Cripple. History Major. Irritable and in constant pain. Vaguely Left-Wing.
Lol so like I said, you “opposed” them by voting for them.
This you, buddy?
Maybe if you went after dipshits who vote for people like Biden, Cuomo and Clinton in Democratic primaries you wouldn’t have to hear about what pieces of shit Democratic politicians are. 🤷♂️
Or did you forget what a primary was?
Oh, who am I kidding? Fascists don’t believe words have meanings.
Harris, because I had the terrible curse of prophecy, and predicted a good 50% of the bullshit we’re currently living through should Trump win.
Made a protest vote. Not proud of it, honestly, but I thought Hillary was going to win handily, and I could afford to voice displeasure with her fuckwit candidacy, especially after the coronal tone that was pushed by the DNC during the 2016 primary.
I lived in a safe state at the time and it went Dem anyway, but I still have flashbacks to that morning, watching the results come in.
The only one of those three I ever voted for was Biden, in 2020, in the general election, because I’m not a dipshit fascist. I voted Bernie in the 2020 primary.
Maybe if you went after dipshits who vote for people like Biden, Cuomo and Clinton in Democratic primaries you wouldn’t have to hear about what pieces of shit Democratic politicians are. 🤷♂️
Cute considering that I opposed all three. But that doesn’t match your narrative, so of course, you do the only thing your tiny fascist mind can think of, and make shit up. :)
Then enjoy your award for supporting genocide.
Are you still salty that calling for genocide isn’t allowed in HistoryMemes?
Please, by all means, provide us with evidence that Pug abuses his banhammer. Mod logs aren’t hidden. If his actions are scummy or inappropriate for his position then prove it. Regardless of his popularity you would be doing a favor for the entire fediverse in doing so.
I openly admit to being irritable, impatient, and not really suited for modding duties. At the same time, my bans are overwhelmingly for issues of ideology, not tone, and I generally try to find context for the user’s statements before heading in with a ban. If someone calls me a fuckwit, that’s whatever.
If someone is playing “Bothsides” games when that bullshit is the reason why I’m living in an increasingly fascist state circling the drain, with over a million projected to die from the end of USAID, the unconditional support of Israel’s lunatic genocide in Palestine and imperialism in both Syria and Lebanon, my own increasing inability to find insurance after recent changes in Federal medical policy and state assistance for a chronic disease that will kill me if left untreated (not to mention my mental health issues, which also may kill me untreated), the fact that I’ve had fucking family members who’ve been in the country for almost two decades with no trouble ending up being deported under this administration, that we have people being openly murdered in the streets by unaccountable fascist paramilitaries for the crime of protesting, and every attempt made to enable and assist Russia’s imperialist and genocidal project in Ukraine…
… well, they can enjoy their ban.
He’s a mod who really doesn’t like it when people talk about Democratic politicians who support Israel’s genocide.
lmao.
Also when you talk about him your comment will get a lot more attention than what you’d expect from organic traffic. I have my suspicions he’s got funding.
You caught me.
Neither, I’m just aware that Dems are the only one of the two parties which have moved away from supporting Israel as of late in response to Dem voters, for the first time in my fucking lifetime, moving away from unconditional support of Israel, and have no patience for “Buh-buh-buh-bothsides” bullshit. I checked the user’s comment history before banning for context, which confirmed them as a “Electoralism doesn’t matter!” useful idiot for fascist genocidaires.
But hey, at least they can ‘virtue’ signal about how great it is to enable the murder of as many minorities as possible.
deleted by creator
It’s very understandable to handwave it away and dismiss it,
I very much disagree. Handwaving it and dismissing it misses the entire point of why deliberately murdering civilians is bad.
but yeah, we should just briefly accept that violence against innocent people is wrong and immediately turn it back to Israel, who, by far, hurt and kill way more innocent people than Hamas ever could.
I don’t know about ‘ever could’ - if the IDF was entirely incompetent instead of just vile, I wouldn’t trust Hamas not to simply play this card in reverse. Their long history of antisemitism remains… suspect. On top of being theocratic loons.
But that’s why Israel supported Hamas to undermine Fatah. Much easier target for Israeli PR.
Welp, looks like he started the whole thing off an old comment he found. He was looking for a fight by directly going with the most controversial statement he could find.
That’s not even the most controversial statement in the thread, man.
From my point of view, Israel is waging war on civilians mostly. Hamas is a non issue that can only deal the damage Israel let’s them.
I would agree. I would go so far as to say that calling it war is generous. It’s nothing more than a genocide. Hamas isn’t much more than a cat’s paw for Israeli domestic politics - which makes the defense of their targeting of civilians (something both morally abhorrent and without significant gain for the Palestinian people) all the more ridiculous. At least, ridiculous from an anti-Zionist point of view.
