OldWoodFrame

joined 2 years ago
[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (7 children)

Everybody congratulate the Houthis for singlehandedly stopping Israel's attacks.

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. We all agree that they are doing their trading vessel attacks because they are against Israeli war crimes. Sure that is undeniable, but that's not what is at question. The Houthis do a lot of other stuff, inclusive of their own war crimes. So they're not good guys, they're not heroes, they're not a single issue group that only exists to stop Israel.

They're also not stopping the genocide.

[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee -1 points 4 months ago (2 children)

The Houthis have been committing war crimes for years before Oct 7th. They're not some freedom fighter group that popped up in 2023 only doing bad things to serve their greater goal of stopping Israeli genocide.

That's my entire point, they're not heroes just because you agree with their stance on Israel. I hope you don't agree with their stance on torture and child murder. You are against indiscriminate bombings of civilians when Israel does it, surely you're opposed to it when the Houthis do it.

Two organizations who disagree with each other can both be bad.

[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 0 points 4 months ago (9 children)

They are not stopping a genocide.

[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee -4 points 4 months ago (5 children)

Entirely ignoring the point.

Perhaps shockingly to you, being against genocide doesn't make you a hero. Jeffrey Dahmer was presumably against the Holocaust. He's not going down in history as a hero.

[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 3 points 4 months ago

Republicans put national secrets at risk while bombing Yemen.

You: The important thing to say about this is that Democrats support genocide.

[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 3 points 4 months ago (18 children)

I was almost with you on this one. Just because they're against the guys you don't like doesn't make them heroes.

[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 10 points 4 months ago

Reagan was a lot of things but he sure wasn't a Russian asset.

[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 8 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Can't tell if the way small minded bigots stay away from the best parts of every country is a fun coincidence or causal.

[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Sure, so they don't have power right now. Republicans control both houses of Congress and the presidency. Blame the voters who wanted this scenario if you don't like it.

Schumer is playing the long game trying to get power back at the midterms.

[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The fascists will do what they want either way. They only use laws when it is convenient for them to do so.

If that's your actual stance, then none of what Schumer or any Democrat does, matters at all.

What the fascists wanted was to be legitimized by bipartisan support of their bill. They wanted the Democrats to consent in advance. To take the next small step willingly.

In what world is this the thing that matters? You're really saying fascists would do whatever they want regardless of all laws or institutions, but...not really, the one man holding them back was Chuck Schumer, minority leader in the Senate.

Chuck Schumer has handed the country over to the fascists in exchange for nothing because he serves the same billionaires.

I see how you're getting here, he does fund raise from Democratic billionaires, but the Internet Leftist urge to just dismiss anyone with any political power as not ideologically pure enough and thus the enemy puts such a small ceiling on the movement in terms of actual political results. Nothing to do with this comment thread it's just something that annoys me.

There wasn't a sudden realization from Schumer that flipped his opposition on Wednesday to his support on Thursday. That was his obvious cover to try to hide the billionaires he serves. Don't fall for it.

He flipped overnight, ok. What's the more likely scenario, he got some overnight polling that showed people were going to blame the Democrats for the shutdown so he switched out of political necessity, or he...secretly agreed with the Republicans the whole time but decided to pretend to oppose it for exactly one day for no reason.

Whoever controls the messaging can blame the other party for the shutdown. Democrats don't bother to even have a narrative let alone control one.

Voters are not dumb, they just don't all agree with you politically. They blamed Congressional Republicans in the Ted Cruz shutdown over Obamacare, and they blamed Trump in the shutdown over the Wall. Because those are the people who caused it. In this case, it would be the Democrats forcing a shutdown.

[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 54 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Given enough time, we were always going to have right wing authoritarians back in power.

But call me an idealist, I didn't think it would be actual Nazi sympathizers. Thought the brand was appropriately tarnished what with the Holocaust.

[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee -2 points 4 months ago (5 children)

Whoever shuts down the government, loses. Republicans can't just veto the bill or not pass a budget. But they CAN pass something Democrats don't like and then blame Democrats for shutting down the government if they filibuster it. And voters WOULD blame Democrats, because they would be the party blocking the bill.

Run through the logic, after they stop this budget. Trump does whatever he wants while people blame Democrats, and eventually the Democrats cave and pass it anyway after allowing irreperable harm and harming their ability to take back the House in 2026, or they cave by letting Trump whatever he wants indefinitely.

view more: ‹ prev next ›