@anti_dan's banner p

anti_dan


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 06 20:59:06 UTC

				

User ID: 887

anti_dan


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 06 20:59:06 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 887

So do we conclude Whites should logically just be "race-realist but not racist"? The problem is that even if we could magically snap our fingers to get to Walt's end-goal - this would still be anti-White. They both talk about being "harsh on crime" as though this just means we turn up a dial that puts more criminals (a disproportionate amount of whom are Black) into prison. But in practice, enacting any such policy basically has to make general society a lower trust (i.e. worse) place to live in. For some specific examples:

Very much agree.

One thing that is not talked about, in the context of high black crime. Is how much higher it actually is than the official statistics indicate. Even before BLM and Floyd made policing minor crime in black areas taboos, it already was not emphasized. Black neighborhoods regularly deteriorated into street parties of teens burning garbage and openly drinking and using drugs. Rapes were and are common, and never reported, in these fiery, but mostly peaceful (unironic use of the phrase), street gatherings. The only thing that gets the cops to intervene is a gunshot, where unless they catch a body, the perp is rarely caught.

Now, try to imagine a scene like that happening in a white neighborhood. You can't. 5 cop cars descend on a house in the burbs because its 10 PM and the music is a little loud.

It continues to surprise me how many of these blunders date back to the first weeks of the administration. I'm not a huge fan of the previous president, but many of Biden's first actions included repealing...

Its similar to the "reversed stupidity is not intelligence." Biden just got into office and reflexively repealed a bunch of high profile Trump actions without seeming to engage in any thoughts about the merits and tradeoffs relating to any of those policies. So what you got was floods of new asylum claims, funding going to a bunch of terrorists, etc.

Why would there be assimilation into whiteness when all the incentives are for them to continue to claim distinctive minority status?

Assumes facts not in evidence. Given that most Hispanic voters are from places like Mexico and Puerto Rico, and the new migrants are from places like Ecuador and El Salvador, there isn't good evidence that they particularly want those people coming in. Intra-Hispanic racism is very strong, likely stronger than anti-Irish/Italian sentiment ever was in America. It is a big mistake to imagine that non-whites abide by anything similar to the thought processes that govern whites, particularly urban liberal whites who dominate the discourse.

Yes, they just got a lawyer a few days ago. Robert Barnes found out about it because he was in town working the Amos Miller case and he wanted to verify some details before he filed anything.

Oh god. How does this guy keep grabbing these cases up?

US foreign policy is schizophrenic.... Why should anyone trust in his word when the next guy can negate it?

Because we are the 1000 lb gorilla. But more seriously, this is all caused by Presidents thinking they can make foreign policy solo. Wars are supposed to be declared by Congress. Treaties are supposed to be approved by 2/3 of the Senate. If Obama wanted to make a serious nuclear deal with Iran he should have gotten 2/3 of the senators on board, not done a deal he knew 54 senators were opposed to. This sort of unserious flipping happens when a President tries using foreign policy to secure victories on domestic policy.

Or what do you call bombing another country's consulate?

Well, given the facts of this case, what Israel did was a counter-terrorism operation. They bombed a bunch of people who's main function was facilitating Hezbollah rocket attacks into Northern Israel.

A someone who went to University in Pittsburgh this is all very similar to the experience of the city I had. Particularly the section about getting super lost because of one wrong turn or missing an exit.

That wing is still at the same place even after the've been "humiliated". They are incapable of that emotional state.

I don't consider it much of a "rare" miss. I find Hanania's writings increasingly incoherent across the board, and I think he is generally searching for an odd niche to try and maintain relevance now that his actual big splash in has waned. Trying to balance takes in the anti-woke sphere to ensure you are "respectable" tends to put you into a land of comments that are either uninteresting, or fallacious, and thats where this one, and a lot of them recently, have landed.

Well she also apparently threw herself a wedding themed 40th birthday party which is why she is actually trending right now. Because of the levels of cringe that inspires in so many people.

Because your plan is nonsense? The distinction between Hamas and Gazans is thin, at best. More realistically it is nonexistant for most Gazan adults. Plus, the surrendering people will inevitably contain hordes of Hamas agents, even if my position that most Gazans are basically Hamas happens to be wrong. So at best you'd end up doing nothing, more likely youd be exposing your civilian administrators of these camps to endless violence from fake surrenders.

Plus, I argue with some of your premises. Hamas is a highly legitimate government of Gaza. Few governments on earth so tightly hew to their people's political positions.

Alternatively...Biden could enforce the border. I know it sounds crazy, but at this point its a political win for him to work with Abbot.

A few points that I think are salient to the issues presented, but I don't think were appropriately discussed.

  1. The FBI, prior to J6 had many directives to investigate conservative orgs. There really was no rational and reasonable reason to be doing this, so it is very strong evidence (alongside the cornucopia of evidence discussed here) that there is serious anti-conservative bias at that organization, which obviously is a key cog in the "deep state" as defined in the discussion.

  2. Yassine didn't think entering the Capitol Building/encouraging that was all that dispositive, and I don't think this was pushed back against enough. Entering the Capitol IS why J6 is "JANUARY SIXTH". If no one enters the building its a boring protest outside the Capitol that has no political value to Democrats at all.

  3. More buttressing of the problems with J6 is how, if there is no inside job, its just a demonstration of outright incompetency. I will describe a generic building to you: Large masonry structure, at the top of a hill, with armed guards. What have I described? A fort. Julius Caesar could have held the Capitol building against the J6 crowd with 8 men in sandals equipped with no more than some sticks and a few shields. An the Capitol police lose it with dozens of times that manpower? That is, indeed, suspicious.

