Cursed Political Content (formerly Cursed Social Media)

  • Thread starter TexRex
  • 1,227 comments
  • 40,144 views
22,465
United States
Here to Eternity
TexRex72
Opinion discarded.
I mean...it's wrong, no matter what kind of avatar. The stay of the OSHA mandate does not keep employers from mandating vaccination themselves, nor are those who do subject to liability that they otherwise would not be.
 

Danoff

Who is John Galt?
Premium
30,474
United States
Mile High City
FEHhsO5VcAkDJyc.jpg
Facepalm!
 
12,288
Australia
Adelaide
GTP_Imari
What the? Christmas lights are not Christian.
Don't you remember when Jesus said "Come ye all and decorate trees of pine with magical sparking lights that burn without fire to celebrate my birthday. And use many shekels to purchase gift cards and disposable presents that people do not want, for Supply Side Jesus helps those who help the economy!"

:P
FDY3zKEVkBQRs30.jpg

The **** it is.
What an A-wohl.
 

UKMikey

This is where the casuals hang out, right?
Premium
9,849
United Kingdom
West Drayton
UKMikeyA
UKMikeyA

McLaren

Premium
41,772
United States
Texas


Only the Gravy Seals are allowed to exercise their 2A rights when it comes to showing up to protests with guns.
 
22,465
United States
Here to Eternity
TexRex72

The Biden DOJ is probably aware that Texas law effective September 1, 2021 provides any individual aged minimum 21 years not otherwise subject to state or federal prohibitions may carry a handgun without a permit.

If you had "the right seeks federal intervention in state firearm matters" on your 2021 Bingo card, you got a square.

These mother****ers are "D-U-M-B" stupid!
 

Danoff

Who is John Galt?
Premium
30,474
United States
Mile High City
The Biden DOJ is probably aware that Texas law effective September 1, 2021 provides any individual aged minimum 21 years not otherwise subject to state or federal prohibitions may carry a handgun without a permit.

If you had "the right seeks federal intervention in state firearm matters" on your 2021 Bingo card, you got a square.

These mother****ers are "D-U-M-B" stupid!
One of the benefits of being disassociated with the group that constantly cries "I love guns", like anyone defending CRT is, is that you get a bit more benefit of the doubt when you say "locked and loaded". Does that mean guns? Well, coming from a gun nut quite possibly. Coming from someone defending CRT, maaaaybe.

Poor decision to say it regardless, as if the US needed any more threats that could be considered violent right now.
 
Last edited:
22,465
United States
Here to Eternity
TexRex72
One of the benefits of being disassociated with the group that constantly cries "I love guns", like anyone defending CRT is, is that you get a bit more benefit of the doubt when you say "locked and loaded". Does that mean guns? Well, coming from a gun nut quite possibly. Coming from someone defending CRT, maaaaybe.

Poor decision to say it regardless, the US needed any more threats that could be considered violent right now.
Definitely. There's little doubt in my mind that this was nothing more than someone trying to sound hard and it would certainly have been better if he had not, but even if you take the remarks at face value, there's no actual threat of violence. Being armed is not itself a violent act and stating intent to be armed, particularly in a jurisdiction subject to a supposed "constitutional carry" law as Texas is, isn't stating intent to do harm.

I suspect this (the response from House GOP) is mostly an allegation of hypocrisy directed at the DOJ because of a memo it released regarding an increase in violence and threats of violence at these sorts of school board meetings, but that memo was itself
panned by Republicans including Texas senators Cruz and Cornyn. It was described as intimidation against parents for their speech, and now they seem to be invoking the DOJ and its memo because someone has a view of things that they don't like. That he represents what they deem to be the opposition is likely the only reason they invoke it, because Garland and the "Biden DOJ" also represent what thy deem to be the opposition.

Speaking of CRT and school boards...

FEWRA6CVQAIjD69.jpg
 
Last edited:

Danoff

Who is John Galt?
Premium
30,474
United States
Mile High City
Definitely. There's little doubt in my mind that this was nothing more than someone trying to sound hard and it would certainly have been better if he had not, but even if you take the remarks at face value, there's no actual threat of violence. Being armed is not itself a violent act and stating intent to be armed, particularly in a jurisdiction subject to a supposed "constitutional carry" law as Texas is, isn't stating intent to do harm.
Legally you're right. Practically speaking, it kinda depends on context - including who is saying it. I definitely would take that same statement to be a threat of violence given the right circumstances, I'm not sure those circumstances were present in this case, but I don't see the statement as innocuous.
 
22,465
United States
Here to Eternity
TexRex72
Legally you're right. Practically speaking, it kinda depends on context - including who is saying it. I definitely would take that same statement to be a threat of violence given the right circumstances, I'm not sure those circumstances were present in this case, but I don't see the statement as innocuous.
I know people are going to take things the way they're inclined to take things, but legality is the only relevant interpretation when the interests of the Department of Justice, whomever heads it and their supposed biases, are invoked. Consider a letter issued by Grassley and Republican members on the Senate Judiciary Committee, in which relevant jurisprudence in Brandenburg (incitement) and Virginia v. Black (true threats) are cited, to Garland regarding the aforementioned memo.

Screenshot_20211117-082950_Drive.jpg

Grain of salt regarding the broader subject matter. Marcy Wheeler live tweeted a great thread of Garland getting grilled before the SJC.



It concerns me that this is a dynamic at school board meetings (before mass cultivation of culture war grievance, these were fairly boring affairs), whether it's motivated by mask policies, curriculum fear mongering or who is entitled to use which bathrooms.

House GOP Twitter wants the DOJ to be interested in this but not. They can't allege hypocrisy without calling attention to their own.

Edit: Here's a link to the PDF screengrabbed above.
 
Last edited:

Danoff

Who is John Galt?
Premium
30,474
United States
Mile High City
I know people are going to take things the way they're inclined to take things, but legality is the only relevant interpretation when the interests of the Department of Justice, whomever heads it and their supposed biases, are invoked.
Yea that's absolutely fair.

It concerns me that this is a dynamic at school board meetings (before mass cultivation of culture war grievance, these were fairly boring affairs), whether it's motivated by mask policies, curriculum fear mongering or who is entitled to use which bathrooms.
That concerns me too. This last round of voting I paid attention to school district elections for like the first time ever in my life. That's part of the reason I don't like the "locked and loaded" comment. I just want folks to take things down a peg.
 
22,465
United States
Here to Eternity
TexRex72
That concerns me too. This last round of voting I paid attention to school district elections for like the first time ever in my life. That's part of the reason I don't like the "locked and loaded" comment.
It's not nothing, to be sure, but I suppose I also have a high tolerance for threats.
I just want folks to take things down a peg.
The time has come to peace the **** out.

I referenced this tune in another thread in response to a gif from another of the band's videos (it's driving me nuts not knowing which one, however). Sweary words in not only the song but the title as well.

 
Last edited:

UKMikey

This is where the casuals hang out, right?
Premium
9,849
United Kingdom
West Drayton
UKMikeyA
UKMikeyA
If he tells large swathes of the population they're irrelevant to his campaign, how does he plan to treat them if he gets elected?
 
Last edited: