BatWatch's forum posts

Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

162

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

No.

Communist leaning leftists have always had a bit of a workers of the world unite thing going on, but they don't hide it all that much. Do I think many of them would like to have a more intertwined world government such as a souped up U.N. with some actual teeth? Yeah, a lot of the hardcore leftist crowd would, but it's not a grand conspiracy. It's pretty transparent as political agendas go.

Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

162

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

@jgames said:
@dernman said:

Frack sake people are already defending this shit. Just willingly jumping on the slippery slop throwing away their freedom. That's how they get you not by hammering it in but chipping away at is cloaked in sheeps clothing. Wake the hell up!

This I can understand to be honest. The slippery slope defense I can understand. Just trying to informed people what the law actually does, as the title is misleading and people don't like reading for some reason. That being said is a way to prevent discrimination in facilities, and there nothing too crazy about it and is honestly reasonable.

The thing I hate about slippery slope argument is the fact that it's trying to prevent one reasonable law, due to being afraid something ridiculous might come next, that might not come in a long time and barely have any chance of passing through. Is fearing a small chance of something happening. Well whatever I can somewhat still respect your opinion as I can see them trying to pass something that might be more in the gray area.

A law that requires people to use an inaccurate pronoun or have the government seize your money or throw you in jail (or shoot you if you resist either) is not something that leads to a slippery slope. By this point, we are already well down the ice covered slopes and plummeting to our doom. Heck, even if this law required you to call biological males and females by the normal pronouns, it would still be a ridiculous totalitarian load of hogwash.

Anybody who wants the government to control other people's words is a bit of a control freak.

I don't understand. If an employee is behaving in a way that their employers deem inappropriate the employers already reserve the right to terminate the employment. There is already a perfectly viable method of making sure said employees don't act like jerks, we don't need to make a law for it.

Absolutely right, but people's knee-jerk reaction to every problem these days is to empower the government to point guns at people and say, "Stop or I'll shoot you in the head."


@jgames said:

Yes, free speech is the right to have hate speech, unfortunately. I defended the god damn nazi protesters, even though they should get their ass kick. That being said freedom of speech does not protect harassment from a patient under someone care, and the fact that people think is not harassment, is the reason why a law like this exists. Not saying the bill is perfect and there should be some revision as there something in the bill that can be improved. I just hate the fact that there seems to be discrimination still in this country. Also, hate the fact that people think freedom of speech means people are entitled to harassing people in a professional work place, which is honestly disturbing.

They are entitled to say what they want and get fired for it if the employer doesn't like the speech. It's a problem that would take care of itself if it were truly abhorrent speech.

That being said, refusing to deny biology isn't harassment in my book.


Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

162

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

162

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

162

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

#5  Edited By BatWatch

@cameron83 said:

I genuinely want to know if Trump really supports the AltRight and the White Nationalist movements. I mean, they openly show support for him and it seems that, not only he embraces them, but he almost caters to them at times. A large amount of his protesters seem to be openly racist and make up a considerable base of his voters.

And then the worst thing is when they try to pander for the black vote, despite the fact that they say racist things about black people on every other basis. In fact, when they pander to the black vote, it's a bit cringeworthy at times for me. Most of the times, it's just a video saying, "Look, I'm a black person that supports Trump! We exist guys! It's okay over here, other blacks!" They don't actually give a shit about black people, they just see them as vote points and use racially charged language to try to appeal to them.

I don't know if anyone here knows for sure, but maybe someone can share their thoughts because these movements seem to be growing and getting more power. Whether or not if he does support them, I am not sure, but they do seem to be making up a great amount of his support.

@stupid1@lvenger@iragexcudder@anyoneelseinthisthread

Trump hired Stephen Bannon as his campaign manager. Bannon was formerly the chairman of Breitbart Media. Bannon described Brietbart as a, "platform for the alt-right."

What is the Alt-Right? Well, according to an article posted on Breitbart by Milo Yiannopoulos, arguably the biggest writer at Breitbart, Alt-Right is a movement lead by white people about preserving culture and, "The alt-right’s intellectuals would also argue that culture is inseparable from race."

That seems pretty racist to me.

For some more thoughts along the same line, here are some excerpts from Milo's lengthy description of the Alt-Right.

"Halting, or drastically slowing, immigration is a major priority for the alt-right. While eschewing bigotry on a personal level, the movement is frightened by the prospect of demographic displacement represented by immigration.

"The alt-right do not hold a utopian view of the human condition: just as they are inclined to prioritise the interests of their tribe, they recognise that other groups – Mexicans, African-Americans or Muslims – are likely to do the same. As communities become comprised of different peoples, the culture and politics of those communities become an expression of their constituent peoples.

