this post was submitted on 18 May 2024
436 points (98.2% liked)

politics

19089 readers
3900 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 42 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] blazera@lemmy.world 97 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I cant believe shaming a conservative didnt work, again

[–] Clent@lemmy.world 31 points 5 months ago

They are literally unshamable. Ideologist can't feel shame for their ideology; they would immediately no longer be ideologists.

[–] EvilBit@lemmy.world 24 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Having you tried SLAMMING them? If that doesn’t work, try BLASTING them for their actions.

[–] srwax@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago

You won't believe what verb they used next. Click here to find out

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 80 points 5 months ago (2 children)

It’s hard to look at stuff like this and not feel, at some level, that these fascist fuckstains are actively courting political violence with what they do. They’re essentially proving they’re wholly and entirely unaccountable, like a monarch.

They seem to be forgetting that the country was established in large part because people were angry enough about a very similar dynamic a quarter-ish millennia ago that the fought a fucking war over it.

[–] Clent@lemmy.world 45 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm not saying anyone should murder this guy or other politic figures like him but if a mob of people did, I can't imagine being upset. They can't ignore mob violence and not expect it to bounce back in them.

They can’t ~~ignore~~ exploit mob violence and not expect it to bounce back on them.

FTFY

[–] rayyy@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

these fascist fuckstains are actively courting political violence

They absolutely know what they are doing - riling up their poorly educated stooges to do the dirty work of the very wealthy.

[–] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 32 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Conservatives are a cancer. There is no place in a modern culture for their disease of hate.

Conservatism has always been a plague of death. It is long overdue for a cure.

[–] Zerlyna@lemmy.world 19 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I’m not arguing this isn’t horrible but why are we just hearing about this now?

[–] TreeGhost@lemm.ee 8 points 5 months ago

I've wondered the same thing. Maybe a the Enquirer did a catch and kill payoff to the neighbors when it happened?

[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

The only two choices are strategy or incompetence. With some initial searches no one is covering this aspect.

[–] Drusas@kbin.run 17 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Even if it was his wife who turned it upside down, as he claims, it's still his house as well and he could have opposed her decision to do so. On top of that, couples are (supposed to be) a team. If he didn't know what she was getting up to in their own house, it speaks pretty poorly of him.

But obviously he, at the very least, condoned the upside down flag by allowing its presence.

[–] dohpaz42@lemmy.world 25 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (4 children)

I think the bigger takeaway from this is not that it was his wife who did it (regardless of whether that’s true), it’s that he readily threw his wife under the bus in an attempt to save face for himself. That, by itself, speaks volumes to the type of guy he is at his very core. Or even his supposed loved ones are safe if he feels threatened. Now that’s the sad part.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 13 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It's easy to do that when she will suffer no consequences whatsoever for it. He's not sacrificing her to save himself, he's using a convenient excuse whereby the member of the household who has some nominal expectation of impartiality and civic support keeps their hands clean because their spouse has apparently have zero implications for their impartiality or ethics (see Thomas, Ginni).

[–] dohpaz42@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You just described what it is to throw someone under the bus. 😊

To "throw under the bus" is a figurative phrase in English meaning to blame or abandon a person for selfish reasons. It is typically used to describe a disavowal of a previously amicable relationship to avoid being associated with something controversial or embarrassing.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 7 points 5 months ago

"Throw someone under the bus" implies the other person going under the bus is bad for them and you're doing it so they receive the harm instead of you. If someone says "hey, who shit in my flower bed" and you blame your dog, the dog isn't going to suffer any consequences. I think Alito's wife probably thinks he's outplayed the haters, not that he's harmed her to save himself, because nothing at all will happen to her.

[–] VubDapple@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

This is the selfish narcissist core right here. He threw his wife under the bus rather than backing her up.

[–] Nachorella@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 5 months ago

Exactly what I was thinking.

[–] Quetzalcutlass@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Reminds me of Ted Cruz blaming his family for him skipping out to Cancun during a state-level crisis.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Don't get me wrong, I don't buy his story for a second, but dear God, your whole post exposes ignorance of how couples work, and reeks of "hes the man of the house and should take control."

I've been with my wife for over 20 years. We don't make sure everything the other does we agree with, and we don't constantly keep tabs on what the other is doing. Claiming that it speaks poorly of him because he doesn't keep some kind of totalitarian eye on his wife is kind of ironic in a comments section of this article.

[–] CoggyMcFee@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The level of betrayal it would take for my wife to do something like this when I am a Supreme Court justice, knowing the political significance it would have, would be off the charts.

This is not simply be a case of “my wife and I don’t agree on everything and we don’t keep tabs on everything”. This is one of 9 people in the entire country appointed to one of the most powerful positions for life, and who, if they have the slightest bit of integrity and respect for the power entrusted to them, should be striving to show a significant level of nonpartisanship. Yes, this is a sacrifice. It’s the job.

I don’t know how I could possibly remain married to someone who would sell me out like that — make it appear that I was supporting insurrectionists. But we know it wasn’t a betrayal, and that he was showing support for them, and saying his wife did it is a convenient way to signal to the bad people while hand-waving away anybody who calls him out.

[–] Drusas@kbin.run 1 points 5 months ago

Wow, you totally missed my point. Being on the same page and aware of what your partner is doing has nothing to do with taking control. And I didn't say he should be lording over her.

Relationships, when done well, involve a lot of communication. And how would you not notice the flag on your own front door?

[–] ME5SENGER_24@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago

DISBAR. I don’t need excuses or more wives blamed (looking at you Thomas)

[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago

White nationalist on the court. Pack the court. Give the people a voice in a system designed to punish them.

[–] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 6 points 5 months ago (4 children)

I don't know why we're getting mad about this when there's absolutely nothing that can be done. The Senate isn't going to impeach him, and the House definitely wouldn't convict. It feels like getting heartburn for no reason.

[–] owenfromcanada@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Because when justice is dead, people get mad. And they should get mad.

[–] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 1 points 5 months ago

My therapist says getting mad about things I can't change is bad for my mental health.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Not wrong, but you got it backwards- house impeached senate convicts.

[–] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Either way, never gonna happen.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago
[–] Drusas@kbin.run 8 points 5 months ago

You explain why people are mad in your statement. They're mad because nothing can be done.

[–] MrVilliam@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

He only has a lifetime appointment. He can be removed at any time if Congress is unwilling to act. The same goes for CEOs trying to interfere with unionization efforts. We're running out of peaceful options and these oligarchical fucks aren't nearly afraid enough.

[–] Spitzspot@lemmings.world 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] Clent@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago (3 children)
[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 4 points 5 months ago

Yeah, that's not passing Congress, even if Democrats had the majority in the House.

[–] thesporkeffect@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

Why not both?

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Congress won't impeach. Time for Smith and Wesson to do the job they refuse to do.