I fear the 'breakfast question' has even more dire answers than I had feared, and even people who talk about the breakfast question often fail the test themselves. Which is wild.
Hadn't heard of that, but this is a common problem I do have with some people. I literally have to ask "I know that you did have breakfast, but how would you feel if you hadn't" because otherwise the answer is invariable.
Also, no matter how you feel about this ICE shooting, I really hate the bloodthirstiness some people on "my side" are exhibiting.
Here's what I don't understand. It's almost as if people think that it does them or their side some good to cheer this or be bloodthirsty. And sure, many leftists did cheer or react blasé to Ashli Babbitt.
But the fact that they do something stupid doesn't mean that the right should. Cheering Babbitt did them absolutely no good, and it galvanized the right for years. Even if you don't have a problem with the immorality, would you not at least try to be strategic?
I see a lot of leftists concluding "they want us dead" due to this reaction. Of course they ignore the specifics, like we do when it suits us, possibly because they think that people support her being shot because she is a leftist. Serves them right, now they know how the right fells? Of course, they'll become ever more implacable and try ever harder to fight you now, so "making libs angry" isn't much of an accomplishment.
I heard it put well, I think by Daryl Cooper (who sadly also missed some obvious stuff and got things wrong for no reason), that this was a 'can, not should' shooting. i.e. the lady probably crossed enough lines so the agent will have a decent defense for pulling the trigger...but doesn't mean that's what was called for in that situation.
Opinion is basically polarized around support/opposition to ICE. I'm in Europe where it's unthinkable to shoot under this circumstance, so to me, it looked bad (and people didn't like that because it's such a shibboleth). I do understand the shooting - e.g. even if he wasn't in her path, he may have thought that he was. But I have other questions: shooting the driver in a moving vehicle seems very dangerous, what if there was a kid in the path. And why is the administration immediately denouncing the woman as a domestic terrorist, rather than the usual "tragic event, we'll investigate thoroughly"? That made me doubt the 'official story' more than my own lying eyes.
I like how Darryl Cooper is obviously a very humane guy, but he's constantly called an evil nutsi. To be honest, I'm not interested in his history - I prefer historians for that - but his takes on current affairs I think are very good.
And, sadly, I think both sides wanted this. The left to prove their point, the right/admin so they can point to the riots and get more support for increased crackdowns.
I think this is bad for the admin (just calculation, not only because I'm black-pilled). I think this has galvanized the left to oppose far more than any disorder will provide a justification for an increased crackdown. I've seen videos of people getting away with psycho behavior, so obviously they're not doing much of anything.
Lastly, because I realize this is another essay
And yet always worth reading.
People keep talking about duty to protect when it comes to killing Americans. 'He had to pull the trigger, or she would have driven off and killed someone else.
I don't understand that at all. It's not as if she was driving like a maniac at 200 km/h, she was trying to get away from the ICE officers. Wouldn't shooting her increase the chance of an out of control vehicle hitting someone? Frankly, that part is what disturbed me the most about the whole affair. What if there was a kid between her and where her car smahed into that other car?
They had her plate...they had her "partner," so she wasn't going to escape justice either. We can talk self defense, that's certainly valid, but the idea that he had to stop her from leaving is just not correct.
Yup.
While law and order is very important, we do also have to be wary of further normalizing the killing of Americans
Any abuse of power that you justify for others, will eventually come back for yourself. They justified Ashli Babbitt, even though she was unarmed, and now they're saying that you cannot ever shoot an unarmed woman (a car aimed at you is arguably a weapon, but whether it was used like that is controversial) when it's their ox being gored.
No matter how you all feel about this crazy leftist, a lot of the people pulling the 'law and order' strings hate us as well.
The most maddening thing about MAGA cheering for Venezuela. Those deep state goons who want that hate you more than Maduro.
Even if you don't have a problem with the immorality, would you not at least try to be strategic?
Right? Not to say I'm correct about everything, but you can easily straddle the line on this; she did fuck around and find out, and a sane person wouldn't have done that...it should also still be sad that a woman lost her life. And we should be asking if there was a way to avoid that.