"You’ll often encounter doomsday rhetoric in alt-right online communities: that’s because many of them instinctively feel that once large enough and ethnically distinct enough groups are brought together, they will inevitably come to blows. In short, they doubt that full “integration” is ever possible. If it is, it won’t be successful in the “kumbaya” sense. Border walls are a much safer option.

"The alt-right’s intellectuals would also argue that culture is inseparable from race. The alt-right believe that some degree of separation between peoples is necessary for a culture to be preserved. A Mosque next to an English street full of houses bearing the flag of St. George, according to alt-righters, is neither an English street nor a Muslim street — separation is necessary for distinctiveness.

"Some alt-righters make a more subtle argument. They say that when different groups are brought together, the common culture starts to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Instead of mosques or English houses, you get atheism and stucco.

"Ironically, it’s a position that has much in common with leftist opposition to so-called “cultural appropriation,” a similarity openly acknowledged by the alt-right.

It’s arguable that natural conservatives haven’t had real political representation for decades. Since the 1980s, establishment Republicans have obsessed over economics and foreign policy, fiercely defending the Reagan-Thatcher economic consensus at home and neoconservative interventionism abroad. In matters of culture and morality, the issues that natural conservatives really care about, all territory has been ceded to the Left, which now controls the academy, the entertainment industry and the press.

For those who believe in the late Andrew Breitbart’s dictum that politics is downstream from culture, the number of writers, political candidates and media personalities who actually believe that culture is the most important battleground can be dispiriting. (Though Milo is trying his best.)

Natural liberals, who instinctively enjoy diversity and are happy with radical social change – so long as it’s in an egalitarian direction – are now represented by both sides of the political establishment. Natural conservatives, meanwhile, have been slowly abandoned by Republicans — and other conservative parties in other countries. Having lost faith in their former representatives, they now turn to new ones — Donald Trump and the alternative right.

There are principled objections to the tribal concerns of the alt-right, but Establishment conservatives have tended not to express them, instead turning nasty in the course of their panicked backlash. National Review writer Kevin Williamson, in a recent article attacking the sort of voters who back Trump, said that white working-class communities “deserve to die.”

Although the alt-right consists mostly of college-educated men, it sympathises with the white working classes and, based on our interviews, feels a sense of noblesse oblige. National Review has been just as directly unpleasant about the alt-right as it has, on occasion, been about white Americans in general."

As far as whether Trump personally believes in the Alt-Right philosophy, I doubt it. I don't think Donald Trump believes in anything other than furthering the greatness of Donald Trump. The Alt-Right is simply a group that embraced his message, and since that seemed to be fueling his rise, he continued to feed them the red meat they desire. He's an unprincipled opportunist.

That's not to say that he has no racist tendencies. He has several quotes in his past that are definitely racist, but I don't think it's so much an ideological racism as much as it is sort of unthinking stereotypical racism. Trump thinks, "Jews are good at money, so I want them to count it not the blacks who don't have the smarts or work ethic." It's not like he's got a Klan suit or thinks, "I hate them other races," he just thinks of things in oversimplified generalities.

That's my two cents.

Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

162

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

162

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

I got sick with the New 52 in 2012 and haven't read much of anything since then. I hear a couple of you saying Tim and other characters histories will be restored? Is this correct? I know Titans have been given some history back, but is everybody getting pre-Flashpoint? This would thrill me.

Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

162

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

@spambot:

I can't imagine Cruz doing well in New Jersey. Very left state much like New York in voting demographics, and you see how poorly Cruz did there. Cruz did have a chance in Cali, but not a good chance. Also, Cali awards delegates by proportion, so even if Cruz won a majority in Cali, he wouldn't have received all the delegates. Cruz would need a giant turn of the tables. It would be like making up twenty points in a basketball game in the last twenty minutes.

The prolonged internal fighting in GOP has not helped them. If they had the power to pull the plug on Cruz, they would have done it long ago.

Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

162

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

@cpt_nice:

Spambot is misinformed. Cruz's aim since Florida has been to try and block Trump from getting a majority of delegates. If Trump failed to get a majority, then and only then would there be a contested convention at which point a new complex set of rules would come into effect and Cruz could then possibly win a victory. However after losing Indiana, it would be nearly impossible to stop Trump from winning a majority. To stay in the race on a tiny sliver of a chance would to be to sustain a pointless beating.

The GOP establishment hates Ted Cruz, and I can provide a litany of evidence supporting that.

Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

162

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

@spambot:

Cruz didn't have a viable path to victory after losing Indiana. That's why he dropped. Kasich has never had a path to victory. The fact that he dropped immediately after Cruz means he was blocking Cruz for Trump.