American Politics 4.0 - Orangeyou Glad He’s Back?

[Mickey76]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Tell me you don't know how AI works by literally telling me you don't know how AI works.

I don’t understand how AI works. I know it can be used to make fake content that is difficult to distinguish from what is true.

[Mickey76]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Hey I noticed you ignored my question over who else is on your list. Care to go back and give it a try?

I am good with a short list reserved for people who say kids are better off when their parents are murdered.

[Duruss]

Originally Posted by Duruss

“Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.”
― Jean-Paul Sartre

This whole Kirk situation brings this quote to mind plus, conservatives never think an something is a problem until it personally effects them, hence the first school shooting many of these people have ever cared about.

In retrospect Sartre was only partly right, a lot of these fascists are too stupid to see the ridiculousness of their words.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by Mickey76

Corsi’s comment is beyond outrageous. Saying “Good riddance” when Hulk dies less so. You are right though it can be difficult to determine where the line is drawn. Ultimately I suppose the public decides where that is and it is subject to change.

Obviously a guy in the back changing tires is subject to less scrutiny than the head coach of the Calgay Flames. But when tire changing man applies for the managers position 4 years down the road and it involves dealing with the public, handing out kids soccer jerseys to the team that is sponsored by the shop, his social media history is going to be relevant.

But, like, that's just your opinion, man. So why is my comment less deserving of scorn or ridicule than Corsi's? Because it involves his kids? On what scale are you comfortable utlizing to establish a federal list of offenders to dox and hold accountable?

Because that's what we're talking about here. Not saying something on Facebook or Instagram and have it affect your employability and/or upwards mobility. This has always been a reality since the dawn of social media.

This is an official list maintained by government authorities who will then administer whatever punishment they deem suitable, and you just know it will be handled with the same careful thought and bipartisanship the UCP did with their book ban. You also know that they will have zero issue with leaking this list to the public so their enemies can face all the vigilante justice. And they will cheerlead it all, demonstrating that declicious home-baked hypocrisy we've come to know and love from these new-aged fascists.

All because 'they have a different opinion'. Thankfully, we'll have folks like yourself showing up in these pockets of the internet to condemn those people as extreme ghouls with no humanity that aren't considering these people as parents and spouses.

We can count on you then, right?

[Mickey76]

[QUOTE=Yamer;9509318]But, like, that's just your opinion, man. So why is my comment less deserving of scorn or ridicule than Corsi's? Because it involves his kids? On what scale are you comfortable utlizing to establish a federal list of offenders to dox and hold accountable?

Because that's what we're talking about here. Not saying something on Facebook or Instagram and have it affect your employability and/or upwards mobility. This has always been a reality since the dawn of social media.

This is an official list maintained by government authorities who will then administer whatever punishment they deem suitable, and you just know it will be handled with the same careful thought and bipartisanship the UCP did with their book ban. You also know that they will have zero issue with leaking this list to the public so their enemies can face all the vigilante justice. And they will cheerlead it all, demonstrating that declicious home-baked hypocrisy we've come to know and love from these new-aged fascists.

All because 'they have a different opinion'. Thankfully, we'll have folks like yourself showing up in these pockets of the internet to condemn those people as extreme ghouls with no humanity that aren't considering these people as parents and spouses.

We can count on you then, right?[/

I don’t think it’s too difficult to distinguish between your comment and Corsi’s. Corsi’s involved innocent children yours did not. Ultimately though I suppose society/the market place determines this. If there was a tire shop in Calgary where all the employees wore oilers gear all the time I’m guessing most Calgary Flames fans wouldn’t shop there. However if their tires were 50% less than most would.

Back to your original point, of course it is my opinion that Corsi’s comment is worse than yours, but when most of society shares an opinion it becomes a shared value. If you could talk to the largest 50 companies in Canada and show then both yours and Corsi’s posts, I can almost guarantee you that none would have a problem with yours and many/most would have a problem with Corsi’s and it would affect future employment.

It’s more than a “difference of opinion.” Saying “I find Charlie Kirk’s views reprehensible” or just plain “ I think Charlie Kirk is reprehensible”is a difference of opinion. No company/organization that I can think of would have a problem with that view or posting that view. Saying his kids are better off because he has been murdered is not the same thing. It’s not even close to the same thing. It can and should get you in hot water.