I like how Darryl Cooper is obviously a very humane guy, but he's constantly called an evil nutsi. To be honest, I'm not interested in his history - I prefer historians for that - but his takes on current affairs I think are very good.
Do you listen to Provoked, his podcast with Scott Horton? It's pretty good, and it's interesting to see them bounce off each other. I like both the guys, and think they're both operating in good faith, so it's interesting when they clash sometimes. Scott failed the 'nationalism' question on one ep, and I was much more on Darryl's side.
As to history, I haven't heard too much but, among other ones, do find his series on WW2 fascinating. That first episode about WW1 is absolutely horrific, in both the best and worst way. Trench warfare ain't nothing to scoff at. And Ernst Junger was an absolute boss.
I think this is bad for the admin
Probably. Still feels like they wanted it, or were too stupid to avoid it, though. No matter who you think is at fault in this particular incident...it's not an unpredictable outcome. I was talking about ICE killing someone and leftists burning cities months ago.
And yet always worth reading.
Thanks, but I should learn to be more concise...
They justified Ashli Babbitt, even though she was unarmed, and now they're saying that you cannot ever shoot an unarmed woman
Because they don't have standards or integrity, and live in their own reality.
(a car aimed at you is arguably a weapon, but whether it was used like that is controversial) when it's their ox being gored.
It was used like that, or at least presented such a danger. I don't think, and never did think, that she intentionally tried to run the agent over. It's also not relevant to his reaction, though.
As to cars as weapons, they absolutely can be, and sometimes are. Ironically, it was Tucker himself who had a great bit about all the 'unarmed blacks gunned down by police,' and he did a breakdown, pointing out how they were almost all armed in one way or another; I think one officer was even pinned between two vehicles when he fired. That was classified as him killing an unarmed person. That's just insane.
The most maddening thing about MAGA cheering for Venezuela. Those deep state goons who want that hate you more than Maduro.
It's not even MAGA at this point, that's what's really sad. MAGA is dead. It's a skinsuit operated by Mark Levin, Ben Shapiro, and Laura Loomer now. A bunch of Never Trumpers somehow convinced Trump and MAGA that they are Core MAGA, and everyone else is a traitor.
Right? Not to say I'm correct about everything, but you can easily straddle the line on this; she did fuck around and find out, and a sane person wouldn't have done that...it should also still be sad that a woman lost her life. And we should be asking if there was a way to avoid that.
It's not that hard either. I agree that she FAFO, but a lot of people use that phrase in a celebratory manner, as if: yay, we finally got one of theirs.
Do you listen to Provoked, his podcast with Scott Horton? It's pretty good, and it's interesting to see them bounce off each other. I like both the guys, and think they're both operating in good faith, so it's interesting when they clash sometimes. Scott failed the 'nationalism' question on one ep, and I was much more on Darryl's side.
I do. It's quite good, and it's a shame that it's weekly. With all of Trump's clown wars, it would need to be daily to keep track of developments.
I mentioned him before I listened to the lastest Provoked. What's interesting is that what he said was almost identical to my own thoughts. Except for his claim that it's exactly like Charlie Kirk, but I still admire his ability to call out his own tribe forcefully. He also had the exact same reaction to the admin calling her a domestic terrrorist and making judgments almost immediately. What a nazi! When I grow up, I want to be a nazi too.
As to history, I haven't heard too much but, among other ones, do find his series on WW2 fascinating. That first episode about WW1 is absolutely horrific, in both the best and worst way. Trench warfare ain't nothing to scoff at. And Ernst Junger was an absolute boss.
I said it when a leftist Rome-history podcaster was discussed, and shockingly, people here actually agreed with it. Probably because I was saying it about someone who was on the left. But I would rather get my history from the source rather than through the telephone-game of a podcaster who isn't a historian.
Probably. Still feels like they wanted it, or were too stupid to avoid it, though. No matter who you think is at fault in this particular incident...it's not an unpredictable outcome. I was talking about ICE killing someone and leftists burning cities months ago.
For now, it seems that they're not burning cities, probably because Trump is a bit less of a joke this time around. BTW, we were discussing his first term. Allowing your country to be burned down, and then saying "well, they were Democrat areas anyway" to justify your inaction was a big no-no to me.
