Social WR Lounge v 235: Arcane Rogue Trickster, but who likes Sickness?

[Sara]

The protocol is male-preference primogeniture. The reason the women don't give birth to princes is because they're technically not in the line of succession if their marriage isn't matrilineal. The sons absolutely give birth to princes/princesses. Usually to the second generation.

Even since the Edward the V “rule”?

 

[Falsedawn]

Even since the Edward the V “rule”?

I don't know that rule, the only circumstances I know for Edward V is that he was essentially declared a bastard and thus illegitimate to inherit. That's separate from the inheritance issue though. Or kinda separate in that if he was the legitimate first son, he would rightfully be king. Marriage licensure was a way to attack his biologic right to the throne.

 

[Jesus H. Sherdog]

@PolishHeadlock2 I guess what’s kinda fucked is I didn’t even consider white guys catching shit from racists about dating outside of their race. I just assumed it was a problem for other guys dating white girls.

Idk if that shows some bias or just ignorance on my part.

 

[tonni]

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

@PolishHeadlock2 I guess what’s kinda fucked is I didn’t even consider white guys catching shit from racists about dating outside of their race. I just assumed it was a problem for other guys dating white girls.

Idk if that shows some bias or just ignorance on my part.

That kind of makes sense as I think Others dating white girls gets a more visceral reaction than the Others dating white guys

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

@Jesus H. Sherdog

A couple of anecdotal stories that have been rolling around in my head and might not even be coherent together but...

I've posted before that my Dad owned a small deli in Northeast Philly during my childhood. The first 10-15 years he owned the deli it did very well financially, my Mom was able to able to be a stay at home looking after the 5 of us (the 6th came later).

His store also had 2 apartments above the business. In the early 90s he rented one of the apartments to a young black family and this was the first black family to move into that neighborhood (this was white flight time in the NE Philly) and my Dad's income dropped almost in half overnight and rumors started swirling in the neighborhood that my Dad was Jewish (the guy he bought the store from was Jewish) which is even crazier because my Dad lived in that neighborhood his entire life and including a Catholic grade school, high school and college. That drop in income is why my Mom became a nurse at the age of 40. I found this our recently when talking to my parents to going back to school.

Back when I was a conservative I bought into the narrative that Free Markets will fix racism on thier own as it is economically unwise for businesses to be racist and turn people away... at the time I never thought of if the other way.... costumers punishing businesses for not being racist.....

Not a huge epiphany I guess, especially for anyone rom the South that knew more about that being a problem.

But in a black or white world the costumers that stopped shopping at my Dad's place are the bad guy racists and the ones that kept shopping were the good guy non-racists.

Anyways race jokes were never off the table during the the white flight period and there were a lot of jokes about black guys moving into the neighborhood knocking up fat white chicks. One day a white guy came into the store with a smoking a hot black chick and after they left I made the comment "Nice, one for our team haha" and one guy says to me with a straight face "anytime there is mixing they win.".... and this was one of the guys that stood up for my Dad renting an apartment to a black family.

Also my Dad is a hardcore Conservative that listened to Rush Limbaugh daily.

Anyway not sure if there is point there but it's been rolling around my head lately

 

[giusti825]

Warren, AOC, Brown, Newsom, Castro--all "right-wing corporate Democrats." And there's a bunch of these guys. They also seem to be very generous to some rightists (Hawley, Bannon, Trump, Carlson).

Im pretty sure when i first saw the list, AOC wasn't on it. Warren has lost all credibility; when the going got tough in her campaign, she took corporate money instead of leaving the race. She knew she couldn't win and stayed in to split the progressive vote and called Bernie a sexist. She did this with the intent of getting a position in the biden administration if he won. How'd that work out for her?

All the other candidates you mentioned campaign on the corporate dime.

As far as being generous to rightists, there's a bit of nuance there. If there are areas of agreement, I'm all for supporting ways where we can work together. With Tucker Carlsen and Rand Paul for instance, they have called out the stupid, illegal, endless wars in the middle-east. I agree with them on that. I dont just hate every single thing someone says because they align more with the red team.

I don't play the red team/blue team game in general anymore. Its stupid and has broken american politics.

Its the reason we can elect a democratic majority house and senate and a democratic president and still end up with assholes who give us little to no actual change.

You vote blue no matter who idiots are the reason shit like this happens.

Even though they say this:


You're the reason we bomb syrians in syria when we get attacked by iraqis in iraq. You hold your politicians to no standard. You sit there and preach how much better the democratic party is, then when they get complete legislative and executive control, they fail on their most basic campaign promises. Then you guys get shocked when democratic voters become apathetic and republicans take power.

