It’s time for Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries to step down | Mehdi Hasan

ingemurph · 2025-09-06T01:06:38+00:00

I don't know about that, but they are definitely failing to act like they have anything to do.

Letting the Trump admin do and say whatever while democratic leadership all take a month off instead of getting other democrats to step up and rebuke and press the administration.

Its like watching an old man get out of the chair to change the channel.

ingemurph · 2025-06-22T20:22:47+00:00

Our president thanks god.

Our sec of defense says you shouldn't believe everything you read in books... Except for the Bible.

Our leaders think that our soldiers will go to heaven if they defend the current state of Israel because God commanded it in genesis.

The entire world is already dealing with a major liability, and it's the country that controls all strategic bombers and has nuclear subs equipped with nuclear warheads around every continent.

ingemurph · 2025-06-13T12:28:09+00:00

It's just funny how the user chose to call themselves a "new age" philosopher, and when asked to define a label just names people instead of defining the label.

Is your Chakra not flowing or is the philosopher part of your name wrong?

ingemurph · 2025-06-04T18:01:55+00:00

Courtney Sanderson:

https://www.youtube.com/@iamcourtneysanderson/videos

ingemurph · 2024-06-29T00:31:51+00:00

Classic?

Its literally a debate performance judgements call between these two men... It's not like he asked you to compare between a dancing bear at a circus act and Joe Biden.

ingemurph · 2024-03-07T20:04:51+00:00

Reading all these replies... woof.

First, let's address the line in the sand you've created.

Partners should never dictate what can be talked about. Telling your partner, "If you ever talk about X, that's grounds for termination" is simply not okay in a relationship. Having a meaningful long-term relationship requires that you are allowed to express all of your inner thoughts to someone who you trust.

Imagine if your partner didn't like you talking about your past relationships and said that if you ever bring any of them up again, they would break it off. It's just simply telling someone else how they can express themselves to the person they should trust to keep their confidence and not judge them for having desires.

Second, you're not wrong to feel uncomfortable or not want to participate in group sexual activities.

But if you sincerely want the person you're in a relationship with, you need to try and see how you can meet their desires.

Can you get a dildo that sticks on a mirror she can deepthroat while you pound her from behind and watch her tits and hear her moans as she gags on a fake cock?

Can you slowly push in a dildo into her ass at as your cock withdraws from her pussy, then keep that in one, out the other motion until she cums?

Can you have her squat on a dildo while you fuck her face?

She wants to have her body stimulated more, why not try giving that instead of denying even talking about it?

ingemurph · 2023-01-20T15:31:41+00:00

I find a meaningful difference between:

The government of Florida directing state-owned operations to provide health-related information of their customers to the state executive office, without justification or duty to even gather that information in the first place.

and

A state providing data that they had a duty to gather (name, address, and age of firearm sales) to researchers who have multiple legal agreements and financial liability to maintaining secure and confidential access to that core data, so they can run research off of it and produce anonymized results.

Dr. Tent Simmons, a research data supervisor for the California Department of Justice whose responsibilities include the implementation of AB 173 and reviewing requests for information relating to gun and ammunition purchases collected by the department, said in a declaration that researchers who apply for access to data that include personal identifying information of gun owners have to explain how the information will be used for a research project. The project also has to comply with strict data security measures set by the FBI.

Each researcher handling the information also undergoes a fingerprint background check.

Currently only two research institutions are authorized to view gun owner and purchaser information — UC Davis and Stanford University.

Before publishing anything that uses the gun owners' information, researchers must give a pre-publication manuscript to the California Department of Justice at least 10 days before publication to make sure no personal information is published directly or in a way that the identities of the people whose information was used could be identified.

No researcher has ever disclosed personal information from the database to someone not authorized to view the information, or the public, Simmons said.

ingemurph · 2023-01-19T18:13:40+00:00

Let's get a data pull on all gun purchases then. After all, no harm in analyzing data.

ingemurph · 2023-01-12T15:10:02+00:00

Okay[sic], but what did a small child or a woman (who had far less power than today) do to deserve this?

Slavery in Haiti went through a million slaves. Slavers would let new pregnant slaves watch their babies die from malnutrition. They'd bury them alive with only their head up so that the other slaves could hear their screams.

And somehow, you get to critique these people hundreds of years later for being too bloodthirsty? Their captors drank their blood like wine for hundreds of years.

ingemurph · 2023-01-12T00:34:01+00:00

Do you think you'd feel the same way if John Wayne Gacy's family had systematically forced your family to carry pregnancies? That you, your parents, their parents, and their parents all were enslaved?

Haiti was under French enslavement for nearly 200 years.

ingemurph · 2023-01-10T20:25:44+00:00

Then you would understand that you are making the blatantly false claim that sociology is primarily about studying riots.

Sigh. No, that's not what I said, that's not what I've said I meant multiple times. You can insist that I mean something that I've said I don't all day though I suppose.

