this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2023
948 points (98.7% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2624 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Has the appearance of a transient ischemic attack. But apparently "he's fine"

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 259 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Oh goodness, I hope it's nothing minor.

[–] [email protected] 61 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I generally don't wish ill will on people. That being said, this asshole isn't a human in my book. He's just an evil hate filled pile of shit, and it will be a great day for democracy and America when he does die.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I am not going to openly condemn anyone. That said, Mitch opens himself up to some interesting ethical questions.

Is it ok to sacrifice one man to save 300 hundred million?

How about to reduce the medium / long term risk to billions?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Is that man Mitch McConnell? Then hell yeah, this isn't a trolley problem, it's more of trolley party

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I don't wish harm on anyone, well except Mitch McConnell. Oh, and Steve Bannon. Oh, and Bobo and ... Oh, well I guess I do wish plenty of harm.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Fucking Kissinger. Wishing death upon that man makes you a better person.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

It is a highly moral position.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I don't want him dead. I want him to live a long life in excruciating pain.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I'm convinced that McConnell is human, but an agent controlled by the Reptilians to destroy us from within. As evidence, I submit the nauseated look on his face most of the time. The real Mitch is still in there, and is horrified at the terrible things he's forced to do. Obviously, this latest incident occurred because the radio signal to the control chip in his brain got disrupted.

Ted Cruz is the one who is not human. He's their next attempt, a Reptilian in a (bad) human suit. As evidence, well, just look at him. Their later iterations have gotten a little better, like Taylor Greene, Bannon, and Boebert, but still firmly in the Uncanny Valley. Some of them are so convincingly human, though, that I'm not sure if they're Reptilians in disguise, or some sort of latter-day Sonderkommando.

I have to believe this, because it's the only way that the GQP makes any damn sense.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I want to be very clear: I will never support or condone violence. But when this parasite dies (from natural causes), the entire country will be massively better off for it.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

All violence is not equal. Unjustified and unprovoked violence is not the same as justified violence in self defense, for example. To say that one does not support violence is to paint with a very large brush and over important nuance and context

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

I don't believe self-defense is violence. For example, I believe Ukraine has every right to capture, injure, kill, and drive out all Russian invaders as they protect their country.

I get what you're saying, but believe me: I understand how broad my brush is, yet I still don't like violence. In my opinion some things are just black and white... 🤷‍♂️

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A little surprised that you're getting downvoted for this, but I suppose your opinion on what constitutes violence is a value judgment rather than a dispassionate definition. Ukraine driving out Russian invaders from their homeland using whatever means necessary, including violence to the fullest extent allowed by the Geneva Convention, is absolutely justified in my book.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Remember, one of the biggest instances is Lemmy.ml, run by Tankies. Fuck fascism.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

being justified or not has nothing to do with whether something is violent. if someone is getting hurt, maimed, or killed, that's violence, no matter how much they deserve it.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sounds like the end justifies the means, which is itself a tricky statement. Though I think I know what you're saying.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not even close to what I'm saying. But I'm glad you're listening...

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

I think it is what you're saying but not what you are intending to say. It sounds like there are conditions under which violence is ok, though violence itself is something to be avoided. Eg. Ukraine can defend itself using violence because violence in defence is ok, which in my mind sounds a lot like the end (self preservation) justifies the means (war).

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Before you commit to that statement remember that peaceful protests work about 1% of the time.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I know it's frustrating, but some things are more important than the end result. People who have to kill someone are often traumatized. For life. We weren't built to destroy each other, and by doing so, we also lose some of our humanity...

If you go out and kill a murderer... the net total of murderers in the world remains the same.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I think we are lucky to not have to make those choices.

My uncle was murdered and my grandma ended up spending a lot of time talking with the murderer. That's one way. There is also no shortage of stories about people killing those who have traumatized family members (rape and murder). In my case the murderer was troubled, but in other cases (Mitch) they are psychopathic people who I think should be removed from society one way or another. That's my sentiment towards Mitch and his health problems. I am completely ambivalent about his well being. To be completely anti-violence is a position, but it is a hard one to hold in reality.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

I want to be very clear: I will never support or condone violence. But when this parasite dies (from natural causes), the entire country will be massively better off for it.

Why? Violence inflicted by pen is still violence. He's killed thousands.