Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
She's old enough to assume he's a Jerry.
:)
That's the excuse she can go with, at least.
Edit:
I'm skeptical.
edited 20th Jun '18 12:27:14 PM by CharlesPhipps
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.He's signed the EO, but it only stops seperation, not zero tolerance.
https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1009517483206823937?s=19
edited 20th Jun '18 12:32:05 PM by tclittle
"We're all paper, we're all scissors, we're all fightin' with our mirrors, scared we'll never find somebody to love."I have to ask - has any previous President kept on holding "rallies" after actually attaining office and not when actively campaigning? I mean outside of major events, such as Bush's "Mission Accomplished!" or Obama speaking at various wakes of mass shooting victims. Trump seems to have one almost once a month.
edited 20th Jun '18 12:37:38 PM by ironballs16
"Why would I inflict myself on somebody else?"Would you please stop pushing this ahistorical nonsense? The search for "Custer's mistakes" has never been anything other than an exercise in racism, a search for an explanation that isn't needed, because the reason for his defeat has been self-evident from the word "go". This is a problem, I'll note, that is far from unique to the Little Bighorn, and which is, in a lot of ways, indirectly responsible for the current mess we are in, which is why I'm going to give a full length response.
Custer lost because he was outnumbered by at least three-to-one, and because Gall, Crazy Horse, and the other Native American military leaders out planned and outfought him. And the reason he was outnumbered by at least three-to-one is because Sheridan's campaign plan assumed that the Lakota and Cheyenne would scatter to the four winds, and would have to be run down. So he filled the plains with small columns of troops meant to run down the fleeing "cowards", and which left all of them vulnerable to the Natives instead deciding to concentrate their forces.
Any tactical mistakes Custer made are functionally irrelevant. "He should not have split his forces." "He should have taken reinforcements." "He should have taken Gatling guns." All of these are dodges and all of them are pointless.note Custer lost the moment the battle was joined at all. The only way to win would have been to not fight, and in doing that he would have been going against Sheridan's orders. Any of Sheridan's columns, presented with the same situation, would have done the same, and any of those columns would have gone down to defeat for the exact same reasons. As for his plan being "evil" the capture of noncombatants as hostages was a bog-standard tactic of the wars with the Native Americans. Using it to demonize Custer is pointless; far more sympathetic figures used the identical tactic.
If America is ever going to face up to its history of racism and genocide, it has to abandon the comforting myths of the past and accept the reality of what happened. And the Custer Myth, in all its variations, has consistently obscured reality, by providing a convenient scapegoat for America's racism and ethnic cleansing. If any progress is ever going to be made on dealing with America's treatment of its First Nations people there are two things people are going to have to get through their heads:
1) Custer was not uniquely incompetent. He was a capable Civil War leader who had, in fact, made his reputation routing Confederate cavalry forces that were far larger than his own. What happened at the Little Bighorn was not the result of Custer being stupid, it was the result of Gall, Crazy Horse, et al, being more capable than any opposition he had come up against before. Native Americans are not agency-less actors in their own stories, and we have to stop treating them like they are.
2) Custer was not uniquely evil. He was, as previously stated, a moderate on Native American issues, standing in-between humanitarians like George Crook and John Pope, and exterminationists like Sheridan, Chivington, Connor, and others. Painting him as a demon has always been a way to exonerate the larger American Army, and indeed, American society, of complicity in genocide and ethnic cleansing, crimes in which Custer, while complicit, played an extremely small part when compared to figures like Sheridan. Pretending that the worst of the genocidaires went down to defeat and death at Little Bighorn is a way of ignoring these facts; in truth there were many people far more deserving of Custer's death than Custer, and most of them got away.
Moving forward on race, on white-Native relations, on taking responsibility for genocide, means moving past the figure of Custer, and ceasing to use him as a scapegoat for the failings of American society at large. The United States of America committed acts of mass murder against the Native American population. The United States of America fought wars to steal land from the Native American population. And when that population successfully resisted, the USA blamed its own generals for losing the battles, rather than acknowledge any competency or agency on the part of Native Americans. The Custer Myth is a part of this process and it absolutely, 100%, needs to die. Discarding it is not merely necessary for an accurate understanding of history, but as a matter of belated social justice for one of the USA's most abused minority populations.
As long as American history is taught as an endless parade of white accomplishments and white mistakes, with evils blamed on individuals who were only tangentially connected to them, figures like Trump will continue to be empowered. American history is not all about white people. And it's high time we let go of the myth that it is.
edited 20th Jun '18 12:47:35 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
By the way, about the immigrant children being forcibly injected with drugs thing, seems that specific shelter, Shiloh, has been abusing children for years even before Trump got into power, and the Texas businessman who owns it had another shelter in the state shut down because a child died in it: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/article/Federal-agency-s-shelter-oversight-raises-5969617.php
edited 20th Jun '18 1:12:44 PM by Wariolander
That said, Trump would argue that he is actively campaigning for 2020, just way early. Which is why I said a couple months ago that the Democrats need to fight fire with fire sooner than later. Right now the optics make it look like we have nobody to run against him, which isn't good.
![]()
The opposition presidential campaign only begins after the midterms, it's been like that forever. We don't need to start changing standard procedures left and right because of one out of the norm president elected in a fluke.
Yeah, let's not give him this.
![]()
![]()
The one is Duluth is going to be particularly deranged I think.
It's going to be an outlet for all the frustration he's feeling about the immigration crisis and the Mueller investigation. He thinks he got out of this looking good, and will be crowing all about it tonight, in between screaming about how it's all a Witch Hunt.
My advice: Be a duck. Observe with detachment, and let it roll off your back. Save your outrage for another day.
edited 20th Jun '18 2:09:06 PM by megaeliz
I just had a disturbing thought - given the backlash over this, what are the odds that Trump will use that as a reason to dismiss him so he can install a toadie who'd be willing to end the Mueller investigation? It'd allow his supporters to go "Just a month ago you were complaining about Sessions, now you're complaining he's been fired? Typical libs!"
"Why would I inflict myself on somebody else?"Support for Democrats is ticking up, and this is before most of the impact (if any) from the detention policies is going to be reflected.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/20/politics/generic-ballot-june-poll/index.html
One does not need to think Custer was more racist or unique in his desires for murder as well as genocide to think he was a stupid military commander making a stupid decision. Conflating the idea of apologia to the idea Custer was a fool is a bizarre and nonsensical position to take. It's like saying to hate the Last Jedi is approving of the Alt-Right. Just because some assholes have scapegoated Custer doesn't mean he wasn't bad at his job.
Bluntly, American genocide and displacement isn't even an issue with Custer. It's conflating the Fruit Company and South American exploitation with a specific banana.
edited 20th Jun '18 2:13:37 PM by CharlesPhipps
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.@246272:
You do realise those guys in red with the funny hats aren't just for the tourists, right?
"Yup. That tasted purple."

Worse? Like who?