[FlamesAddiction]

How long until Trump cancels MLK day and replaces it with a Charlie Kirk day?

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by Mickey76

I don’t think it’s too difficult to distinguish between your comment and Corsi’s. Corsi’s involved innocent children yours did not. Ultimately though I suppose society/the market place determines this. If there was a tire shop in Calgary where all the employees wore oilers gear all the time I’m guessing most Calgary Flames fans wouldn’t shop there. However if their tires were 50% less than most would.

Back to your original point, of course it is my opinion that Corsi’s comment is worse than yours, but when most of society shares an opinion it becomes a shared value. If you could talk to the largest 50 companies in Canada and show then both yours and Corsi’s posts, I can almost guarantee you that none would have a problem with yours and many/most would have a problem with Corsi’s and it would affect future employment.

It’s more than a “difference of opinion.” Saying “I find Charlie Kirk’s views reprehensible” or just plain “ I think Charlie Kirk is reprehensible”is a difference of opinion. No company/organization that I can think of would have a problem with that view or posting that view. Saying his kids are better off because he has been murdered is not the same thing. It’s not even close to the same thing. It can and should get you in hot water.

You ignored so much of my post and completely missed the point.

No it shouldn't. That's the point. It is freedom of speech to say Charlie Kirk's kids are better off without him. You're welcome to disagree and even be offended by it, but you can't legislate locking someone up and destroying their lives because it hurt your feelings. It reaches nowhere near the levels of something like hate speech, for example. And no, Charlie Kirk should not have been assassinated because he spread the latter.

It can be tasteless and crude, and employers have every right to monitor how their employees reflect their image, but it should never be illegal.

The mere thought that you might think that's OK, and that the parameters of how that should be guided and operate according to some organic process based on your made up figures and hyperbole is absolutely terrifying.

Knock it off. This is how you get fascism.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by #-3

I would like to extend an invitation Goriders, Stone156 and others who have spent 2 days expressing disgust at not only the few who were openly celebrating Kirks death, but conflating that stance with those of us who are not openly mourning Kirks death, because we are happy to point out that he is an unsympathetic figure.

Please tell us how you feel about Fox and Friends openly advocating for the involuntary euthanization of undesirables?

Its been 7 hours and we are really missing your commentary on the moral obligations to care for human life.

Hey Mickey76, I would like your take on Fox and Friends assertion that lethal injection is proper response to homelessness?

We havent really been able to solicit a response to that question from the group who is so offended by the 3 or 4 people on this board openly celebrating Kirks death, and those who don't seem to be able to distinguish between those 3-4 people, and dozens here who are unwilling to white wash Kirks well documented villainy in the face of his violent demise.

I am really very interested to hear what we should do about political commentor who explicitly on air advocate for Nazi programs like the euthanization of undesirables. It's a way more interesting conversation than doxing people.

[Drak]

Is Mickey76’s business something we can choose not to do business with? If so, good, because I’d rather not do business with someone who thinks it’s ok to compile a one sided government run big brother data base list, potentially littered with false information, about people they can fire or worse. etc., for not liking folks like CK.

[Mickey76]

Originally Posted by Drak

Is Mickey76’s business something we can choose not to do business with? If so, good, because I’d rather not do business with someone who thinks it’s ok to compile a one sided government run big brother data base list, potentially littered with false information, about people they can fire or worse. etc., for not liking folks like CK.

I don’t think the list in question was being curated by the government. I don’t think the government should be involved in anything like that. However I agree with the sentiment of your post, directing your business towards people you share values is a good idea. I would not support a business where the owner enthusiastically declares kids better off because their dad has been murdered. You seem to find this endearing so you should find ways to support that point of view.

[#-3]

Mickey, since your still posting?

No stance on what we should do about TV channels who advocate for the state sponsored murder of homeless people? What is the correct thing to do about those TV Channels?

