![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pecuniumFirst, he wasn't paying attention when I said, "don't try to tell me he must have, "provoked them," in my post about Peter Watt's arrest
Nope, willysnout (possessed of a blank Lj, and a link to non-existent "political blog" had the temerity to say, “ Watts is an asshole. He had it coming. He's lucky they didn't break his arm. I would have. He was stopped at the border for a screening. He decided to be a pissant about it. Tough shit, Peter."
Which is so wrong, on so many levels. 1: Unsupported we are treated to willy's idea that Peter Watts is an asshole. Me, I don't know them man, but a lot of people I do know have said he's not. That's he's a decent guy. willy has no standing with me, and offers no support for his position.
2: No one, "had it coming" in that way. Cops are supposed to be better than that. We spend a lot of money, putatively, training them to deal with just the sort of thing willy is saying causes one to deserve to be beaten, arrested, deprived of property (what relevance as evidence in a charge of "resisting arrest/assaulting an officer" does the entire contents of the car have?) and kicked out into a winter storm in the dark of night; in one's shirtsleeves.
In willy's world, a "pissant" deserves a royal beatdown. Why? I don't know; I suppose to keep other people from questioning authority.
Ok, so we have seen willy to be an asshole. Why do I say he's an idiot as well?
8Because I looked at his profile.
Someone made the observation that I'm a liberal. Here's my answer.
"Liberal" and "conservative" are relative terms. I really don't think my own political views have changed very much. I considered myself "moderate" after college and up through the 1990s, but then Bush and the Republicans took a hard right turn so now I'd have to say I put myself in the "liberal" category. When I was younger, even the Republicans were pro-choice and in favor of equality for women, and you didn't have this religious wacko wing that went after homos and abortion the way they do now.
So he's a liberal, because the folks who elected Bush, and the things Bush did, mean he's not a moderate anymore.
The next paragraph shows he doesn't really understand the history of the party he's saying, "took a hard right turn."
The Republicans of my youth wouldn't have dared to try and steal Social Security or bust labor unions the way they do now, and the level of outright corporate theft these days is amazing.
I don't know what he's smoking, but I'm torn between wanting him to share, and thinking it needs to be banned. The Republicans of his youth wouldn't have busted labor unions? They wouldn't have gone after labor unions? They wouldn't have connived (even with a bit of willful blindness) at the levels of corporate theft?
How old is he? Because I remember when air-traffic controllers had a union. I remember when the Savings and Loan industry went belly-up (and how McCain managed to avoid being put to pasture by leaving the House for the Senate).
Then we have this little gem: What bothers me more than any of that, are the following two things:...
Second, the officially-sanctioned use of torture. I am aware that bad things happen in war, but I think the U.S. lost the Iraq War the day the leaders ordered torture. When they did that, they broke faith not only with everything we stand for, but with the military past, present and future.
Which is it willy? Torture is bad, or pissants deserve to have their arms broken? Is it only military abuses of people you dislike, and border guards doing such things is fine? Enquiring minds want to know the difference between the tortures you hate, and the ones you think are ok.
I admit, I think people who self-identify as, "libertarian" are confused, but the last line in his profile seems to sum him up pretty well, "If you add up my politics, I think I'd be better classified as one-third populist, one-third progressive, one-third traditional "mind-your-own-fucking-business" libertarian and entirely one vindictive son of a bitch. There are a lot of people who need to be slapped down hard,...
And we can see just who it is he thinks really needs that sort of person deserves his vindictiveness; the sort who asks cops why they are intruding into our business.
Idiot, and asshole.
Nope, willysnout (possessed of a blank Lj, and a link to non-existent "political blog" had the temerity to say, “ Watts is an asshole. He had it coming. He's lucky they didn't break his arm. I would have. He was stopped at the border for a screening. He decided to be a pissant about it. Tough shit, Peter."
Which is so wrong, on so many levels. 1: Unsupported we are treated to willy's idea that Peter Watts is an asshole. Me, I don't know them man, but a lot of people I do know have said he's not. That's he's a decent guy. willy has no standing with me, and offers no support for his position.
