Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday June 05 2020, @04:22AM   Printer-friendly
from the the-elephant-in-the-room dept.

A serious divide exists among Trump advisers over how to address nights of protests and riots in US after Floyd's death

Trump is being urged by some advisers to formally address the nation and call for calm, while others have said he should condemn the rioting and looting more forcefully or risk losing middle-of-the-road voters in November, according to several sources familiar with the deliberations.

[...] During a staff call Friday, Trump's top domestic policy aide Brooke Rollins argued for a measured response to riots the night before, advice that was echoed by Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner. Several advisers feared, and hoped to avoid, another Charlottesville moment, when Trump was criticized after declaring in 2017 that "very fine people" were among the Nazi mobs that descended upon Charlottesville, Virginia.

[...] While aides like Kushner have pushed for a more restrained response, Trump is also hearing from several advisers who warned that by not condemning the protests after the death of Floyd, an unarmed 46-year-old black man, that turned into rioting and looting, he is risking losing some demographics that will be key to his election victory in November, like suburban women voters.

As Protests and Violence Spill Over, Trump Shrinks Back

The president spent Sunday out of sight, berating opponents on Twitter, even as some of his campaign advisers were recommending that he deliver a televised address to an anxious nation.

how the George Floyd protests left Donald Trump exposed

“Americans watching this address tonight have seen the recent images of violence in our streets and the chaos in our communities. Many have witnessed this violence personally, some have even been its victims. I have a message for all of you: the crime and violence that today afflicts our nation will soon – and I mean very soon – come to an end.”
These were the words of Donald Trump, not in May 2020 but July 2016, as he accepted the Republican presidential nomination at the national convention in Cleveland.

[...] Not even Trump’s harshest critics can blame him for a virus believed to have come from a market in the Chinese city of Wuhan, nor for an attendant economic collapse, nor for four centuries of slavery, segregation, police brutality and racial injustice.

But they can, and do, point to how he made a bad situation so much worse. The story of Trump’s presidency was arguably always leading to this moment, with its toxic mix of weak moral leadership, racial divisiveness, crass and vulgar rhetoric and an erosion of norms, institutions and trust in traditional information sources. Taken together, these ingredients created a tinderbox poised to explode when crises came.

Antifa: Trump says group will be designated 'terrorist organisation'

"It's ANTIFA and the Radical Left. Don't lay the blame on others!" Mr Trump tweeted on Saturday.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Friday June 05 2020, @01:47PM (21 children)

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Friday June 05 2020, @01:47PM (#1003724)

    He would drool in his chair while his advisors made the decisions.

    This has been the nature of the U.S. Presidency ever since the star of "Bedtime for Bonzo" took office.

    And his advisors, on average, inspire no more confidence in me than Trump's.

    Historically, I've been much more impressed with the change in condition of the country after 8 years of Clinton's advisors, and 8 years of Obama's advisors than I have after 8 years of Bush Jr.'s leash holders, or 4 years of Trump's advisors. The 12 years of Reagan/Bush Sr. were pretty good/impressive, but I got the distinct impression that they were gambling - bigtime - and happened to win; while I approve of the outcome, I do not have confidence in the team and when they've had power since then the results have been much worse.

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Interesting=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Arik on Friday June 05 2020, @03:29PM (17 children)

    by Arik (4543) on Friday June 05 2020, @03:29PM (#1003783) Journal
    "The 12 years of Reagan/Bush Sr. were pretty good/impressive"

    The opposite of my assessment. I would say evil/impressive.
    --
    If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @05:00PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @05:00PM (#1003827)

      Yes but Lawful Evil, as opposed to the current Chaotic Evil. Maybe someday we can get back to the more preferable Neutral Evil or even more hopefully Lawful Neutral.

      • (Score: 2) by Arik on Friday June 05 2020, @05:11PM

        by Arik (4543) on Friday June 05 2020, @05:11PM (#1003838) Journal
        ROFL.

        No, none of these guys were lawful in the slightest.