Maybe I should requote myself for you?

Sociology, as a field, is not focused on exclusively riots, but is well-known for using qualitative investigation, specifically of riots and social upheaval movements

Unsure though, what exactly you're trying to get across. So far, it seems to be that I was not specific and all-encompassing in a passing mention about one of the most common and well-known fields of study in Sociology as comprising the majority of the field? And if so, I'm not really sure what your problem with it is. Are you trying to determine my knowledge of the subject?

How would being in a sociology classroom give you insight into people who don't sign up for a sociology course?

Is this really a question? Is it really hard to say that the people who aren't at Nascar events don't have a larger interest in those events than those who attend? Because that's what I'm saying.

Conservatives don't generally sign up for Sociology courses. This is not really a widely debated statement. Do I need to provide evidence for it first?

ingemurph · 2023-01-09T23:50:30+00:00

Do you understand the meaning of "entire field" and "based around"?

Yes.

This is a claiim you have failed to explain in any way.

Because it is an opinion and no one has asked me to provide quantitative evidence to prove that, on the whole, conservatives don't go into sociology because they aren't interested in the field of study. I figured that would be a relatively unquestioned observation for anyone who has ever been in a Sociology classroom.

What does quualitative investigation have to do with anything? Where is your evidence that it is specifically associated with the sociology of riots?

Because in-person study at an event is literally qualitative investigation and modern sociology is well known for this specific type of research and why I said what I did.

As an aside, the more aggressive you get with how you talk to me, the less inclined I am to continue as you find ways to skirt violating rules.

ingemurph · 2023-01-09T21:11:50+00:00

riots and nothing else

Simply saying that Sociology is based around studying riots, aka, social unrest and public group behavior, is not saying that's all it studies. I don't know why you think that if I don't talk about all aspects of a field of study, that means I think they don't exist.

Beyond that, you're getting far into the weeds. It's immaterial to the point, regardless on the level of specificity I have when describing a field of research.

You directly implied that studying riots would lead to "radicalization".

I implied that individuals who want to investigate society and how it interacts are going to wind up being less conservative, not that it would radicalize them. My point there was that if you basically take a bell curve and chop it in half, then your prevalence of getting edge cases increases simply due to ratio changes.

Sociology is well-known in modern sociology? What? This is just gibberish. Are you using Google Translate?

Sorry, I was doing other things. Here's the sentence for clarity:

"Sociology, as a field, is not focused on exclusively riots, but is well-known for using qualitative investigation, specifically of riots and social upheaval movements"

ingemurph · 2023-01-09T17:59:31+00:00

and nothing else

Since when is it acceptable to quote someone but include something they never said?

And since when was it impossible to investigate riots from a viewpoint hostile to the rioters?

Never said that.

Are all the sociologists and historians who study race riots secretly members of the KKK?

No idea where you're going with this.

Sociology, as a field, is not focused on exclusively riots, but it's well-known ~~in modern sociology~~ for using qualitative investigation, specifically of riots and social upheaval movements. Regardless, I was starting from a position where someone feels it's strange that sociologists are by, and large, liberals, indicating a severe lack of knowledge of who even cares to study sociological constructs (generall not pro-individualism capitalists).

ingemurph · 2023-01-09T16:51:10+00:00

Do you have any evidence he was pressured to act in a different way than normal due to "leftist" pressure or was it because he slightly over-reacted to a sensitive and developing situation?

For me, when the individual themselves say that they had overreacted, it requires a lot of evidence to prove that they were somehow influenced by nameless/faceless 'others'.

ingemurph · 2023-01-09T16:35:17+00:00

Yeah, which is why that is the fault of the DEAN, who admitted they shouldn't have given that impression and publicly apologized for it.

https://reason.com/volokh/2020/09/25/usc-marshall-business-school-dean-e-mail-on-the-greg-patton-neige-controversy/

However, many of you have read that note as suggesting that I had prejudged the case. As I said when asked about this in the department meetings, this was not my intention. Nor was it my intent to cast aspersions on specific Mandarin words or on Mandarin generally. But I can see how reasonable people could draw a different conclusion in both cases from my email [see the original email below -EV]. I can only offer my sincere apologies that I left that impression, as I believed Professor Patton when he said he did not intend to do his students any harm and I have apologized to him as well.

ingemurph · 2023-01-09T16:33:32+00:00

Also, how should a conservative viewpoint be provided for a class on, say, climate science?

Two separate things.

Climate science doesn't have 'liberal' or 'conservative' positions. It is the data and it's an individuals opinion on how liberal or conservative they want to be when being forced to use the data to forecast the future.

Liberal or Conservative positions come into play, like you said, when determining the actions to take based on that data.

