Biden says he regrets referring to 'an illegal' and defends direct criticism of Supreme Court in State of the Union
Biden says he regrets referring to 'an illegal' and defends direct criticism of Supreme Court in State of the Union
The president used the term to describe Jose Antonio Ibarra, a Venezuelan who crossed the border into the U.S. and has been charged with the murder of Laken Riley.
You're viewing part of a thread.
Dude just give it a rest. The transcript speaks for itself and you or me or any other person can just read it and form their conclusions. If you read it and your conclusions are some specific way, then of course you're welcome to that opinion.
Permanently Deleted
when are you going to stop personally attacking other users?
Permanently Deleted
mozz is a huge propagandist, everytime I see him it's almost defending Biden.
I take your irritation with me as a sign I'm doing something right
That's something a Trump supporter would say to a liberal.
Keep going, I'm getting close
You know, I'm on your side, but the dude has a point.
I heard that phrase being used in a different context - not conservatives vs. liberals, but more like religious nuts vs. seculars.
I watched a bit in which this religious nut politician was saying to a crowd "If they get all angry because of us placing the ten commandments monument in our capitol, then we must be doing something right!" (cheers.)
And just like that, I stopped using that phrase.
Punching left looks like punching left, yes.
I'm gonna make a politics sub and have an AI moderator that rates your comments on a little ratings system:
- Personal insults, racism, pure hostility that is clearly over the line
- Just asserting firmly how you think it is without any real backing, being combative, refusing to answer questions or engage with the other person's content, inviting or continuing long pointless back-and-forths, constantly changing the subject
- Saying what you think and some justification for it, at least; acknowledging that people might see things differently and the need to back up your opinions with some justification
- Answering questions, engaging, giving sources, responding to what the other person is saying
- Factual honesty combined with good insight, conciseness, admitting weaknesses in your own position or being actively inviting to hearing the other side in detail, or visibly changing your mind on something
If you want to make a comment, it stalks a bunch of your recent postings from everywhere and computes your average, and in order to be allowed to put anything up, you have to be at least at a 3. Just 3. 3's honestly not that high a bar. It'll send you a detailed breakdown of what messages it picked and how it rated them, so it's transparent, and it refreshes like once a week or something and obviously if your average drops once you're in there then you're banned for a short time.
But if you post any significant amount of 2, then probably, fuck you you can't post. Yes I know you're upset, yes I know, I'm a Nazi who wants to play God with who can post in my little playground. I don't care. You're a 2.4, get out, I wanna talk politics and learn things without having the same pointless back-and-forths over and over. This system of "everyone can come in by default no matter how much of a jackass they are and we try to cope with the extreme bad faith people after the fact" clearly doesn't work real real well.
I think it might honestly be a great system, better than having rules based on just the extreme cases, or then trying to figure out explicitly who are state-sponsored shills like the big paid social media sites do. This is my mission now.
Good luck with that. One dedicated asshole is going to destroy either your hardware, or your wallet, in under a week.
Permanently Deleted