Because they don't have standards or integrity, and live in their own reality.
I see the same on the right. Maybe not quite as bad. But they spent years attacking cancel culture and censorship at universities, only to do that for Israel. I opposed that when I was supporting Israel. It seems the GOP establishment supports it to protect Israel, and people here because "some deportations of foreigners are better than none". Not sure that's worth sacrificing free speech rights over for Israel...
It was used like that, or at least presented such a danger. I don't think, and never did think, that she intentionally tried to run the agent over. It's also not relevant to his reaction, though.
I'd say that if she had tried, then there shouldn't even be any question: of course he should have shot her in that case. So in that sense, it is relevant. I think you mean: even if she didn't try, that doesn't automatically make him wrong, and I also agree with that.
As to cars as weapons, they absolutely can be, and sometimes are. Ironically, it was Tucker himself who had a great bit about all the 'unarmed blacks gunned down by police,' and he did a breakdown, pointing out how they were almost all armed in one way or another; I think one officer was even pinned between two vehicles when he fired. That was classified as him killing an unarmed person. That's just insane.
It is insane. I just said that because I didn't want anyone driving a car ever to be equated with someone wielding a deadly weapon. Obviously, if you're using it like that, it's different.
It's not even MAGA at this point, that's what's really sad. MAGA is dead. It's a skinsuit operated by Mark Levin, Ben Shapiro, and Laura Loomer now. A bunch of Never Trumpers somehow convinced Trump and MAGA that they are Core MAGA, and everyone else is a traitor.
The thing is, how have they commandeered what Trump does, and how do they manage to convince the MAGA base. It's not fully a cult, as someone correctly pointed out to me (Iran, Epstein), but it sure looks like a cult when people go from "no regime change" to "yay regime change" over the course of a week.
Except for his claim that it's exactly like Charlie Kirk
It's disappointing to see smart people make such a dumb argument. Tucker did it too. One was a guy sitting there talking, another was driving a car toward an armed agent. Whether you think she "deserved" it or not, one killing was infinitely more justifiable, since there was at least potential cause.
I see the same on the right. Maybe not quite as bad. But they spent years attacking cancel culture and censorship at universities, only to do that for Israel.
I don't see it as near a big of an issue, and not nearly as universal on the right but, yeah, there have been some big failures and hypocrisies.
The thing is, how have they commandeered what Trump does, and how do they manage to convince the MAGA base. It's not fully a cult, as someone correctly pointed out to me (Iran, Epstein), but it sure looks like a cult when people go from "no regime change" to "yay regime change" over the course of a week.
It's not always the same people...but often is. Yeah, very culty. "No regime change...oh, Trump is doing regime change, we have to support it now." Sad.
It's disappointing to see smart people make such a dumb argument. Tucker did it too. One was a guy sitting there talking, another was driving a car toward an armed agent. Whether you think she "deserved" it or not, one killing was infinitely more justifiable, since there was at least potential cause.
Yeah. I can see it used as a way to hold up a mirror to the right, as in "how would you feel if people talked about Charlie Kirk like that?"
I think they're good people and let their moral outrage drive them to that argument.
I don't see it as near a big of an issue, and not nearly as universal on the right but, yeah, there have been some big failures and hypocrisies.
Maybe not the biggest issue, but free speech is pretty important. And Trump is literally forcing universities to enact DEI policies for Jewish students, and hate speech codes. I was ambivalent at first, thinking that it was a weapon to crush these leftist universities, but unfortunately it was just what it seemed.
It's not always the same people...but often is. Yeah, very culty. "No regime change...oh, Trump is doing regime change, we have to support it now." Sad.
Many of the people I liked sold out. Matt Gaetz. Steve Bannon. I liked Cernovich and Jack Posobiec on war, but they're insufferable. And Nikki Haley's brat (named Nalin Haley like a porn parody of Nikki) was very reasonable on Tucker Carlson, only to go, and I quote: "Stfu America runs the world. We do what tf we want when we want. WE ARE THE LAW". Just embarrassing.
This must be how it feels to be a leftist and be on the same side as blue-haired people with 19 facial piercings talking about trans genocide and queerliberation requiring police abolition.
