The Atlas Asylum of absurd/ignorant posts IX

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

This is the right decision.

Suppose you were a wealthy white person in early 1960's Alabama who secretly supported civil rights.  Would you want your $10K donation to a group advocating for passage of the VRA to become a public record?  Do you realize what was likely to happen to this person if it did become public?

Offering a hypothetical scenario from sixty years ago involving $10,000, as a way to excuse billions of dollars flooding political campaigns from god knows where today is certainly a take.

First of all, $10K in 1960 is >$100K today, but OK fine, it could be one of the wealthiest people in the state secretly donating $1M.  

Either way, donations to anything legal should be 100% private unless the recipient notifies the donor in advance that they intend to disclose their info.  I'm an absolutist on this.  Elon Musk should be able to anonymously give $1B directly to DeSantis for President next year, Jeff Bezos should be able to anonymously give $1B to Reelect Biden 2024, and any random person should be able to give their $10, $100, or $1K anonymously to any legal non-profit activity they choose to support.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Abrams was an election denier

Sir, you seem to be lost.  The Simple Truths thread is this way: https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=339441.225

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

If a straight cis male went into the women's locker room, people would rightfully be mad (myself included).

But if a transgender woman (who is statistically lesbian) goes in, nobody says a word, despite the factors that make a straight cis man's reasons for being there concerning still being present.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Hopefully the DA has been talked out of it.  Whatever you think of Trump, this leads nowhere good.  Would likely result in every former president being prosecuted going forward. 

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Abdullah is committing the "No True Scotsman" fallacy when he says terrorists are by definition "not real Muslims." True, we shouldn't take at face value what someone claims to be (North Korea is definitely not a "Democratic People's Republic," despite what they call themselves). However, Abdullah is constructing an artificial standard that excuses all the excesses and extremes of Islam. He is trying to define away the bad aspects of his faith.

Here are the reasons why his attempts fail:

1) Most obviously, there are no adherents to any religion who manage to follow every single command of that religion to the letter. According to Abdullah, those who do violence in the name of Islam are cherrypicking particular aspects of the Koran to follow and not follow-- but this is true for how all people of faith end up approaching their religious texts, no matter how dogmatic they are. Has any Christian lived a 100% truly Biblical life? No. The mere fact that self-professed "Islamic terrorists" do not obey every single element of their holy text does not automatically render them non-Muslims. If this were true, no Muslim would be a "true Muslim." Thus, even if the Jihadis are not following the Koran to the letter, that doesn't suddenly mean that their actions are completely independent from the doctrine of Islam. The opposite is true: They are inseparable.

2) His logic cuts multiple ways. Christianity has an explicit commandment: "Thou Shalt Not Kill." But the Crusaders certainly broke this commandment frequently-- does this mean that the Crusades were carried out by non-Christians? It would be ahistorical in the extreme to make that argument. Doing so would ignore all the nuances of how religious people engage with their faith, and I highly doubt that Abdullah-- as a Muslim-- would be willing to excuse the atrocities committed by Christians due to the perpetrators being "fake Christians."

3) In other threads (and I don't expect you to know this, being a newcomer), Abdullah has suggested that the philosophy of liberalism will ultimately lead to the legalization of infant murder and cannibalism. Ignoring whether or not that's the case, it is intellectually dishonest of him to claim that liberalism leads to hypothetical and speculative future conclusions while ignoring the reality of where Islam is today. I only raised the counterexample of Islam to illustrate that all ideologies, when taken to their most extreme points, end in disturbing places.

I would not agree with you that this is an instance of the no true scotsman fallacy. From what I recall, Islam scholars make references to particular rules. It's stated in the Quran that if a person chooses to not follow some of these rules, then they are to not be considered a Muslim. His claims are coming from scholars who have studied this material for their entire lives; its not a matter of a fallacy, its explicitly known in his faith.

You can certainly pick and choose your definitions in a way to make it so that Abdullah shares the same ideology as these terrorists, but then you would simply be making a trivial claim. In my eyes, to call someone apart of the same or differing ideology, in this case, seems to be a matter of semantics. Do as you wish, but there would be no significance to your claim. Abdullah is claiming that he does not share an ideology with these terrorists, given that some live a life filled with murder while he does not. I would trust him more pertaining to this claim, because he has referenced many scholars who make the same claims, and he has a decent understanding of the Quran.

You can claim that he shares the same ideology as these terrorists because they use the same book and worship similar Gods, but I genuinely do not understand the significance of that claim either. It'd be like saying that because you and Stalin had a similar ideas pertaining to the origins of the universe, you are like him, and hence your ideas must be dangerous.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

https://newrepublic.com/post/172571/starbucks-closing-stores-main-union-stronghold

Last year, Ithaca, New York, became the first town in the country where every Starbucks worker was unionized. Now, by the end of the month, Starbucks will have forcibly shut down all three of its unionized Ithaca locations.