[Fuzz]

Mickey is engaging in the same type of disingenuous debating Kirk did. Ignore all the hard questions about the substance of your position, and carry on with the obvious stuff most people can generally agree on. You'll appear fair because you never address the base position others find so evil.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Mickey is engaging in the same type of disingenuous debating Kirk did. Ignore all the hard questions about the substance of your position, and carry on with the obvious stuff most people can generally agree on. You'll appear fair because you never address the base position others find so evil.

Or answer a question by asking the other person 5 questions back in quick succession while talking a mile a minute so they can't formulate a response. He was good at tripping people up that way, but it wasn't good faith dialogue like his fans insist.

[Mickey76]

Originally Posted by #-3

Mickey, since your still posting?

No stance on what we should do about TV channels who advocate for the state sponsored murder of homeless people? What is the correct thing to do about those TV Channels?

That’s terrible. If I was running the news station I would fire him. I don’t think the murder of people should ever be condoned. Although apparently if the kids are better off it might be ok.

The question of what to do next is difficult.Should that host ever work in TV again? I don’t know. Should John Rocker or Bill Peters starve to death? Probably not, but I wouldn’t go to flames games if he was the coach. Is there any way to restoration after comments like that? I don’t know but it’s a question society needs to figure out. If an 18 year old says the N word there should be consequences but probably not for 50 years.

[FlamesAddiction]

I don't know if his own kids are better off without him, but one less political activist pushing a vision of America that tolerates school shootings as an acceptable tradeoff for having 2nd amendment rights, is not a bad thing for other people's children.

[Mickey76]

I’m not a huge Kirk fan although I did admire him, but the post about the kids being better off really bothered me. I can’t remember the last time I read something online that really bothered me a day or two later. When I see people rushing to defend it I am baffled. It seems like we’ve lost all our humanity. I rarely post because I seldom get worked up about what people post online but this one got to me. I had a friend whose dad died when he was 10 and it was unquestionably the worst thing that ever happened to him by a factor of 100. When I see it casually thrown out like it’s nothing and people seemingly agreeing with it I wonder what has happened to everyone.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Mickey76

I am good with a short list reserved for people who say kids are better off when their parents are murdered.

weird take.

what about pedophiles?
what about murderers?


Seems like a pretty targeted list you are making that appears to be made on the basis of political affiliation only, given that you never proposed or mentioned support for this type of list until a right-wing political commentator was murdered.


see why this is bad?

[Mickey76]

Originally Posted by Cappy

weird take.

what about pedophiles?
what about murderers?


Seems like a pretty targeted list you are making that appears to be made on the basis of political affiliation only, given that you never proposed or mentioned support for this type of list until a right-wing political commentator was murdered.


see why this is bad?

It has nothing to do with politics. The comment that upsets me is the kids are better off with their dad having been murdered. I don’t know who the most liberal person in the US congress is but if they were murdered I would call for the same consequences if someone suggested their kids were better off with their parent murdered. I’ve never thought of it until now because I’ve never seen such an outrageous post.

[Drak]

Admiration of a White Supremacist who thought children being obliterated at school is just a price to pay for his right to bear arms.

Isn’t that interesting…we seem to have a few of those around here.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by Mickey76

That’s terrible. If I was running the news station I would fire him. I don’t think the murder of people should ever be condoned. Although apparently if the kids are better off it might be ok.

The question of what to do next is difficult.Should that host ever work in TV again? I don’t know. Should John Rocker or Bill Peters starve to death? Probably not, but I wouldn’t go to flames games if he was the coach. Is there any way to restoration after comments like that? I don’t know but it’s a question society needs to figure out. If an 18 year old says the N word there should be consequences but probably not for 50 years.

So to recap:

You think a database that tracks everyone with wrong think or distasteful comments is a good thing, but it shouldn't be created and maintained by the government. Maybe just an unqualified group of vigilantes, whose standards should come from the court of public opinion. But it should definitely include any statement that says Person A's kids are better off without Person A.

And you don't know what the consequences should be. Maybe they don't get a job, maybe they get fired, maybe they face an onslaught of endless and threatening harrassment, maybe they die. Maybe not. Or maybe yes.

You've had a big day. CorsiLeagueHockey said something you took issue with you've championed them being entered into a database for later "consequences". All reichey then.