        --
        If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
    • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday June 05 2020, @05:16PM (14 children)

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Friday June 05 2020, @05:16PM (#1003843)

      Evil is often a matter of perspective.

      Good or evil, they brought a kind of end to the Cold War.

      I didn't get to tour the entire USSR in 1990, but I did take a 5 day bike tour of East Germany along the B5 from Boizenburg to Berlin in the summer and I can say: those people were MUCH better off overall after the Cold War ended - not 100% in all areas, but most things have dramatically improved for them in the last 30 years.

      Also, as far as evil goes in the Bushes, I far prefer Bush Senior's evil expedition to Iraq/Kuwait as opposed to Junior's "Mission Accomplished" in Afghanistan/Iraq.

      --
      🌻🌻 [google.com]
      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Arik on Friday June 05 2020, @06:03PM (13 children)

        by Arik (4543) on Friday June 05 2020, @06:03PM (#1003867) Journal
        Reagan and Bush didn't bring down the Soviet Union. They just happened to be there at the right time to take credit for it.

        The Soviet Union was dismantled from within, because it simply wasn't capable of providing for its people.

        "Also, as far as evil goes in the Bushes, I far prefer Bush Senior's evil expedition to Iraq/Kuwait as opposed to Junior's "Mission Accomplished" in Afghanistan/Iraq."

        I hesitate to start splitting hairs so fine as to argue that one mass murderer is preferable to another, as a general rule.

        --
        If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
        • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday June 05 2020, @06:26PM (12 children)

          by JoeMerchant (3937) on Friday June 05 2020, @06:26PM (#1003877)

          Reagan and Bush didn't bring down the Soviet Union.

          Reagan himself, of course not. "Star Wars'" massive funding of basic military research like high energy laser weapons, and other escalations that started in 1980 after Reagan took office - they didn't "crush the USSR" - but they did hasten, and perhaps even bring about its fall. If instead we had continued SALT and other Cold War cost containment measures, the USSR might have brought down the Iron Curtain in a more controlled fashion and it might even persist in some form today. That might have been a better outcome for the people of central Russia, but not the border states.

          Mass murder, in response to an unlawful invasion - usurpation of sovereignty, with a quick decisive: in-out-done, minimal collateral damage outside the military is orders of magnitude better than protracted violent occupations like Afghanistan (Russia and US), Iraq II, Vietnam, Korea, etc.

          --
          🌻🌻 [google.com]
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @06:43PM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @06:43PM (#1003885)

            Reagan himself, of course not. "Star Wars'" massive funding of basic military research like high energy laser weapons, and other escalations that started in 1980 after Reagan took office - they didn't "crush the USSR" - but they did hasten, and perhaps even bring about its fall.

            I completely disagree. The USSR was failing long before the 1980s.

            In fact, in an essay by Robert Heinlein (don't remember the title, but published in the anthology "Expanded Universe" [wikipedia.org]), he predicted the fall of the USSR within 50 years in 1960!

            As I recall, Heinlein's thesis rested on a variety of economic indicators (including the price and availability of bread, the number of cargo ships in the harbors of Moscow and a bunch of other stuff), collected during a holiday he took with his wife in Russia, not any sort of arms race.

            If that was obvious to a layman back then, presumably it wasn't difficult to figure out by those with expertise, even back then. That the US decided to focus on the USSR as a boogeyman, even though they were clearly dying, says more about the US than it does about the USSR.

            Reagan/G.H.W. Bush? Secret negotiations with the Iranians to keep the US Embassy hostages in custody until after he took office? Iran-Contra? Trading guns for hashish (then selling that hashish in the US -- and thank goodness! Great stuff that Afghani hash!) with the Mujahadeen? There are so many examples of those guys doing flatly *illegal* shit, we could have a whole front-page article just about that.

            • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday June 05 2020, @08:16PM

              by JoeMerchant (3937) on Friday June 05 2020, @08:16PM (#1003936)

              Robert Heinlein (don't remember the title, but published in the anthology "Expanded Universe" [wikipedia.org]), he predicted the fall of the USSR within 50 years in 1960!

