I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

True. But let's be brutally honest about why this is happening. Democrats want more bodies in the booths. Ninety percent of the party apparatus couldn't give a fuck about these peoples' rights. One can't help wonder how many "tough on crime" Ds suddenly supported felons' voting rights when they became a large enough statistical bloc to make a difference.

I find it spellbinding that you think you have such a deep understanding of the inner workings of everyone's mind and their motives. What is even more absorbing is watching you force equivalency on the removal of a restriction on voting with that very same restriction. It's all so gripping.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

That's exactly what I was saying. Except it applies to both parties.

This is completely and totally untrue. We are talking about voting, not approaches to governing or campaign promises. Republicans restrict voting. Democrats do not.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

But in the end, neither group offers the lumpen proletariat anything more than a temporary hand job to ease the pain of their utterly fucked futures. And neither tells the poor sons of bitches the ability of govt to protect and provide for them all in the manner to which they've become accustomed is coming to an ugly conclusion sooner than expected.

I'm not having this conversation with you again.

TM

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Oh dear. You got the brutal part, but not the honest part. You're just making shit up about what (unidentified) motivates Democrats. If you want to make shit up, go for it, but don't pretend you're being honest.

"Party Apparatus," not Democrats in general. Neither party organization gives a fuck about much more than winning and preserving its power.

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

What?

I do not know how I could possibly make this any fucking clearer. There are no instances of voter suppression occurring w/r/t white people (except, as Ty pointed out, the one that was handled*). The whole point of the VRA is to police states that suppress minority voters. If the only instances of voter suppression occur in one direction, then how the fuck does what you just wrote make any sense at all?

TM

*Let me guess your response: But we don't know about all the voter suppression of white people because the non-colorblind DOJ didn't investigate all the instances of white voter suppression!

FOH.

eta: I find it fascinating that you don't understand that I was agreeing with him based on what he wrote.

Calm down.

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Technically, the application is supposed to be effected in a colorblind manner. That's all I read him or SEC to be saying. And that's all I said.

Calm down.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

Calm down.

Fuck off.

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Are you talking about something I said?

Calm down. And listen to some post-Thanksgiving funk. The Nite-Liters with "Stuff-n-it." Get it? Stuff-n . . . stuffing? Get it? Calm down. The Daily Dose:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjH-qjxk9-c

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

Calm down.

Fuck off again.

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Fuck off.

That is the opposite of calming down.

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Fuck off again.

I don't understand why my calming directive appears to be having the exact opposite of the intended effect. It's like this place is some sort of backwards world.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

Calm down. And listen to some post-Thanksgiving funk. The Nite-Liters with "Stuff-n-it." Get it? Stuff-n . . . stuffing? Get it? Calm down. The Daily Dose:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjH-qjxk9-c

Since you're here anyway... "Nevermind the Bollocks, Here's Joe Corre: Idiot of the Decade"?

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Since you're here anyway... "Nevermind the Bollocks, Here's Joe Corre: Idiot of the Decade"?

I don't know, it's kind of punk rock, right? Nihilism and all that? Right? "Get pissed. Destroy." Although the whole Thames bonfire thing is more glam than punk. I guess I have not spent a lot of time evaluating the moral implications of his actions. I've just been so terribly worried about Kanye.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Ninety percent of the party apparatus couldn't give a fuck about these peoples' rights.

He says based on his decades of hands-on work within the party...

One can't help wonder how many "tough on crime" Ds suddenly supported felons' voting rights when they became a large enough statistical bloc to make a difference.

One can't help but notice how much progress the Ds made in removing the racists among them (mostly by those people by flipping to R, but always greater awareness).

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

I don't know, it's kind of punk rock, right? Nihilism and all that? Right? "Get pissed. Destroy." Although the whole Thames bonfire thing is more glam thank punk. I guess I have not spent a lot of time evaluating the moral implications of his actions. I've just been so terribly worried about Kanye.

It sounds terminal. Kim's been sleeping next to his bed. I hope if the end does come, it comes gently, with St. Peter greeting him warmly, before taking him to meet himself.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

By *perceived* politicization, I guess I am more referring to the partisan echo chamber that infects both sides now. Not that the DOJ is itself problematic, but that no matter who is in control, the other side cannot acknowledge a single success of the other side or fault of their own. Regarding the current DOJ, a good portion of the country thinks of Fast & Furious, intentionally gunwalking to support an anti-second amendment agenda ("We need to brainwash people about guns"--Holder), contempt of Congress, BS executive privilege claims, and not handing over documents when they think of the DOJ, because that's what conservative media tells them about.

To illustrate the point you go on to make, I had forgotten about most of that. I think pretty much all non-issues, but as you say perception on one side...

And on another topic, I have seen reports that Hillary may be keeping her options open for 2020. I cannot help but think it is a colossally bad idea for Dems, but would appreciate the thoughts of someone who actually likes her.

Sounds like a colossally bad idea to me.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

And on another topic, I have seen reports that Hillary may be keeping her options open for 2020. I cannot help but think it is a colossally bad idea for Dems, but would appreciate the thoughts of someone who actually likes her.

Not sure how much I like her, but I don't dislike her. She can her options wide open, but there is not a chance that she will be able to get Democrats to give her another shot.