The company announced its intention to close Ithaca’s two remaining stores (in a town in which a large chunk of the population is caffeinated college students) on Friday.

Wonderful news, 100% unironically. I do troll a bit regarding Amazon unions(I don't hate them that much) but Starbucks unions are incredibly dangerous. Poorly paid workers who are relatively educated that unionize can be the vanguard of a communist revolution. All efforts must be undertaken to eradicate Starbucks unions.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

She's obviously not a supporter of "democracy".  Someone who was would not veto legislation passed by the democratically elected legislature at the rate Hobbs does.

That's not a criticism; that's an observation.  One could state that she is a believer in a "republican form of government" as specified in the Guaranty Clause.  I certainly believe that Governors should veto legislation that they consider inherently unwise.  But stop whining about "Our Democracy" when you serve as a roadblock to what the most democratic branch of your state's government comes forth with.

Context only makes it worse

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Too bad we can't deport the native-born meth fiends first. Maybe we could giver citizenship to some illegal aliens on condition that they take the meth fiends' kids.

That may actually not be that bad of an idea.

When I worked at the Public Defender's Office in a major Ohio City about 15 years ago, part of my job was to about once a week along with two others in my office handle all the jail Arrangements that came in the night before. Literally everything from people picked up on a minor traffic warrant to death penalty cases whom I would represent for anywhere from 30 to 90 seconds (depending on how quick the judge was going) and make their initial Bond argument. In all misdemeanor cases I handled that weren't resolved that morning ( ranging from a decent portion to absolutely none depending on which judge was presiding), I would continue on as lawyer for their case in the coming weeks.

I regularly dealt with trash, both black and white, whose answers about prior employment or education I would quickly Garner from them too try to finagle a lower bond from the judge were usually frustrating to dispiriting. Oh I don't know, I used to work for McDonalds. How long ago? I don't know maybe a couple months I'll go. How long? I don't know, a few weeks then they fired me. Hey, make sure to tell the judge I want a recog Bond, okay?

The Hispanic defendants-- almost all illegals , not counting the  occasional  white guy  whose last name was Lopez or the like , were a Stark exception. They were a small percentage, though they've grown in the region since then, but without exception every single one of them had at least one, frequently two jobs, either in construction, landscaping, and / or restaurant work. They verified it with the names of their employers and phone numbers which whenever I followed up on inevitably were the truth. They're sole crimes - and I will admit this is before gangs moved into the region which they definitely have now - - were limited almost entirely to driving without a license for obvious reasons, and the occasional OVI. Not much difference from the whites and blacks I represented, perhaps with a slight Lee higher proportion due to some cultural differences about the acceptability of drinking and driving. The one guy whom I remember was caught for theft. He didn't even rip off a business of all the whites who were scared of Mexican crime, but actually the local Mexican grocery store. I'm not a fan of vigilante justice, but I won't lie I found it satisfying to read about how the store employees gave him a bit, though not excessive in my view, of street Justice before turning over the cops. Viva El Barrio!

 I said it once, I said it a hundred times, and I'll say it again. I would gladly exchange damn near every Hispanic defendant I represented during those years and instead choose to deport a solid majority of the native-born black and white trash I like whom I represented. Those f*** tards were never going to contribute anything to this country or their society Beyond increased prison bills and illegitimate uncared for kids who would grow up sadly just like them.

And I will add Ann Coulter to that trade list, gladly.

You seem to be confused.  The good posts thread is that way: https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=261105.1000

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

.
White women do not experience any oppression in our society today simply because they are women.

This is just… objectively false. I wasn’t aware that the Dobbs decision had a loophole that said white women can still get abortions.

Imagine thinking it being harder to kill your baby in some places is oppression.

Texas woman almost dies because she couldn’t get an abortion

Florida Woman Denied Abortion Miscarried in Hair Salon Bathroom, Lost Half Her Blood

Her miscarriage left her bleeding profusely. An Ohio ER sent her home to wait.

...and so on...

Imagine thinking that denying abortions in those cases isn't oppression.

Except your anger is clearly misplaced. It's the hospitals and medical professionals that failed them in those cases, not the laws y'all are so mad about.

Oh no, honey child. Your moral cowardice is no excuse here. These hospitals and medical professionals so-called failed these women only because they are now afraid to touch abortion with a 20-foot Pole explicitly because the laws that you and yours have put into place making it an issue of those places being shut down and doctors risking prison if they do.

Show an ounce of backbone at least and acknowledge that these incidents are a direct consequence of fighting to being abortion like you've done for years. At least have the courage to say well gee that's bad but it serves a greater good rather than so pathetically wimping out.

It's not "wimping out" to point out that the healthcare professionals involved in those scenarios are more willing to make a political statement than do their jobs.

There is no law that prevents a woman who miscarries from receiving treatment.

What a lying liar you are to hand pick that one in three headline and ignore the fact that it was directly related to abortion law restrictions. As the article noted,

"Holeyman, Zielke's husband, says hospital staff seemed "hesitant." The two of them wondered at the ER if that was because of Ohio's new six-week abortion ban. "I wish someone had come out and said, 'Hey, this is a state law, this is what we're afraid of,' and was a little more frank," he says. Instead he says, paraphrasing what he heard: "It was, 'Well, we don't know if this [pregnancy] is viable, this could still be viable. This is the information you got in D.C., but we need to confirm it."

Not enough of you to crawl out of your shell and admit this is part of your and your ilks doing? Let's proceed shall we?

The situation: Christina Zielke was discharged from an ER in Ohio without treatment for her miscarriage even though she'd been bleeding profusely for hours.

The state law: When Zielke was in Ohio in early September, the state had a law known as a "heartbeat bill" in effect, which bans abortion after about six weeks of pregnancy. The law was passed in 2019, and went into effect the same day the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade on June 24. In mid-September, a judge in Hamilton County blocked the law. Ohio's Republican attorney general has begun the appeals process, and the case is ultimately expected to go to the state supreme court.

Health care providers who violate the law face fifth-degree felony charges, up to a year in prison, loss of their medical license, and fines up to $20,000.

What's at stake: Ohio's abortion restriction doesn't explicitly restrict the treatment of miscarriages or emergency care, but it can have that effect anyway.

Health care providers use the same clinical tools to manage a miscarriage as they do to perform abortions – the medications and surgical options are identical. That can mean when someone seeks care during a miscarriage, a pharmacist or doctor who suspects a patient is seeking an abortion might deny or delay providing treatment, fearing prosecution.

Not enough for you to cry uncle and say okay we lied to this woman suffering but it's for a greater good because the cruelty is the point? Let's carry on further!

"We're in a moment of tremendous fear, and we're working with hospitals and doctors who are not fans of liability," she says. That has led to situations where "physicians or staff say, 'Only if I think I'm 1,000% safe will I do necessary, potentially life-saving medical care.'"

Just fess up. Show a quarter ounce of guts and say. Yes, this is exactly what me and other pro-life radicals- oh sorry, "activists"-- aimed for. Do not even attempt to disassemble that this is a direct straight line result of strict hardcore abortion restrictions being put into place. Again, very very telling that you only chose the one headline about a miscarriage when in fact it was directly related to abortion restriction loss, and you completely utterly hit under the your bed regarding the two other explicitly abortion related headlines.

At least have the courage of us some other pro-life activists and say well it's tragic but it's necessary to save fertilized zygotes--whoops! I of course mean "babies". If not, again, cowardice at it's most pathetic display.

I'm in Ohio today with my granddaughters that were allowed to be born.  Just sayin'.

Why are you wasting time on forum arguments right now?  It’s one day till the 4th of July (and you’re in the best state in the country ).  Go enjoy your visit with your family.  Atlas will be here when you get back

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Rudy was always just a figurehead for the FBI, and not this bullcrap mythology that he was some brilliant prosecutor. Once the United States government no longer needed the Mafia they went after them relentlessly and who better than an Italian-American to be the token prosecutor, one who's dad by the way was a mob associate. Rudy himself has been linked to Russian mobsters ever since as well.

Uh... other than asking captured mobsters to help in the invasion of Sicily (which was based BTW) when have the government and mafia ever really cooperated?

 The United States chose to look the other way on Mafia activities for decades because they favored Italians-Americans having control of rackets over African-American organized gangsters. Hoover who was a virulent anti-Black racist did pretty much nothing about the Mafia. There was even an urban legend that he was a cross-dresser and the mob had compromising pictures of him but this never made any sense. The United States also used the Mafia to undermine union leadership and use them as both a corrupting influence to attack unions and undermine them. The United States started prosecuting the Mafia once union membership had fallen dramatically and organized Black crime had been nearly wiped out through the kingpin statutes and crack-cocaine epidemic.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Another one for me is requiring parental licenses to have children.

how would this be enforced?  Sorry let me rephrase that, how in the hell could this be enforced without trampling on every adult (or if you want to be really sexist about it, half of adults) rights, and some very intimate, important rights.

It would be required for both parents regardless of gender. In order to get a license, you would have to pass a sort of mental competency test, so the would be child would be less likely to have a parent that is abusive or doesnt care about their wellbeing.

right right right, but how would it work?  Lots of forced abortions on the ignorant and dumb?  Lots of forced (and not 100% working and not 100% reversible) temporary contraception?  Forced adoptions?

