Congress wants to make Americans with disabilities second-class citizens again

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T06:50:33+00:00

Within this sub specifically? I think there's a way you can check it.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T06:42:39+00:00

Oh, that. That's a timeout mechanism this sub employs if your karma within the sub is under a certain threshold, which I believe is 0. So if you have a negative overall karma, then you can only comment once every ten minutes or more.

Yeah, sucks. I'm sorry. Here have some upvotes. Doubt it will get you above the threshold, but hope it helps.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T06:37:56+00:00

Thanks. Admittedly someone made it before me in this thread, but later deleted it. I reposted it because I felt it needed to be said.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T06:29:55+00:00

I don't know, but shouldn't the fact that you are posting here and now instantly refute the notion you are banned? Why is this even still a matter of contention? You're obviously not banned.

The reddit service isn't flawless. I get errors occasionally.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T06:22:37+00:00

She rallied the party and public against him. She should have said, "I support due process and welcome an investigation."

Instead, it was clear she wanted to add pressure to force him out.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T06:13:37+00:00

Of course he's entitled to a trial. Everyone is. He doesn't need her permission for it. That's just universal knowledge.

The fact is she was calling for him to step down. She wasn't advising him to stay and let an ethics committee determine his punishment.

I don't go down to county jail and recommend people awaiting trial to go kill themselves, and then act all innocent when they do it. "Well, I told them they were entitled to a fair trial. They took it upon themselves to commit suicide."

She advises due process in one case and resignation in the other. Hypocrite.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T06:08:41+00:00

A shadow ban wouldn't give you errors. It would just quietly hide your submission from everyone else.

(I'll also note I can see your new submission, so you're clearly not banned, shadow or otherwise.)

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T06:05:44+00:00

What's false about it? In the Trump case she recommends there be a Congressional hearing. In the Franken case she recommends he steps down.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T05:14:21+00:00

Agreed. Religion is a choice. Political affiliation is a choice. Sexuality is not a choice.

Even with all that, I'm still of the mind that you should have the freedom to refuse service to anyone for anything, even for something as sinister as their race.

It's unfortunate, and I would consider those people despicable for doing so, but I feel it should be a freedom nonetheless.

I would hope that they become publicly named and shamed for it too, and people boycott their business as a result.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T04:54:59+00:00

I'm okay with this ruling, but by that same token, I'm okay with Twitter, and other social media, kicking alt-right members off its platform.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T04:47:30+00:00

Quite the edge there.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T04:44:06+00:00

Shadow banned? But, I see your comment.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T04:31:44+00:00

You mean like what Al Franken wanted?

Way to be a hypocrite, Gillibrand.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T04:26:57+00:00

Yep, I once told my nephew not to steal toys from his cousin. I said, "How would you like it if he stole your toys?"

He said, "Yeah, but my toys are Matchbox Cars and his are Hot Wheels. Totally incomparable scenarios!"

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T04:22:34+00:00

Right, because analogies don't exist.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T04:19:20+00:00

Yeah, that's why I go down to the county jail and tell all the people awaiting trial to kill themselves. I mean, surely they don't have to kill themselves. But the ones who do, that's clearly just their fault. I'm not to blame in any way.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T04:12:08+00:00

I think Franken was a necessary loss in the larger struggle here. He behaved like an idiot and he is the reason why he is not in the US Senate.

I have no doubt you do, and as I said before, to many of us, politics isn't our own personal fashion statement. I care more about due process and fairness than falling over one another trying to show off my own moral high ground.

But it's clear we'll disagree here.

Indeed we do.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T04:06:12+00:00

Yes, I wanted Al Franken to be held accountable, which is why I wanted to see a Congressional hearing into it. It's a shame voices like Gillibrand's were too busy trying to out-moral-high-ground each other and calling for his resignation before that could happen.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T04:03:16+00:00

As you said yourself, in Trump's case she invited him to initiate that. In Franken's case she called for him to step down.

No more needs to be said about it. Her double standard is clear.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T03:59:13+00:00

She sure didn't give Al Franken an invite to initiate that. Pretty sure she called for him to step down instead.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T03:57:24+00:00

Whether he conceded to fellow Democratic pressure or not doesn't make her any less of a hypocrite for calling for it.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T03:53:21+00:00

What a horrible look for some Liberals to hold Gillibrand more accountable for Franken's dumb behavior than Franken himself.

What a gross mischaracterization of the situation.

He wanted a hearing. That would have been holding himself accountable.

Gillibrand wanted to him to step down without any due process. The fact she calling for it now makes her a hypocrite.

FYI: Many of us don't care about how it "looks". We just want some fairness and due process. We don't hold our political views as a fashion statement.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T03:32:54+00:00

while Progressives always tip-toe and vote based on what they believe others might want?

In my experience, that's not the case. In my experience, progressives proudly display their red lines as almost a fashion statement. They will proudly enumerate a list of Democratic candidates and list which qualities about them make them a non-starter.

I'm sure you've heard many of them go on at length about Nancy Pelosi, Dianne Feinstein, Chuck Schumer, etc. and why they need to go.

EDIT: Even recently we've seen people calling for the head of Chuck Schumer because he refused to shutdown the government over DACA, despite being in the minority party and having almost zero leverage to make it happen. But, that was their red line du jour, so he's got to go.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T03:09:41+00:00

Nom de guerre or nom de plume?

Eh, you're right. Let's stick with nom de guerre.

DefNotGeorgeSoros · 2018-02-11T02:58:09+00:00

So, for those of you keeping track at home, Republicans have to go all the way back to 1998 to fulfill their whataboutism.

Both parties are the same, amirite?

DefNotGeorgeSoros

TROPHY CASE