  4. Also, chronically under-discussed is how incredibly valuable "JANUARY SIXTH" has been to Democrats. Not only has it been an excuse to prosecute thousands of conservatives in connection to it, not only has it been an excuse to prosecute an opposition candidate for the office of the President, but its been nearly their only political argument for 3 years now. Without J6 they have nothing. That protesters were allowed into the Capitol has resulted in the largest political victory for either party in my lifetime. And that really should mean something to anyone discussing the events of that day.

Texas is standing up because they kind of are actually defending themselves against an invasion right now. Several hospitals are basically only serving migrants and aren't being compensated. They are threatening to shut down and leave the state. Biden has no political leg to stand on, and only a thin legal leg that there are 4 strong votes on SCOTUS to kick out from under him, and 2 questionable votes.

Jayapal is the chair of the CPC, but doesn't appear to reflect progressive consensus on Ukraine, which is that defeating Russia is super important.

Uhh? Biden's whole Mid East policy is based on pandering to that wing. They have a lot of cachet.

My answer is 'probably around 300 to 500 years.'

A fairly unhinged estimate. Jewish refugees and Chinese immigrants have shown quite definitively the answer, in America, is closer to 20 years. Almost all of your subpoints are simply wrong, and/or disconnected from what is happening in America. Poor education does not stick, indeed, in America, blacks are furnished with better education than anyone else (save for the part where they are in classrooms with other black kids). Black kids raised in the top 10% households commit crimes on rates on par with white kids in the bottom 10%. The problem is clearly not some legacy, unless that legacy is an internalized cultural one. An internalized culture that would be stronger by orders of magnitude than any other in the US from 1950 to today, and it also would have to have magically also spun up a high bastardy rate as part of its legacy.

If you think Zendaya is hotter than Gal Gadot you need to get your eyes checked. She's not unattractive, but she has a very underdeveloped body for an adult woman. She's mid-pubescent for a healthy, on track to be very attractive, woman.

The Arizona case that currently is the most relevant precedent was made on the thinnest of grounds and is ahistorical. And states, traditionally, had the power to reject foreigners, particularly the indigent. Precedents beggining in the 1960s are against this...but the Warren court is notoriously wrong about all things.

Also, the invasion/immigration thing is obviously a question of fact and law to be subject to intense argument and scrutiny if ever litigated. I don't think anyone in the federal government wants to be calling witnesses to the stand about how 5000 people a day crossing the border, more or less unvetted, through cartel territory, is actually technically immigration not an invasion. It looks like an invasion to a large % of the populace. It is an invasion in the practical sense that the people abetting it ( Biden) seek to use it to change the populace of the nation. Its a total landmine for that side. While the Abbot side is simple and good for him, at least until the point where he loses on a technicality (not guaranteed) and then calls Roberts a loser who sucks big donkey dick.

?? Biden has been extremely moderate and a bunch of far left cultural elements seem to be coming to heel. What’s going on in the movie you’re watching?

You'd describe the border as moderate? Ketanji Jackson-Brown? Numerous attempts to imprison Republicans over slap on the wrist level infractions?

I live by a large shelter for migrants in the city. They have a group of folks who are dedicated to this candy/soda selling on the side of the road. The main reason I think these people are here is for the schools. Word was out from day 1 that they could and should enroll the kids in schools and they have. The local bus stops are bustling with migrants from 6-8am and 3-4 pm. The resource strain is fairly acute, at least locally, on the schools and public transit. I will say they are polite and clean, but there are things that I am seeing as fairly big failure modes. These Venezuelans are terrible drivers, and have crappy cars, so there is a spike in them getting into accidents, where they don't have insurance, registration, or a driver's license. Not great for a court system and PD that is already hard up for manpower. I'm also a bit disappointed in the entrepreneurial spirit of the males in the camp. I tried to hire one to help me get a chair out of a u-haul and up 4 flights of stairs. No bites at $50 for one big ass chair.

I am willing to go on the "fraud never stopped, why the heck do you think it did" theory. I will cite known major fraud cases and indicate that nothing has changed to make that less likely.

‘Tightening the rules around violent crimes getting bargained down to misdemeanors for the nth time’ is a reasonable technocratic thing that Texas might do if it gets around to it

I'd put that in the "not likely anywhere at all". And Texas as a whole can't do much either. These are all local decisions made by prosecutors offices based around a bunch of overworked, understaffed, underpaid ASAs and ADAs doing triage on a messy docket. Dealing with violent criminals as violent criminals is much harder than dealing with them when they are doing other, easy to prove, bad things like shoplifting and being illegal immigrants. Thats why things like the no-pros on shoplifting has such outsized effects. That is a 2 hour bench trial and then with 3 strikes or similar laws you've got someone off the street for 90 days, then 180 then 365, etc. A felony trial is going to take 2 days minimum.

I have contact with states attorneys who deal almost exclusively with DUIs and other traffic matters. The fact is, minor offenses are down, major offenses are up. DUIs, going 40+ over the limit, way up. Going 10 over, almost non existent in court. So we have seen the enforcement bifurcation, at least in this area.

The other obvious problem I've seen is people did forget how to drive. The number of bad drivers has clearly increased. Maybe the DMV waiving in person testing for a while is a cause, maybe people just lost it after 12 months with no traffic, but the roads are clearly less safe.