Krystal to Dems: 'If you cannot cross this basic moral threshold, I don't want to hear from you.'

[element94]

Purity tests are why Democrats are subsisting on a diet of crow.

You're forgetting the opposition here aren't you? By comparison, the dems are the last ties to the United States of America, and its principles, of the last ~250 years.

 

[Dans La Lune]

You and I had actually never established which 'this case' we were addressing. I saw the photo on the linked video, which had among other things, a photo of Epstein. on it.

Well, now you know. You could have either clicked the link OR read the thread you're responding to.

 

[btthegreat]

Well, now you know. You could have either clicked the link OR read the thread you're responding to.

Your video discusses, not one but two topics, Gaza and Epstein.
You: "I feel exactly the same way. If Dems cannot cross this basic moral threshold, I honestly don't care what their domestic policies are. There's a certain minimum moral threshold you HAVE to cross before I will support you. And many progressive Dems feel the same way. Fascism is about getting what you want, but having to sacrifice other groups to get it. No deal.

What's it going to be, Dems? Make your centrist, right-leaning political calculation at your peril."

If you had read the thread you were responding to, you would have found this Post # 74:

Me: "Haven't watched the video, I suspect it will just piss me off. I am in favor of a 'basic moral threshhold' but I am not in favor of a 'purity test'. I suspect the difference involves being on the right side of fundamental questions of right and wrong and being willing to speak up clearly even at personal risk. Purity tests involve supporting specific policy positions and supporting specific tactics to achieve them. "

If you had read this, you would have noticed that just like your OP, the word 'legal' is absent and the word 'moral' is present.

The way you talk about fascism, just reminds me of the real consequence of progressives not holding real power in this country. They get increasingly morally smug and sanctimonious about how they think they would use power if they got some.

 

[Dans La Lune]

Your video discusses, not one but two topics, Gaza and Epstein.

And Zohran. That's three topics.

You: "I feel exactly the same way. If Dems cannot cross this basic moral threshold, I honestly don't care what their domestic policies are. There's a certain minimum moral threshold you HAVE to cross before I will support you. And many progressive Dems feel the same way. Fascism is about getting what you want, but having to sacrifice other groups to get it. No deal.

What's it going to be, Dems? Make your centrist, right-leaning political calculation at your peril."

If you had read the thread you were responding to, you would have found this Post # 74:

Me: "Haven't watched the video, I suspect it will just piss me off.

Well, actions have consequences. You get what you put in. You decide your level of participation.

I am in favor of a 'basic moral threshhold' but I am not in favor of a 'purity test'. I suspect the difference involves being on the right side of fundamental questions of right and wrong and being willing to speak up clearly even at personal risk. Purity tests involve supporting specific policy positions and supporting specific tactics to achieve them. "

If you had read this, you would have noticed that just like your OP, the word 'legal' is absent and the word 'moral' is present.

Yeah, but I expect people who are interested would do the basic work required to be invested in the thread. By post #3, it was clear that Israel and Gaza were glaring points. By post #10, it was clear that my moral issue was with Israel's actions in Gaza. If you feign or exert ignorance after stage, perhaps you should ask yourself why you're even participating.

The way you talk about fascism, just reminds me of the real consequence of progressives not holding real power in this country.

Seems that way, doesn't it? Progressives don't hold power and we get fascism. From both parties.

They get increasingly morally smug and sanctimonious about how they think they would use power if they got some.

Perhaps you should support Rahm Emanuel in 2028.

 

[OrphanSlug]

Purity testing on various subjects is certainly not new, the question is always which ones and what in the news is provoking the challenge(s) we hear.

Gaza is easy. One can acknowledge that Hamas is responsible for starting this mess but that Israel has lost all moral and ethical credibility with their response. In that context one can call for saying it is now immoral to continue to support Israel and their campaign. The moral character of MAGA Republicans favoring the wealthy at the expense of the most economically vulnerable, inner city to rural healthcare, is also easy for the most obvious reasons.

The question is what else is put to the purity test for 'inclusion' in the Democratic Party.

They go back to identity politics and the game becomes more complicated for voters no matter what progressives tell themselves in a haze of self-issued righteousness.

 

[Luce]

If there was proof, perhaps I'd change my mind. You on the other hand have called him guilty without any proof.

I am an unbiased source and I'm not a partisan hack. I don't know if he did it or not, but without any proof or evidence, I'm not going to call him guilty.

Would that be the proof that we can't see, because the list suddenly stopped existing?

 

[Michael Cole]

It's not hard to find out who she is. Maybe you'd be more comfortable with Jack Tapper.

She was hot when she was at CNN. Is it immoral of me to say that?

I found her commentary to be vanilla bean simplistic and boring. But damn, those legs.

She can't pull that off anymore.

Anyway, enough of my immorality.

Legal prostitution. Moral or immoral? Who gets to decide, and what do we do with those who chose wrongly?

 

[RedAkston]

Would that be the proof that we can't see, because the list suddenly stopped existing?

Oh, I believe there is a list. But without seeing the list, speculation continues to flourish.

 

[btthegreat]

And Zohran. That's three topics.



Well, actions have consequences. You get what you put in. You decide your level of participation.



Yeah, but I expect people who are interested would do the basic work required to be invested in the thread. By post #3, it was clear that Israel and Gaza were glaring points. By post #10, it was clear that my moral issue was with Israel's actions in Gaza. If you feign or exert ignorance after stage, perhaps you should ask yourself why you're even participating.



Seems that way, doesn't it? Progressives don't hold power and we get fascism. From both parties.



Perhaps you should support Rahm Emanuel in 2028.

Oh I vote for progressives, just not the sanctimonious, morally smug ones. It's not a black or white world ( progressive or fascist). It's a nuanced and gray one and only those politicians that can recognize that, are safe with power.