Hadn't heard of that, but this is a common problem I do have with some people. I literally have to ask "I know that you did have breakfast, but how would you feel if you hadn't" because otherwise the answer is invariable.
Here's what I don't understand. It's almost as if people think that it does them or their side some good to cheer this or be bloodthirsty. And sure, many leftists did cheer or react blasé to Ashli Babbitt.
But the fact that they do something stupid doesn't mean that the right should. Cheering Babbitt did them absolutely no good, and it galvanized the right for years. Even if you don't have a problem with the immorality, would you not at least try to be strategic?
I see a lot of leftists concluding "they want us dead" due to this reaction. Of course they ignore the specifics, like we do when it suits us, possibly because they think that people support her being shot because she is a leftist. Serves them right, now they know how the right fells? Of course, they'll become ever more implacable and try ever harder to fight you now, so "making libs angry" isn't much of an accomplishment.
Opinion is basically polarized around support/opposition to ICE. I'm in Europe where it's unthinkable to shoot under this circumstance, so to me, it looked bad (and people didn't like that because it's such a shibboleth). I do understand the shooting - e.g. even if he wasn't in her path, he may have thought that he was. But I have other questions: shooting the driver in a moving vehicle seems very dangerous, what if there was a kid in the path. And why is the administration immediately denouncing the woman as a domestic terrorist, rather than the usual "tragic event, we'll investigate thoroughly"? That made me doubt the 'official story' more than my own lying eyes.
I like how Darryl Cooper is obviously a very humane guy, but he's constantly called an evil nutsi. To be honest, I'm not interested in his history - I prefer historians for that - but his takes on current affairs I think are very good.
I think this is bad for the admin (just calculation, not only because I'm black-pilled). I think this has galvanized the left to oppose far more than any disorder will provide a justification for an increased crackdown. I've seen videos of people getting away with psycho behavior, so obviously they're not doing much of anything.
And yet always worth reading.
I don't understand that at all. It's not as if she was driving like a maniac at 200 km/h, she was trying to get away from the ICE officers. Wouldn't shooting her increase the chance of an out of control vehicle hitting someone? Frankly, that part is what disturbed me the most about the whole affair. What if there was a kid between her and where her car smahed into that other car?
Yup.
Any abuse of power that you justify for others, will eventually come back for yourself. They justified Ashli Babbitt, even though she was unarmed, and now they're saying that you cannot ever shoot an unarmed woman (a car aimed at you is arguably a weapon, but whether it was used like that is controversial) when it's their ox being gored.
The most maddening thing about MAGA cheering for Venezuela. Those deep state goons who want that hate you more than Maduro.
He got hit by the car
Wasn't clear to me. Anyway, I wasn't taking a position on that, but this is a common anti-shooting argument.
It's clear as day dude. He got hit by the car.
I gotcha though
I understand that standards for shooting people are different in America and that under those standards, this was probably justified.
Right? Not to say I'm correct about everything, but you can easily straddle the line on this; she did fuck around and find out, and a sane person wouldn't have done that...it should also still be sad that a woman lost her life. And we should be asking if there was a way to avoid that.
Do you listen to Provoked, his podcast with Scott Horton? It's pretty good, and it's interesting to see them bounce off each other. I like both the guys, and think they're both operating in good faith, so it's interesting when they clash sometimes. Scott failed the 'nationalism' question on one ep, and I was much more on Darryl's side.
As to history, I haven't heard too much but, among other ones, do find his series on WW2 fascinating. That first episode about WW1 is absolutely horrific, in both the best and worst way. Trench warfare ain't nothing to scoff at. And Ernst Junger was an absolute boss.
Probably. Still feels like they wanted it, or were too stupid to avoid it, though. No matter who you think is at fault in this particular incident...it's not an unpredictable outcome. I was talking about ICE killing someone and leftists burning cities months ago.
Thanks, but I should learn to be more concise...
Because they don't have standards or integrity, and live in their own reality.
It was used like that, or at least presented such a danger. I don't think, and never did think, that she intentionally tried to run the agent over. It's also not relevant to his reaction, though.
