this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2025
1017 points (99.4% liked)

politics

26740 readers
2367 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A retired Tennessee law enforcement officer was held in jail for more than a month this fall after police arrested him over a Facebook post of a meme related to the September assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

Prosecutors eventually dropped the criminal charge brought against Larry Bushart, but his stint behind bars came to exemplify the country’s tense political and legal climate following the tragedy, when conservatives sought to stymie public discourse about the late controversial figure that it saw as objectionable.

Now, Bushart is suing over his incarceration.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

Get the fuck out. Did you miss the part where you said...

That does not change it from being the framework for succession and their main complaint

...which was in reference to me saying "states rights is a bullshit excuse?

Which I literally screenshotted , highlighted, and made giant red arrows pointing to it.

Do I need to do that all in-text for you? Are you using a braille display or something?

Edit: Fuck it, went back to your original comment that prompted all of this. You sole position in there was that states rights was the founding principle of the Confederacy, and you even recognize there that it was complete bullshit excuse, but also claim that it was the sole cause for secession (and thus the civil war).

Point to where I said or implied slavery was not the primary cause of the civil war. I won’t hold my breath because that isn’t something I’ve said nor would said

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world -1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Yes their main complaint is that a slave in one state is a Freeman crossing the border to another. They complain about it at length and it was indeed the framework they attempted to use to legalize their secession. That's fairly common knowledge so I'm not sure why you would take issue with that nor do I see how you taste it as denial of slavery.

which was in reference to me saying "states rights is a bullshit excuse?

To which I replied

That does not change it from being the framework for succession and their main complaint

Which is accurate, something being idiotic does not make it unfactual. "They're stealing our jobs, they're all criminals" is a shitty excuse to attempt to deport millions does that at all change the fact that is the excuse they're trying to use? I say no but I'd love to know your opinion on it.

Edit: Fuck it, went back to your original comment that prompted all of this. You sole position in there was that states rights was the founding principle of the Confederacy, and you even recognize there that it was complete bullshit excuse, but also claim that it was the sole cause for secession (and thus the civil war).

All this time and you didn't bother to find out what the actual contention was? Educators can't say it wasn't about states rights because it was, it's rooted in slavery sure but that's not the cause of the civil war both Jefferson Davis and Lincoln agree on this and notably slavery was never abolished in this country.

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Un-fucking-beleiveable.

Well anyway, we've already established previously that you tacitly admitted to being a disingenuous troll, not sure why I'm bothering at this point anymore. Someone needed to counter your fake bullshit, and coming with direct quotes from you and actual links to actual references well establishes that you know what you are saying is a false re-writing of history to whitewash the fucking morons that betrayed the country to fight for the "right" to deny foundational rights and freedoms to others.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Well anyway, we've already established previously that you tacitly admitted to being a disingenuous troll,

And when did we do that exactly?

It's not rewriting anything.

Let's go fact by fact.

Did the with use a framework of states rights to attempt to legalize seceding? Yes or no. No bullshit editorializing, yes or fucking no.

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

^^

Did the with use a framework of states rights to attempt to legalize seceding? Yes or no. No bullshit editorializing, yes or fucking no.

Point to where I said or implied slavery was not the primary cause of the civil war. I won’t hold my breath because that isn’t something I’ve said nor would said

You fucking tell me.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 32 minutes ago)

See. When pushed into a yes or no you simply refuse to answer.

Yes or no genius. Should be easy to answer.