-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Final Senate Vote on Judge Kavanaugh Underway (Saturday 3:30PM EST) [Update: Confirmed] (Read OP)
- Thread starter Etrian Oddity
- Start date
The mods appreciate that emotions are running high and are excercising leniancy. Seems sensible.
I think they are trying to show the country they are better people than the scumbag Republicans. The only problem is, that only works when the majority of voters are also decent people...
But are they better then scumbags that advocate the murder of other human beings?
Im fairly confident the poster wasnt expecting someone to see their post and suddenly be inspired to murder Mitch. A temp ban for a post borne out of frustration at the current situation seems like good modding to me.
Given that Beto is running a very issues-oriented campaign, maybe he doesn't want to spend weeks answering questions about who yelled in Ted Cruz's face on a given day. Maybe he really doesn't care but he sees it as becoming a distraction from what he wants to discuss in the same way that Sanders didn't want to talk about Clinton's "damn e-mails" when he's trying to get his message across.
a)(1) Whoever--
(B) threatens to assault, kidnap, or murder, a United States official, a United States judge, a Federal law enforcement officer, or an official whose killing would be a crime under such section,
with intent to impede, intimidate, or interfere with such official, judge, or law enforcement officer while engaged in the performance of official duties, or with intent to retaliate against such official, judge, or law enforcement officer on account of the performance of official duties, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).
(4) A threat made in violation of this section shall be punished by a fine under this title or imprisonment for a term of not more than 10 years, or both, except that imprisonment for a threatened assault shall not exceed 6 years
(B) threatens to assault, kidnap, or murder, a United States official, a United States judge, a Federal law enforcement officer, or an official whose killing would be a crime under such section,
with intent to impede, intimidate, or interfere with such official, judge, or law enforcement officer while engaged in the performance of official duties, or with intent to retaliate against such official, judge, or law enforcement officer on account of the performance of official duties, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).
(4) A threat made in violation of this section shall be punished by a fine under this title or imprisonment for a term of not more than 10 years, or both, except that imprisonment for a threatened assault shall not exceed 6 years
Sorry to be the Facebook reposter but I saw this and thought this was crazy in that I never thought we'd go from bathroom bills to silencing victims. I'm starting to get the feeling Republicans only care about protecting the straight white male hegemony.
I think you are over reacting and should probably pm a mod if you disagree with a decision they have made.
I'm also certain I could find scores of examples of Republicans advocating violence against black or Mexican or gay Americans with little effort.
Again you are hugely overreacting to a flippant post borne out of frustration. It wasn't a serious threat or it wouldn't have been made on Resetera on a political thread. It was bad taste hence they caught a temp ban.
I.m complaining on ERA. show me scores of examples of republican posts on ERA and I will stand by you on all of them. There ought to be some kind of line that we do not cross in order to promote civil discourse and if that line is not the murder of someone we disagree with then there is no civil discoarse
nope. Ive gotten mad plennty of times in my life and Ive never called or wished for the murder of anyone
That's falling for decorum. Beto was unprompted and didn't have to give his opinion on it without being asked. There are many ways to tackle it that would have been acceptable and could have even used it to his advantage. We've been trying to have town halls with Cruz in Texas for the last year, but he always chickens out because he knows he'd get shouted down. He saw how those other town halls played out last year. Beto could have easily said, "while I don't condone disturbing Ted's family, these people are trying to make their voices heard to a man who has been avoiding them at every step."
He definitely could have came up with something a lot better if he wanted to. He wasn't asked on the spot to answer for it.
Apologies, you are right i shall stop responding. I just think folks should understand how frustrated everyone is with the current situation and show a bit of common sense when someone posts something stupid.
I just hope this encourages everyone to get out and vote and start the removal of toxic republicans from positions of power. Trumps presidency has been horrible but these past few weeks have drawn a line under just how deplorable the Republican party and all their supporters are.
You've never heard of politicians getting ahead of a question with a response beforehand? I'm not saying you have to be meek to the point of whatever this pathetic act Booker is pulling, but you're refusing to acknowledge how much stoking anger would careen them off message. The media is always looking for ANY excuse to discuss something but policy. You're asking them to go running into a minefield over something that has ZERO impact on policy or helping people.
People literally call for the murder/torture/inhumane treatment of a person in the vast majority of criminal threads here. ERA is not exactly a community of forgiving individuals.
1. mitch mcconel is giulty of what crime? Or are we advocating political violence?
What other thread. the only other thread i can remember is the krauthammer dying thread where everyone said that he was a nazi and they were glad he was dead. I have never
1. called for someone to be killed
2. Been glad someone did because I disagree with them politically
Politicians and people do that when they've done something or it's something in their immediate circle. These protesters had nothing to do with Beto. He did not need to get out ahead of this and try to absolve himself of any blame. He could've waited until he was asked about it, but have the answer in his back pocket. OR he could have made a better statement.