The mental competency tests wont be a measure of intelligence, but rather a measure of whether you have a mental illness or not, whether you have a past criminal record that has to do with children (i.e. child abuse, sexual assault on a child).

If you manage to get pregnant but dont have a license, than yes would be forced to get an abortion.

If you have a child without a license, the child would be taken to an adoption center and the parent be charged with a fine.

If you agree to take the test and you pass, neither will happen.

It sounds cruel, but imo its necessary.

As the poster of that, I can confirm it does belong here. It hasn't even been a couple days and I'm already looking back and cringing. What the heck was I smoking?

If nothing else, props for admitting you were wrong. 

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

And just in case we thought that Vosem wasn't working overtime to defend ethnic cleansing, here's him comparing Hamas to the kkk.

The reactions in this thread would be quite different if this was the KKK protesting on campus. I wonder what the difference is.

Yes, one of these organizations promotes genocide, and the other "merely" subjugation. They are on very different moral levels.

Truly peak Vosem

Once again, your reading comprehension skills are terrible. I think Hamas is orders of magnitude worse than the KKK, and would never equate them. My opinion of individuals who don't think this way is very low, although in the West they are more commonly simply fools rather than actually hateful. Some, like you, are both.

Also, I think I have finally earned a new signature, since this is Peak Vosem!

My reading skills are fine. I understood your point quite well, it's just moronic and chosen ideological blind spot to pick favorites, even as far as relative evil, between these two I love some organizations. The fact that you constantly poo poo the existence of racism, overt or otherwise, especially among conservatives, is again simply your own blind spot.

It's actually rather ironic that you consistently Squat and squeal about my supposedly terrible writing comprehension when every time you do so it's simply a matter I'm pointing out that I understand your arguments completely, and simply how exitable they are.

Obviously nothing will ever top your AAD outburst (and yes, I know you meant 'loathsome organizations'), but saying in your post accusing me of racism that you "love some" Hamas and KKK is an absolutely excellent Freudian slip.

No, a Freudian slip is something that reflects a person’s actual subconscious feelings.  Frankly, anyone suggesting Badger has subconscious positive feelings about the Klan or Hamas is either an idiot or a troll.  So this voice to text mistranslation objectively doesn’t meet the criteria for a Freudian slip.

An example of a Freudian slip would be if you meant to say “I oppose affirmative action because I want to keep bad students out of our schools,” but accidentally said “I oppose affirmative action because I want to keep black students out of our schools.”

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

No, a Freudian slip is something that reflects a person’s actual subconscious feelings.  

Who cares? It's Badger.

Please.

For all that certain people like to rant and rave about how awful Badger supposedly is, it’s quite telling that his most vocal critics tend to default to making objectively false claims about him. 

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Yes, BUT WHY IS IT ONE OF THE BIGGEST ISSUES?

It is a cipher for colonialism. Even my WASP a** understands that. It's not even the best one IMO because after all we are arguing who is more evil: a right-wing racist Israeli government or an Islamic extremist organization that was originally created by the CIA and another right-wing racist Israeli government to halt Fatah's progress and stop the spread of socialism in the Arab world #missionaccomplished

That whole post is a deranged mess

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Biden to Netanyahu is basically the equivalent of Lukashenko to Putin

I stand by it.

Thank you for posting directly into the thread

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I note several things:

1.  The staffer, herself, has not come forward.

2.  However creepy it sounds, there were no laws broken.  There is no rape allegation, and the young woman is not underage.  Nor is there any allegation of Sexual Harassment or creating a Hostile Work Environment.

3.  Biblically, there is nothing more immoral alleged here than in any number of activities folks here are fine with all day long.

4.  Morally, this is no less "hypocritical" of Rosendale than any number of acts, sexual and non-sexual, by any number of pols.

5.  If he were not attempting to run against a vulnerable Democratic Senate incumbent in a year where a flip could result in control of the Senate, this would likely never have been mentioned, regardless if it's true or false.  The timing of this should be viewed as suspect on its face.

6.  The Death Threat against Rosendale is unacceptable.  If a Death Threat were made against a Squad Member it would generate a whole thread here, yet no one appears upset that Rosendale allegedly received a death threat.

7.  What public interest is served by Heitkamp disclosing this on a Podcast?  If there were a crime committed, shouldn't she go straight to Law Enforcement?

No one here would want to be done this way, especially if this were untrue.  And it could well be true; adulterous pols are baked into the cake in our polity.  But this sort of thing is unfair, and it's especially unfair to Rosendale's family.  There's a right way and a wrong way to go about this.  People who think Heitkamp is OK for doing this ought to apologize for any trashing of Linda Tripp they may have done in the past.