2: No one, "had it coming" in that way. Cops are supposed to be better than that. We spend a lot of money, putatively, training them to deal with just the sort of thing willy is saying causes one to deserve to be beaten, arrested, deprived of property (what relevance as evidence in a charge of "resisting arrest/assaulting an officer" does the entire contents of the car have?) and kicked out into a winter storm in the dark of night; in one's shirtsleeves.
In willy's world, a "pissant" deserves a royal beatdown. Why? I don't know; I suppose to keep other people from questioning authority.
Ok, so we have seen willy to be an asshole. Why do I say he's an idiot as well?
8Because I looked at his profile.
Someone made the observation that I'm a liberal. Here's my answer.
"Liberal" and "conservative" are relative terms. I really don't think my own political views have changed very much. I considered myself "moderate" after college and up through the 1990s, but then Bush and the Republicans took a hard right turn so now I'd have to say I put myself in the "liberal" category. When I was younger, even the Republicans were pro-choice and in favor of equality for women, and you didn't have this religious wacko wing that went after homos and abortion the way they do now.
So he's a liberal, because the folks who elected Bush, and the things Bush did, mean he's not a moderate anymore.
The next paragraph shows he doesn't really understand the history of the party he's saying, "took a hard right turn."
The Republicans of my youth wouldn't have dared to try and steal Social Security or bust labor unions the way they do now, and the level of outright corporate theft these days is amazing.
I don't know what he's smoking, but I'm torn between wanting him to share, and thinking it needs to be banned. The Republicans of his youth wouldn't have busted labor unions? They wouldn't have gone after labor unions? They wouldn't have connived (even with a bit of willful blindness) at the levels of corporate theft?
How old is he? Because I remember when air-traffic controllers had a union. I remember when the Savings and Loan industry went belly-up (and how McCain managed to avoid being put to pasture by leaving the House for the Senate).
Then we have this little gem: What bothers me more than any of that, are the following two things:...
Second, the officially-sanctioned use of torture. I am aware that bad things happen in war, but I think the U.S. lost the Iraq War the day the leaders ordered torture. When they did that, they broke faith not only with everything we stand for, but with the military past, present and future.
Which is it willy? Torture is bad, or pissants deserve to have their arms broken? Is it only military abuses of people you dislike, and border guards doing such things is fine? Enquiring minds want to know the difference between the tortures you hate, and the ones you think are ok.
I admit, I think people who self-identify as, "libertarian" are confused, but the last line in his profile seems to sum him up pretty well, "If you add up my politics, I think I'd be better classified as one-third populist, one-third progressive, one-third traditional "mind-your-own-fucking-business" libertarian and entirely one vindictive son of a bitch. There are a lot of people who need to be slapped down hard,...
And we can see just who it is he thinks really needs that sort of person deserves his vindictiveness; the sort who asks cops why they are intruding into our business.
Idiot, and asshole.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Re: McCain and the Keating Five
Date: 2009-12-17 04:31 am (UTC)The House said he was no longer a Representative, so it had no jurisdiction to sanction him, and he had about five years to play his mea culpas and trust the electorate to forget about it.
Re: McCain and the Keating Five
Date: 2009-12-17 05:31 am (UTC)The Senate Ethics Committee did not claim it didn't have juridiction:
Based on the evidence available to it, the committee has given consideration to Senator McCain's actions on behalf of Lincoln Savings and Loan Association. The committee concludes that Senator McCain's actions were not improper nor attended with gross negligence and did not reach the level of requiring institutional action against him. The committee finds that Senator McCain took no further action after the April 9, 1987, meeting when he learned of the criminal referral. . . .
Senator McCain has violated no law of the United States or specific Rule of the United States Senate; therefore, the committee concludes that no further action is warranted with respect to Senator McCain on the matters investigated during the preliminary inquiry.
Quoted in the New York Times here. (http://www.nytimes.com/1991/02/28/us/excerpts-of-statement-by-senate-ethics-panel.html?pagewanted=3)
I remember what the Arizona newspapers (and the letters to their editors) were saying about McCain and his opponents at the time. He was re-elected largely because the majority (about 55% at the time) of the state's population wanted to make sure that the Democrat didn't get the seat. He did benefit from five years' separation from the event, but not quite as much as you think. He wasn't well-liked here for more than a dozen years after he moved here, and there is still a significant portion of the conservative community in Maricopa County that thinks he's too liberal.