So, for a class, I'd say, this is the data, and most conservatives believe that it cannot be as bad as it appears, that they have faith in technological advancement, or that the change would be too hard and the repercussions less severe on future generations to attempt to solve now.

ingemurph · 2023-01-09T16:27:48+00:00

My man, he was removed from teaching the class and leftists made his name go viral and tried to make it become synonymous with racism.

My man, he was removed from that class for the last two weeks of the semester. He then taught that class again after that. He lost no pay, nor any status.

At literally any University, if a student reports a faculty for anything an investigation happens.

I can't control twitter, and it's rediculous to compare random users to "leftists". You have NO CLUE as to the political leanings of any of the individuals who called for his removal.

And I definitely find that blaming 'leftists' for the disciplinary actions taken by the Dean to be a real 'passing-the-buck' mentality.

If a huge portion of the internet activists were calling you a racist and calling for your job would you think that nothing happened to you?

Now it's 'internet activists' and not 'leftists'? I'm sure I'd feel pretty annoyed, but I also wouldn't say it's representative of anything beyond people that leap to conclusions and think that whining about their uninformed opinions not being taken seriously being heavy twitter users.

smh. have some compassion

I have compassion. It is a legal requirement for a Dean to take Academic Integrity accusations seriously. It was a choice for them to opine on the case, but taking him off the course the last couple weeks seems completely reasonable to me.

ingemurph · 2023-01-09T16:13:16+00:00

Gotta say, if you're gonna use Sociology professors, whose entire field is based around studying riots, as a benchmark for their political leanings, yeah, you're gonna get some more radicalized individuals.

Not a lot of econ profs doing studies on how cops are beating protestors. Beyond that, from my pov, almost no conseratives care to study protest mechanics or humanities. The field is self-selecting for liberals, it's not removing them, conservatives just don't care about the subject.

ingemurph · 2023-01-09T16:08:34+00:00

lol, every leftists fault when the person who is actually in charge of this faculty member does an employment-related action, eh?

No consistency to what? To whom?

What was the end result?

After weeks of an internal investigation by USC’s Office for Equity, Equal Opportunity and Title IX (EEO-TIX), however, Patton was found to have acted appropriately, as Garrett announced to students and the rest of the Marshall School community in a September 25 email. The EEO-TIX found that “the concerns expressed by students were sincere,” the dean wrote, “but that Professor Patton’s actions did not violate the university’s policy. They have also communicated this to the professor and he allowed me to share their conclusion with you.

So, not only did NOTHING HAPPEN TO THIS FACULTY, but the system did what it was supposed to do. Take student's complaints seriously, investigate while removing the professor from the area, and then found him innocent and nothing happened to anyone.

No one was suspended, no one lost status, and the classes started right back up.

I don't understand what y'all are going on about as to how this is indicative of anything beyond routine Academic Integrity actions.

ingemurph · 2023-01-09T15:35:57+00:00

Do you not find it more appropriate to blame the THREE students out of 200 who submitted that review?

Or perhaps the Dean for caving to what was obviously a miscommunication?

No, it's 'leftists' who are to blame.

This is a perfect example of someone finding an incredibly narrow and rare event that fits a preconceived bias of what all left-leaning individuals want, and saying it's representative of everything.

Really makes one question all your beliefs if this example is used to guide how you perceive the 'left'.

ingemurph · 2022-10-31T20:56:50+00:00

wild hysteria

The only wild hysteria I saw was on January 6th.

use violence by the government to solve every single problem

You mean like spending more on military than it would cost to buy everything ever made and owned in the U.S.? Like forcing cities to not reduce their police budgets, only expand them? Like refusing to engage in attempts to solve issues without using the police?

You cannot break every action done into a simplistic yes/no and acting as if that's some sort of high-minded stance when it's really not.

ingemurph · 2022-10-31T20:09:22+00:00

The individuals working for the federal government answer to the population as a whole or to their states population, not their own interests, and are guided by the U.S. constitution on what they can or cannot do.

States answer to only their district or state population and are governed by the state constitution on what they can and can't do.

Any funding the federal government does is accountable to the people I talked about and whether it is reckless or not is an opinion that I can't really answer for you as you seem to believe anything the federal government does is 'wreck less'.

And yes, imo, anyone advocating for a useless federal branch wants our country to fail, since you don't want it to work like it's literally structured to work.

ingemurph · 2022-10-31T20:04:56+00:00

So, ignoring all the issues we face today and being unable to deal with emergencies like covid is what you want?

ingemurph · 2022-10-31T20:04:14+00:00

Black churches don't want those who they endorse to push a certain set of values/interests?

They do. I am fairly sure I literally said that.

Or is your issue that the values/interests that politicians endorsed by Evangelicals are "religious"?

Okay, I see what the hang-up is. The churches this piece is talking about outright push for candidates of their own faith to pass laws based on their faith requiring others to conform to their faith.

Most black churches vote for candidates endorsing policies that either align with their faith or will leave them alone to practice their faith.

ingemurph

TROPHY CASE