The Politics Thread (PLAY NICELY!)

At this point I am starting to wonder if you support democracy at all or if you're actually some crazy rebellious radical.

Albeit maybe logic just works inverted where you are. You are upside down after all.

Does A <=> -A hold true where you are?

Sure, but a common defense amongst right-leaning people is that free speech is unlimited, unrestricted free speech. Libertarians, too. It's weird how that suddenly becomes selectively-applied in situations like this.

Also, there was a popular Republican who said he's get his musket (seriously) ready for when Trump lost the election. Last I checked, he wasn't even visited by police despite his Tweet(s) getting a lot of airtime and public scrutiny.

Face facts. The law is applied selectively, and for the benefit of specific parties. It always has been, but you're going to see more of it. And yes, making movements to arrest someone based on what they've said is an attempt to suppress said opinion, which I'm pretty sure infringes upon your Constitutional Rights. The First Amendment doesn't protect you from consequences, but it is meant to protect you from being bullied into not airing those opinions.

No, nothing pisses me off more than it being applied selectively. Inconsistency pisses me off the most, and both sides do it. However, bottom line, the SCOTUS ruled in the late 1900s, that "yelling fire in a crowded building, causing a panic that injures people", is not protected under "freedom of speech". Neither is convincing people of breaking the law, especially murder of all the laws one could break. People get arrested for telling schools they'll blow them up, for telling people they'll burn their houses down, and for telling people they'll cut their throat. None of that is protected by freedom of speech. They're threats. Are they legal in Europe?

You have to define a threat, but I'm unsure of the legalities around it.

Bottom line is while in theory your argument is sound, in practise the law comes down more on jokes like the one you're currently advocating punishment for, than on "jokes" like the one I was complaining about. This is on a platform (Twitter) where actual death threats go unpunished, too.

In an ideal world, I'd agree with you. But we don't live in an ideal world, and I will stand behind my criticism of the hypocrisy in enabling the legal consequences that guy got for his Tweet, while nothing happens to equal Tweets, or even Tweets that are far worse.

(substitute "Tweet" for whatever aspect of social media you wish)

I'd love to hear what he would be saying. One of my favorite comedians.

"don't vote, it only encourages them"

He has a point though- if there isn't someone to vote for who is at least *trying* to sort the issues is it really worth voting for a candidate your not happy with?

In the UK we have quite a few small parties who stand every election and stick to their principals and I think are very worthy of a vote. The trouble is people with principals are 'un-electable' apparently. Whilst I don't agree with him on everything I think Jeremy Corbyn is one such politician- and the labour party have been desperately trying to oust him because they know he can't win *because* he has strong principals he won't back down on (for example he want's to abolish the UK's nuclear deterrent).

I have a lot of respect for the guy simply because he's one of a very select group of politicians who actually appears to stand for something. The sad fact is however that to *be elected* a politician needs to be 'flexible'- which really means go along with whatever the largest group of voters want / think.

I think it's just part of human nature to be very subjective and selectively view issues and laws as they relate to out pre-established beliefs.

I adore how this comic is going in reverse order to what has happened. And how it goes by the assumption that the exact people fighting one flag are the same that support the burning of the US flag.

A little thing that _does_ make it a bit different though. The stars and bars is being hung up on state government property- I'm sure we can all agree seeing a government building burning the US flag is a bit different from a citizen exercising their right to free expression.

People can have bumper stickers of that flag just as people can burn the flag. They have that right. It's just inappropriate when our government does it.

Yea he's been doing that for a while now. Trump grabs *****? oh look more useless emails. Other candidates too much in the news? shout something outrageous. Clinton's about to make a good point? Insult everyone.

When Trump says something dumb, look for the article he's trying to obscure

It doesn't matter what order they take, one was deemed "okay" in the same breath the other was "condemned". Stores boycotted selling them and people were vandalizing ones on people's own public property. Ones on government property, you mean State property? There's a difference between that, and federal property, per the 10th amendment, demanding a state property remove it is fair if you return the lives lost in the war, it's disrespectful to take someone's family under any pretense like that and then tell them never to speak of it and then pity the refugees from middle eastern civil wars. Lost loved ones are universally missed, there shouldn't be any damned cherry-picking to that.

Meanwhile, a college already took down the American flag. They are having protesters standing outside over it now, mainly veterans and such. I suspect they get government money, the flag should be a stipulation to receive that money, just as much as they can pry into what flags the state property can and can't fly.

Alas, here's video of people having to enforce their own property's defense against biased political-based vandalism.

You're acting like this never happened in the reverse. Why is it suddenly a problem now?

The answer to that question is probably the source of disagreement, here.

Yeah, spite. A damn fine reason for a lot of people around here. Especially when everyone's passionate about their political party dominating, regardless of who is running.

Ahh owlturd. great comics XD

tough times for owlturd.

don't think he's pandering to republicans though

He doesn't have to to make something funny/relevant

It's almost like liking music, video games and / or movies is different from supporting and / or voting for a political candidate capable of affecting the livelihoods of everyone within a country.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.

(also shoutout to the comic for the subtle point at the end; you are defined by what you like more than what you hate. In this case, Trump. Your support for him and his team's policies define you, yo)

The maker has already said he doesn't want to make political comics. It's all jokes about himself: Being awkward, being a mediocre artist, getting kicked down by life. He took down a comic about wanting to feel special because people turned it into a political statement.

The subtle point is that nobody is truly defined by what they like, nor truly defined by what we hate. Alternative, it can be seen as a joke that sometimes scumbags are just scumbags (in this case, the trump supporter in the comic). Considering the title of the comic though ("missed the point") i guess that the real meaning is that nobody's a saint.

My last point is this: Have you ever run into people and thought "i'm going to be open minded, i'm not gonna judge" and then that person confirms every bad stereotype and you just want to punch them?