Terrorist groups can’t be defended, but they can’t be used as justification for wholesale slaughter of a civilian population either. That’s the main issue that I think gets people riled up.
The main issue in the real world (thankfully). Unfortunately, on the Fediverse, there’s a fairly large contingent of folk who think that ethnic cleansing is Good, Actually, if it’s pointed towards Israelis.
Thanks for the link.
np
First stop was Hungary, but yes.
The crusaders incurred a huge debt contracting with the Venetians, and when the lackluster crusade didn’t turn up enough people (rich OR poor) to fund the full debt for the transport fleet (which was much larger than it needed to be, since they were expected a larger turnout for the crusade), there was a ‘no refunds’ policy taken by Venice. Venice demanded payment in other forms - first to subdue some local Christian cities they regarded as ‘rightfully’ Venice’s.
After that, the crusaders were still short on cash and running low on supplies, as the strongarming was only to cover the remainder of the contract that they couldn’t afford, and the contract’s duration for providing supplies to the crusaders was running low - in large part because of the time taken by the strongarming detour. They could have disembarked as-planned, but would have done so with almost no food deep in hostile territory, which was not the original plan - hardly an auspicious start to a ‘successful’ crusade. The deposed Byzantine Emperor contacted part of the crusade and offered to pay off their whole debt to the Venetians and provide troops and support to the Holy Land if they put him back on the throne. The Venetians, seeing a chance to fuck over the Byzantines, their traditional enemies, were strongly in favor of the plan.
Of course, this ran into one small problem - the Byzantine Empire was in no shape to pay off massive debts or provide large armies to military adventures at this time. It was only barely holding itself together. When the crusaders sacked Constantinople and put the previous Byzantine Emperor on the throne, they found out that his promises were largely empty, and that even the entire Byzantine treasury couldn’t pay what they were promised.
… so they couped (and killed) the Emperor they themselves had installed by coup, and instead founded what is usually referred to as the “Latin Empire” in modern histories, a Catholic crusader state which ruled over Constantinople and the surrounding area, with only the fringes of the Byzantine Empire remaining free from Catholic control. This section of the crusade never did actually tangle with the Muslims, and the section of the crusade that DID reach the Holy Land (largely made of crusaders who refused to do either sack, Hungary or Byzantine) disbanded because they were too few by that point to convince the local crusader states to start another war with the Muslim polities.
The Pope was reportedly legitimately unhappy about every part of this.
I’m just happy to be a little useful to the Fediverse! 🙏
My favorite part of an FPS is the part where you warm up your rations in the Alpine winter 😭
(unironically, if there was a WW1 sim that went all out like that, I probably would love it)
Speaking of fallible, I’ve certainly taken my fair share of well-deserved lumps from moderation, lmao
Moderator action establishes a baseline for conduct in the community. Sometimes, even regular contributors need a whack on the nose with a newspaper - otherwise it ends up a tightly-knit clique with “rules for thee but not for me”.
Not sure about when it was recognized that the Peninsula was a boot, but it was drawn as such in maps derived from 2nd century AD originals, and high heels became popular in the 17th century AD amongst male nobility who wanted to emphasize their height, status, and the resulting fact that they needed to do nothing requiring practical movement.
By “no matter what their own voter base actually wants”, you mean “some bizarre envisioning of the Dem voter base as far-left”
https://www.newsweek.com/democrats-want-party-move-right-poll-2030713
The poll of 1,001 adults nationwide, conducted January 21 to January 27—just days after Trump returned to office—found that more Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents want the party to move toward moderation rather than becoming more liberal or staying the same.
It found that 45 percent of Democratic respondents wanted the party to become “more moderate,” compared to 34 percent in 2021. The poll also found that Democrats are less satisfied with the state of party politics, with 22 percent wanting the party to stay the same, down from 31 percent in 2021.
Meanwhile, 29 percent of participants want the party to become more liberal, compared to 34 percent in 2021.
The breakdown of the vote percentage shows that 50 percent of nonwhite participants support the party becoming more moderate, compared to 42 percent of white participants. The shift also trends higher among higher-income earners.
Feel free to quote me, unless you’re making shit up because you don’t actually have an argument. :)
Your literacy is remarkably low. I expressed exhausted enthusiasm that Dem voters finally began to change their opinion on Israel in polling, despite there being multiple escalations of the genocide in the past decade-and-a-half alone that didn’t move the fucking needle.
lmao
Sorry that you think licking Trump’s boots is a preferable alternative to voting for a dreaded shitlib, who literally won the majority of the less conservative third of this fucking country in their primaries in 2016 and 2020.
I’m sure the Palestinians in the West Bank and Jordanians and Syrians being annexed by Israeli genocidaires are thrilled by your ‘principled’ stance.