The post in question has been reviewed, and the user has been permanently removed from ResetEra.
Nah, they'd believe them if it was a "deviant" trans person or someone pretending to be one to justify their bigotry. Brett was one of the boys.
Sorry to be the Facebook reposter but I saw this and thought this was crazy in that I never thought we'd go from bathroom bills to silencing victims. I'm starting to get the feeling Republicans only care about protecting the straight white male hegemony.
Can't the Democrats just take back the Senate, win the presidency, and stack the court with liberal judges?
AFAIK there's no law that says there has to be 9 judges. It's not like the GOP is interested in playing fair anyway.
AFAIK there's no law that says there has to be 9 judges. It's not like the GOP is interested in playing fair anyway.
Then the Republicans will just stack it even more when they're back in power
I do think it would be interesting adding 2 to get back at them for Garland though.
The republicans are going to do it eventually anyway, so they'll just have a headstart.
They're already talking about it
Anti-"Dems stack the court" people are basically comfortable with the Repubs stacking the court and being the only ones allowed to, because they've constantly shown they're okay with making their own rules while Dems sit and do nothing. Period. Nothing! No retaliation whatsoever out of fear that oh it could be worse
It already is worse. Fight the fuck back, be dirty too, hit high too, instead of rolling over and taking it
Does anyone really think the Justice Roberts will start moving towards a more progressive interpreter of the law and cases that come before the court.
Personally I do not. The courtbis on such a razor thin line of the perception of legitimacy. I am predicting 200% that in the next >10 years we will be case that is ruled on and that ruling not be abided by.
In the GOPs nakedly partisian ambition they have done more to hurt and delegitimize the court. Not sure where we go from here.
But don't put any faith or hope in Roberts.
Edit - sorry this post is terribly written sounds like English is my 3rd language here. It's not I'm just tired
Personally I do not. The courtbis on such a razor thin line of the perception of legitimacy. I am predicting 200% that in the next >10 years we will be case that is ruled on and that ruling not be abided by.
In the GOPs nakedly partisian ambition they have done more to hurt and delegitimize the court. Not sure where we go from here.
But don't put any faith or hope in Roberts.
Edit - sorry this post is terribly written sounds like English is my 3rd language here. It's not I'm just tired
Extreme poverty has gone down but poverty is still a big force so is income inequality
I agree with you. Roberts has voted with the 'liberal' wing of the court 5 times in 13 years; him as the moderate is terrifying. I don't think he'd vote in favor of Emperor Trump's outlawing of black people not named Candance Owens or Kanye but he'll overturn Roe Vs Wade, make labor Unions illegal and allow voting rights legislation that makes it nearly impossible to vote if you're not rich and white.
The entire point of the GOP is to delegitimize and erode the power and trust in the federal government. Congress was already a laughing stock, they completed the ransacking of the Presidency with the election of Donald Trump, the only thing left was to destroy any faith left in the last, supoosed, impartial pillar of our Democracy, the Supreme Court. The swearing in of Bart I Like Beer Kavanaugh completed this final destruction of every institution in America.
The point is to have a weak federal government with all the power concentrated in the States.
Why weaken the federal government when they can just take it over for good?
So the highest court in the land will change depending on who wins the vote?. Sounds like democracy to me,
This, Burglekutt decided he/she wanted that person banned and went for it, hard.
Grats buddy, you did it.
This is way more conspiratorial than I'm comfortable with espousing. They didn't nominate and swear in Kavanaugh as some long term plan to delegitimize the supreme court. Congress isn't a laughing stock. And the election of Donald Trump wasn't orchestrated by establishment republicans but was in spite of them.
They're taking advantage of having a supposed conservative ideologue by stuffing the federal government with as much conservative ideology as possible. That's all. To imagine that this is someone part of a decades long grand plan to weaken the federal government is fantasy.
so the trick would be to make sure they never get back in power. Use this current period as a history lesson of what happens when you let hate-filled, privileged white men run the country and never ever let it happen again.
It's not a conspiracy, it's conservative policy/doctrine. They do not want a strong federal government, it is antithetical to conservative thought.
While this is broadly true, the actions taken by the federal conservative establishment during Trump's presidency are not aimed at delegitimizing federal pillars but rather at taking advantage of the power they wield. Kavanaugh is in place to weaken progressive policy. Why would they want to delegitimize the Supreme Court when they essentially have control over it and the massive amount of power it gives them?
Didn't know he had a history of this behavior, thanks for reminding me to add him to my ignore list