If Jon Grant gets to Council, then we'll know that not only Trump voters are fools.
ICE doesn't pay rewards? Huh. Does anyone have any suggestions for how to repatriate 20 German tourists on the down low? Asking for a friend.
Somebody needs to remind Donaldo that the Supreme Court OK'ed flag burning as a constitutionally-protected activity. A long time ago.
Just a reminder, Hillary Clinton (with republican Bob Bennett) introduced a bill to criminalize flag burning when she was a senator. The proposed penalty was a fine of up to $100,000, and/or a year in jail.
I imagine that @6 will be right there to remind us that Clinton voted for the Iraq war when Trump sends the Marines into Iran next year.

The only good thing about Clinton losing the election is that nobody has to try to defend the stupid politics she pursued during the Bush administration any more.

@7: Only if a publication suggests that sending troops overseas is something that is beyond the pale for a US politician. Why does context concern and upset you so much?
Oh my god, Clinton and Trump are exactly the same! Susan Sarandon is right!

Not to mention the fact that burning is actually the only PROPER method for disposing of a flag.

Are you pretty much ignoring context there? You elide differences to imply that if Trump or Pence or whoever is in office in the next term orders an invasion of Iran, it's the same as "sending troops overseas"--which we do right now, by the way, as there are American troops overseas.
@11: Fine, change "overseas" to "to Iran" in my comment, if it makes you more comfortable. It does not change anything material about what I said at all, the point of which seems to have flown far over your head.

But what you are ignoring is that you elide differences--in other words, you ignore context at your convenience.

By the way, Clinton's stupid amendment did not include stripping Americans of citizenship as a penalty. Trump's proposal does. Do you understand that there's a difference between the two? Actually, never mind. I know you understand it. But do you acknowledge it?
The law would have prohibited burning or otherwise destroying and damaging the US flag with the primary purpose of intimidation or inciting immediate violence or for the act of terrorism

Yea, exactly the same thing. The level of distraction you people fall for is unreal. Now carry on talking about Orange Hitler's atrocious cabinet picks.

Please show when/where Heidi suggests a flag burning fine/imprisonment is beyond the pale for a politician. The obvious and unstated subtext is that it's an asshole move and nowhere does she indicate that it'd be any less ass-ish if proposed by a Dem. Unfortunately, Hillary's not the current President Elect and so taking her to task at this point seems a bit pointless, which is incredibly unfortunate.

I think the thing that so obviously annoys people here is that you always seem so sanctimonious in your attempts at to point out hypocrisy on the part of those of us on the left (and also your seeming desire to distance yourself from us. We've seen more than enough of your posts to know that you're obviously in agreement with us on the overwhelming majority of issues, and intelligent enough to recognize the importance of unifying behind an ideology, even when said ideology is broad enough to be incredibly far from perfect on so many fronts.)

So yeah, NO SHIT, the dems are frequently immoral and frustratingly hypocritical. And it's worth pointing out when you've got something genuinely and egregiously immoral and/or hypocritical that's being done or proposed. But in your desperation to point out such instances, you so often swing and miss. Like just last week when you linked to the CNN article showing Hillary'd be losing the popular vote. Which she won't. Yes, you were just linking to an article published by an arguably reputable news source, but what even was your motivation to do so? It sure seems like it was political grandstanding and it certainly wasn’t the first instance of inaccuracy on your part.

I really don't want to sound like an asshole here and actually enjoy your contributions on a number of levels, but there's just something about them that pretty obviously gets under the skin of no small number of posters here and I feel like this may be a big part of it.
@14, I think (co)sponsoring legislation is more appropriate than popping off on social media. At least it would move through the proper channels and be subject to debate and eventual judicial review if it were passed – but of course in his case it never survived long enough for a congressional vote, because it was a terrible idea.

Trump's inability to control himself is as much the problem here as his terrible ideas, and he will be the motherfucking president in 8 weeks.
re: Trump's flag burning comment. Again, we're missing the real point of all of this. Trump says some stupid shit that the mouth breathing goons agree with to rile them up and equate opposition with treason. We take the bait and discuss the issue on its merits. The goons see this and it confirms their view that opposition is treason and we're a bunch of traitors.
Trump doesn't give a shit about anything but Trump. Remember that. Trump doesn't give a shit about anything but Trump. So, he obviously doesn't give a shit about flag burning, but he does give a shit about Trump power and keeping it. Distracting everyone with this flag crap furthers his power by keeping his goons riled up and making everyone else look like traitors. Well done Donnie!
@13: The first part of your statement makes absolutely no sense, so I am just going to ignore that.

There is a big different between a tweet and a proposal of new legislation to the senate and house. Sit and meditate on what all those differences may be for a while.
@20, The president can't introduce legislation - only congress can do that. Regardless, I would rather any given piece of legislation be properly aired and vetted via the checks and balances of our government than having our president spout off about it on Twitter, because this is precisely how our government was designed to function. It's pretty fucked up that we are in a moment right now where this actually needs to be said. Jesus christ we're so fucked.
Wasn't there a possible terrorist attack yesterday in Ohio?
So, since there obviously won't be a goodbye post, is this the open thread where we all get to thank Ansel for his several years of hard thankless work?
What @19 said. Trump doesn't give a shit about flags. There's zero point in even discussing it because all he's doing is stirring up his more insecure supporters. Don't feed into it. Don't waste time on it.

Also, @25, I'll second that! Thanks and farewell Ansel!
@25: Yes.

Ansel is a highly motivated and passionate writer. These two traits will carry him far in his career. His writing was provacative, inspired readers to exercise their open minds, spiced with being deliciously annoying and maddening at times. Just like you were Goldy.

Best wishes Ansel on your career and a whole life ahead of you.
@25: sigh. Nice to see you here Goldy even though you bear bad news. Crap. Wish all you exes could recreate Slog somehow.

And, yes, many thanks Ansel. You were one of the last glimmers of hope in the old rag (along with Heidi and Sydney). You will be missed for sure.
Goldy @25 thanks Ansel for his hard work and then his stalker @26 shits all over him for it. Can't think of a more appropriate send-off.

Good luck and thanks for everything, Ansel.
gnossos @29:

Well, we exes have no plans to recreate Slog, but you can always head over to our Facebook page—The Estranger—where we post links to the latest writings from the Slog diaspora.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.