There are way too many bribes in the form of campaign contributions and dark money going around both parties for anything to get fixed. If both parties are completely corrupted by the same entities then voting for the lesser of two evils does effectively nothing as the corporate powers buying our politicians can move both goalposts at the same time whenever they wish.



The democrats had the power to pass a $15 minimum wage and chose not to because they didn't actually want to.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Im pretty sure when i first saw the list, AOC wasn't on it. Warren has lost all credibility; when the going got tough in her campaign, she took corporate money instead of leaving the race. She knew she couldn't win and stayed in to split the progressive vote and called Bernie a sexist.

So devious of her to try to split the vote and to accept donations from supporters, knowing that Bernie is entitled to win regardless of what voters want! Definitely evil. And that totally makes her a right-winger since the political spectrum is just based on how much you help Bernie.

As far as being generous to rightists, there's a bit of nuance there. If there are areas of agreement, I'm all for supporting ways where we can work together. With Tucker Carlsen for instance, he has called out the stupid, illegal, endless wars in the middle-east. I agree with him on that. I dont just hate every single thing someone says because they align more with the red team.

I don't play the red team/blue team game in general anymore. Its stupid and has broken american politics.

More of a brown/red alliance, right?

Its the reason we can elect a democratic majority house and senate and a democratic president and still end up with assholes who give us little to no actual change.

LOL! Did you not see this: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-relief-package-american-rescue-plan-house-vote/? Cutting child poverty literally in half is not actual change. I posted this earlier:

You vote blue no matter who idiots are the reason shit like this happens.

First, no one says "blue no matter who" except dishonest leftists who are trying to mischaracterize the discussion. Second, right, big, transformative bills like that don't pass unless they get majority support in Congress. If Jimmy Dore fans had their way, we'd be looking at another big tax cut for rich people and millions more people would be in poverty.

You're the reason we bomb syrians in syria when we get attacked by iraqis in iraq.

Oops! Sorry about that.

You hold your politicians to no standard. You sit there and preach how much better the democratic party is, then when they get complete legislative and executive control, they fail on their most basic campaign promises. Then you guys get shocked when democratic voters become apathetic and republicans take power.

Of course I hold politicians to a standard. I voted against Trump, for example--something that True Progressives didn't think was worth doing. And I'm never shocked when people act shitty, especially leftists.

There are way too many bribes in the form of campaign contributions and dark money going around both parties for anything to get fixed.

Sure, sure. Another thing about leftists is that they have no problem at all throwing out totally baseless, ugly accusations. No one just disagrees about how to best get things done. Everyone who isn't a True Progressive who is fine with child poverty is taking bribes from corporations.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

No, we have no right to keep our public speech anonymous lol

None at all? What legal precedent is your statement based on? Or do you mean campaign donations specifically? Which even then there is the possibility of protection.

https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/32/anonymous-speech

The Supreme Court has protected anonymity under the First Amendment, but as with other constitutional rights, it has balanced protection for anonymous speech against competing interests, notably in the areas of political activity, campaign finance, and use of the Internet.

If passing out leaflets (i.e. advertising) is protected, I imagine that would apply to other forms as well (eg. placing an ad in the paper or on television).

Outside of politics, this ruling protects anonymity in some cases where speakers are civilly liable.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/...t-anonymity-even-after-speakers-lose-lawsuits

Anonymous online speakers may be able to keep their identities secret even after they lose lawsuits brought against them, a federal appellate court ruled last week.

The decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Signature Management Team, LLC v. John Doe is a victory for online speakers because it recognized that the First Amendment’s protections for anonymous speech do not end once a party suing the anonymous speaker prevails. Instead, the court ruled that revealing anonymous speakers’ identities has far-reaching consequences that must be weighed against opposing parties’ and the general public’s rights to learn speakers’ names once they’ve been found to have violated the law.

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

None at all? What legal precedent is your statement based on? Or do you mean campaign donations specifically? Which even then there is the possibility of protection.

https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/32/anonymous-speech



If passing out leaflets (i.e. advertising) is protected, I imagine that would apply to other forms as well (eg. placing an ad in the paper or on television).

Outside of politics, this ruling protects anonymity in some cases where speakers are civilly liable.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/...t-anonymity-even-after-speakers-lose-lawsuits

My reply was pretty flippant, this isn't a topic I'm familiar with.

Interesting links, thanks

 

[Deleted member 405583]

Edit

 

[Trotsky]

So I gave an emphatic thumbs down to the Cheeto mac n cheese.

On to the next novelty food item

Absolutely delicious. A little more of a gingerbread taste than the actual things, but still delightful.

