of an automatic first degree murder charge if you kill someone while committing a crime is that you are effectively causing the deadly encounter with your crime, even if circumstances later might give you a reason to kill someone. If I mug somebody, they go for the gun, and I kill them, I expect a murder charge. Kyle killing people who attack him after he murders someone is Kyle committing additional murders.
Uh, dear friend, you don't actually get an automatic first degree murder charge if you kill someone while committing a crime. Drunks kill people on the road all the time and don't get murder one. You should really ask for your money back from your law school. You are a lawyer, spouting all this jurisprudence, right?
Being super confident in wrongness is the best Internet trait. I Googled the term for you, "felony murder," though I may have explained it poorly: https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-c ... urder.html It's possible to be charged with first-degree murder under the felony murder rule even if there's no intent to kill. All that's necessary is the participation in the commission of a felony, where a death occurs during that felony, even if the defendant wasn't the one who killed the victim.
One of the downsides of the Internet is that it allows like-minded people to form communities, and sometimes those communities are stupid.
newguy wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 7:31 pm
Why do you all think trump is quick to offer a "but" right there.
I will condemn white supremacy BUT.......
Sure....I "would" say that BUT.......
Serious question.
It would seem like a fine answer would be
"Yes. White supremacy is bad."
And again....what the hell is the point of right then and there directly calling out proud boys. No one was talking about them. No one was saying anything about them.
It's all right there people. It shouldn't take mental gymnastics to figure this shit out.
Biden saying antifa is not malicious is lame, but he didn't name a charter or organization and tell them to be ready. If Biden had said anything like "Black Lives Matter, get ready" or "Rose City Antifa, let's do this" some of you all would be oiling your muskets and preparing for war in the streets.
Both of these bozos make Kanye West look like a very fine choice indeed.
LOL tits or GTFO you must be a woman, ruminating about use of a conjunction in a sentence. Here, I'll help you little lady:
"A conjunction (also called a connective) is a word such as and, because, but, for, if, or, and when. Conjunctions are used to connect phrases, clauses, and sentences. The two main kinds are known as coordinating conjunctions and subordinating conjunctions."
"But" is a coordinating conjunction! So when you're tall enough to go on the big kid rides at Disneyland, you too can forge sentences with two or more co-equal clauses. Now go to church and stay there.
Bennyonesix1 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 2:05 am
Talking earnestly as if white supremacy has any actual content other than a failure to get with the neoliberal program of depressing wages by demographically replacing whites is cringe and honestly a mark of low intelligence.
Here is what is meant by "white supremacy."
Black people are inherently bad and deserve to be lynched.
Take it at that base level.
These guys are running for president. They are not presenting an in depth thesis on the post socialist neoliberal distortion of traditional economic patriarchy.
It is a softball question. David Duke would have been able to answer it.
Yes. I condemn white supremacy.
And I also condemn the violence of antifa.
Done.
This is not rocket science here. The fact that neither of these two nimrods are able to effectively condemn these things does not bode well.
That's a purely idiosyncratic definition.
The term had become so overdefined (intentionally) that to reject it on that narrow definition means also rejecting it for all other purposes for which it is used.
Grandpa's Spells wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 8:01 pm
Don't break law, don't go looking for trouble, don't brandish, don't shoot somebody
You're talking about the rioters, right? Like the guy that tried to shoot Kyle? Right?
I don't think anybody is making good choices, but I believe the whole point of the CCW fetishists is they can help if they see an active shooter.
The whole point of an automatic first degree murder charge if you kill someone while committing a crime is that you are effectively causing the deadly encounter with your crime, even if circumstances later might give you a reason to kill someone. If I mug somebody, they go for the gun, and I kill them, I expect a murder charge. Kyle killing people who attack him after he murders someone is Kyle committing additional murders.
Uh, dear friend, you don't actually get an automatic first degree murder charge if you kill someone while committing a crime. Drunks kill people on the road all the time and don't get murder one. You should really ask for your money back from your law school. You are a lawyer, spouting all this jurisprudence, right?
Being super confident in wrongness is the best Internet trait. I Googled the term for you, "felony murder," though I may have explained it poorly: https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-c ... urder.html It's possible to be charged with first-degree murder under the felony murder rule even if there's no intent to kill. All that's necessary is the participation in the commission of a felony, where a death occurs during that felony, even if the defendant wasn't the one who killed the victim.
The kid has been charged with two counts of intentional homicide. And a misdemeanor charge.
There is no enumerated underlying felony from which to apply the rule.
Melania, all things considered, is running pretty well with all this. She had arguably the worst news cycle for any First Lady in history and it lasted 3 hours.
One of the downsides of the Internet is that it allows like-minded people to form communities, and sometimes those communities are stupid.
Bennyonesix1 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 2:05 am
Talking earnestly as if white supremacy has any actual content other than a failure to get with the neoliberal program of depressing wages by demographically replacing whites is cringe and honestly a mark of low intelligence.
Here is what is meant by "white supremacy."
Black people are inherently bad and deserve to be lynched.
Take it at that base level.
These guys are running for president. They are not presenting an in depth thesis on the post socialist neoliberal distortion of traditional economic patriarchy.
It is a softball question. David Duke would have been able to answer it.
Yes. I condemn white supremacy.
And I also condemn the violence of antifa.
Done.
This is not rocket science here. The fact that neither of these two nimrods are able to effectively condemn these things does not bode well.
That's a purely idiosyncratic definition.
The term had become so overdefined (intentionally) that to reject it on that narrow definition means also rejecting it for all other purposes for which it is used.
I agree that the definition of white supremacy, what it means to be racist, etc. has been intentionally expanded. The other day I got called a racist for making the observation that Donald Trump enjoys a surprising amount of support in the Vietnamese community. (surprising to the people I was speaking with.) I am not a racist. At least I did not used to be.......
My only point is that during a national debate and it's a softball question. It's not hard to answer. You don't need to use the national debate to try to argue what what supremacy is or isn't, or to try and prop up the proud boys. And the same for papa joe. It is a national debate and you are trying to win undecided voters. You don't need to argue that antifa is an ideology not a group, etc.
All you have to say is I condemn all violence and want to see law and order in our streets.
Fat Cat wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 4:25 amUh, dear friend, you don't actually get an automatic first degree murder charge if you kill someone while committing a crime. Drunks kill people on the road all the time and don't get murder one. You should really ask for your money back from your law school. You are a lawyer, spouting all this jurisprudence, right?
Being super confident in wrongness is the best Internet trait. I Googled the term for you, "felony murder," though I may have explained it poorly: https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-c ... urder.html It's possible to be charged with first-degree murder under the felony murder rule even if there's no intent to kill. All that's necessary is the participation in the commission of a felony, where a death occurs during that felony, even if the defendant wasn't the one who killed the victim.
Low-wattage, smoothbrain take you're bringing to this conversation, SPELLS. You have stained your reputation as an internet know-it-all. You stated it was automatic, and I pointed out to you that it is not.
Since, unlike you, I am capable of admitting that I am not an expert in Wisconsin law, I will leave it at that. My bet is Rittenhouse is acquitted of all charges with the possible exception of some minor firearms charge, but even there, is it "open carry" if you're on private property by invitation of the owner?
"I have longed for shipwrecks, for havoc and violent death.” - Havoc, T. Kristensen