As to cars as weapons, they absolutely can be, and sometimes are. Ironically, it was Tucker himself who had a great bit about all the 'unarmed blacks gunned down by police,' and he did a breakdown, pointing out how they were almost all armed in one way or another; I think one officer was even pinned between two vehicles when he fired. That was classified as him killing an unarmed person. That's just insane.
It's not even MAGA at this point, that's what's really sad. MAGA is dead. It's a skinsuit operated by Mark Levin, Ben Shapiro, and Laura Loomer now. A bunch of Never Trumpers somehow convinced Trump and MAGA that they are Core MAGA, and everyone else is a traitor.
It's not that hard either. I agree that she FAFO, but a lot of people use that phrase in a celebratory manner, as if: yay, we finally got one of theirs.
I do. It's quite good, and it's a shame that it's weekly. With all of Trump's clown wars, it would need to be daily to keep track of developments.
I mentioned him before I listened to the lastest Provoked. What's interesting is that what he said was almost identical to my own thoughts. Except for his claim that it's exactly like Charlie Kirk, but I still admire his ability to call out his own tribe forcefully. He also had the exact same reaction to the admin calling her a domestic terrrorist and making judgments almost immediately. What a nazi! When I grow up, I want to be a nazi too.
I said it when a leftist Rome-history podcaster was discussed, and shockingly, people here actually agreed with it. Probably because I was saying it about someone who was on the left. But I would rather get my history from the source rather than through the telephone-game of a podcaster who isn't a historian.
For now, it seems that they're not burning cities, probably because Trump is a bit less of a joke this time around. BTW, we were discussing his first term. Allowing your country to be burned down, and then saying "well, they were Democrat areas anyway" to justify your inaction was a big no-no to me.
I see the same on the right. Maybe not quite as bad. But they spent years attacking cancel culture and censorship at universities, only to do that for Israel. I opposed that when I was supporting Israel. It seems the GOP establishment supports it to protect Israel, and people here because "some deportations of foreigners are better than none". Not sure that's worth sacrificing free speech rights over for Israel...
I'd say that if she had tried, then there shouldn't even be any question: of course he should have shot her in that case. So in that sense, it is relevant. I think you mean: even if she didn't try, that doesn't automatically make him wrong, and I also agree with that.
It is insane. I just said that because I didn't want anyone driving a car ever to be equated with someone wielding a deadly weapon. Obviously, if you're using it like that, it's different.
The thing is, how have they commandeered what Trump does, and how do they manage to convince the MAGA base. It's not fully a cult, as someone correctly pointed out to me (Iran, Epstein), but it sure looks like a cult when people go from "no regime change" to "yay regime change" over the course of a week.
It's disappointing to see smart people make such a dumb argument. Tucker did it too. One was a guy sitting there talking, another was driving a car toward an armed agent. Whether you think she "deserved" it or not, one killing was infinitely more justifiable, since there was at least potential cause.
I don't see it as near a big of an issue, and not nearly as universal on the right but, yeah, there have been some big failures and hypocrisies.
It's not always the same people...but often is. Yeah, very culty. "No regime change...oh, Trump is doing regime change, we have to support it now." Sad.
Yeah. I can see it used as a way to hold up a mirror to the right, as in "how would you feel if people talked about Charlie Kirk like that?"
I think they're good people and let their moral outrage drive them to that argument.
Maybe not the biggest issue, but free speech is pretty important. And Trump is literally forcing universities to enact DEI policies for Jewish students, and hate speech codes. I was ambivalent at first, thinking that it was a weapon to crush these leftist universities, but unfortunately it was just what it seemed.
Many of the people I liked sold out. Matt Gaetz. Steve Bannon. I liked Cernovich and Jack Posobiec on war, but they're insufferable. And Nikki Haley's brat (named Nalin Haley like a porn parody of Nikki) was very reasonable on Tucker Carlson, only to go, and I quote: "Stfu America runs the world. We do what tf we want when we want. WE ARE THE LAW". Just embarrassing.
This must be how it feels to be a leftist and be on the same side as blue-haired people with 19 facial piercings talking about trans genocide and queerliberation requiring police abolition.