 

[giusti825]

So devious of her to try to split the vote and to accept donations from supporters, knowing that Bernie is entitled to win regardless of what voters want! Definitely evil. And that totally makes her a right-winger since the political spectrum is just based on how much you help Bernie.

The difference is she promised not to take corporate money so voters could trust her motivations. She understands how bad it looks to be a bought politician. If she didn't have enough support from actual voters to continue her race; she should have dropped out.

LOL! Did you not see this: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-relief-package-american-rescue-plan-house-vote/? Cutting child poverty literally in half is not actual change. I posted this earlier:

I'm not saying that there aren't some successes here and there, just that they're nowhere near what gets promised during campaigns.

How many concessions did the Democrats make to the Republicans in this relief package?

They means tested people out of the stimulus based on 2019 incomes who may have lost their jobs in 2020, making the 2019 statistics practically irrelevant. They exposed their lie about trying to raise the minimum wage by conceding on that point aswell. They reduced the weekly amount for unemployment benefits. They reduced the check size from $2000 to $1400.

How many Republican votes did they get in exchange for these concessions? ABSOLUTELY FUCKING ZERO!

What is the point of making all of these concessions to the republicans if they wont support the bill anyway? Why not just pass your agenda if they are completely unwilling to solve any problems in a bipartisan fashion? There is no reason. They don't need the republicans to pass anything they actually wanted, which is why the only things they did pass were the only things they actually cared about. They don't care about the minimum wage, it was fodder for the campaign trail.

First, no one says "blue no matter who" except dishonest leftists who are trying to mischaracterize the discussion. Second, right, big, transformative bills like that don't pass unless they get majority support in Congress. If Jimmy Dore fans had their way, we'd be looking at another big tax cut for rich people and millions more people would be in poverty.

You dont have to say it to practice it. The underlined portion is just stupid and has no basis in reality. Jimmy Dore supports an agenda where the wealthy pay more in taxes to accommodate universal healthcare and stronger social safety nets. It must be a long time since you watched him if you think he's changed his stances.

Of course I hold politicians to a standard. I voted against Trump, for example--something that True Progressives didn't think was worth doing. And I'm never shocked when people act shitty, especially leftists.

You don't hold politicians on the blue team accountable because you're a partisan hack. You don't have basic principles that neither side can violate. If you only hold one side accountable, but both sides are bought by the same people, you aren't doing anything constructive.

Sure, sure. Another thing about leftists is that they have no problem at all throwing out totally baseless, ugly accusations. No one just disagrees about how to best get things done. Everyone who isn't a True Progressive who is fine with child poverty is taking bribes from corporations.

If politicians aren't willing to fight while they have actual leverage, then what was the point of electing them. Politics is a leverage game in general.

 

[Sketch]

So I gave an emphatic thumbs down to the Cheeto mac n cheese.

On to the next novelty food item

Absolutely delicious. A little more of a gingerbread taste than the actual things, but still delightful.

I have no doubt you’ve tasted many a creme pie

“more of a gingerbread taste than the actual things”

hahahaha

 

[Deleted member 405583]

Passover is going to be lit

It is every year in the fett household

 

[RidenWitBiden]

What are your hands like for boxing though

Of course, afraid to post your stats.

 

[Deleted member 405583]

@PolishHeadlock2 I guess what’s kinda fucked is I didn’t even consider white guys catching shit from racists about dating outside of their race. I just assumed it was a problem for other guys dating white girls.

Idk if that shows some bias or just ignorance on my part.

Both.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

My reply was pretty flippant, this isn't a topic I'm familiar with.

Interesting links, thanks

I'm not that knowledgeable either and you're welcome.

It makes sense that anonymity would have protection in politics when the most basic and essential function (i.e. voting) is designed around it. Without anonymity there'd be no room for fraud, hence no questioning of the results. But who advocates that votes be public?

 

[My Spot]

I have no doubt you’ve tasted many a creme pie

“more of a gingerbread taste than the actual things”

hahahaha

Must be “visiting” his parents again.

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

I'm not that knowledgeable either and you're welcome.

It makes sense that anonymity would have protection in politics when the most basic and essential function (i.e. voting) is designed around it. Without anonymity there'd be no room for fraud, hence no questioning of the results. But who advocates that votes be public?

Based on your links on these court cases there seems to be a balancing act between the public's interest of the disclosed information and fear of retaliation against the people trying to remain anonymous.

And I think there is very strong public interest in knowing who's spending money on politics.

So sure maybe everybody gets to spend $100 on political activities anonymously but anything beyond that and your anonymity goes out the window... just thinking out loud