              What I'm saying is: I agree with Heinlein. Absent radical aggressive policy maneuvers by the Reagan/Bush admin in the 1980s, the USSR would probably have come apart within 30 years, instead of 10. At the time I was pretty solidly opposed to what they were clearly doing, but 30 years later I can see a fair amount of good that came from it and how "business as usual" might have been quite a bit worse for a lot of people.

              The price of bread in East Germany was 10 phennig per kilo in 1990, I heard that it had recently been raised from 5 phennig per kilo. Conversions from East Marks to West Marks are nearly meaningless, but even giving the East Mark a 1:1 with West Marks at the time, bread was less than US$0.04 per pound, at a time when "free market" bread in the US and Europe was basically $1 per pound. Rent and basic utilities were similarly controlled to crazy-low prices, but apparently getting permission to change apartments was a decades long ordeal.

              The thing about food in East Germany was: it wasn't traded for money in stores - good food changed hands in the black market. About all you could buy for money was (usually) that bread, sometimes some really really bad sausage, maybe lemon drink in a bottle. In 5 days, I encountered a dozen markets that were basically empty except for one or at most two of those items, plus one very very busy little store that had about as much selection as a picked over gas-station quickie mart in the U.S. (still, orders of magnitude more than the other "stores.") Still, the two private homes I stayed in, and even the youth hostels, had much better food available for guests - but they couldn't articulate where to buy it, you knew someone who knew someone and it wasn't traded for money.

              Yep, Iran-Contra, Ollie North, if anybody cared that should have been enough to flush every Republican out of the House and Senate... apparently we don't actually care - I think we should, but what I think doesn't count for a lot come November.

              --
              🌻🌻 [google.com]
          • (Score: 2) by Arik on Friday June 05 2020, @06:54PM (4 children)

            by Arik (4543) on Friday June 05 2020, @06:54PM (#1003890) Journal
            AC got you on a lot of that so I don't need to repeat it.

            Mises beat Heinlein to it by decades, but then again he was the greatest living Economist of his time, rather than a Science Fiction writer.

            But the calculation problem doomed the USSR from the beginning, and the collapse was always inevitable. External threats are as likely to have delayed it as hastened it - the spectre of a foreign enemy is often useful like that.

            "Mass murder, in response to an unlawful invasion"

            A propagandists soundbite that bears little resemblance to the actual situation.

            If Bush really had a problem with the invasion of Kuwait, he might have instructed his ambassador on the scene to refrain from green-lighting it. Might have even put some pressure on the Emir to agree to arbitration.

            It was just another fake news war. Remember the Kuwaiti babies in incubators that never existed?
            --
            If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
            • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday June 05 2020, @08:21PM (2 children)

              by JoeMerchant (3937) on Friday June 05 2020, @08:21PM (#1003937)

              Robert Heinlein (don't remember the title, but published in the anthology "Expanded Universe" [wikipedia.org]), he predicted the fall of the USSR within 50 years in 1960!

              What I'm saying is: I agree with Heinlein. Absent radical aggressive policy maneuvers by the Reagan/Bush admin in the 1980s, the USSR would probably have come apart within 30 years, instead of 10. At the time I was pretty solidly opposed to what they were clearly doing, but 30 years later I can see a fair amount of good that came from it and how "business as usual" might have been quite a bit worse for a lot of people.

              The price of bread in East Germany was 10 phennig per kilo in 1990, I heard that it had recently been raised from 5 phennig per kilo. Conversions from East Marks to West Marks are nearly meaningless, but even giving the East Mark a 1:1 with West Marks at the time, bread was less than US$0.04 per pound, at a time when "free market" bread in the US and Europe was basically $1 per pound. Rent and basic utilities were similarly controlled to crazy-low prices, but apparently getting permission to change apartments was a decades long ordeal.

              The thing about food in East Germany was: it wasn't traded for money in stores - good food changed hands in the black market. About all you could buy for money was (usually) that bread, sometimes some really really bad sausage, maybe lemon drink in a bottle. In 5 days, I encountered a dozen markets that were basically empty except for one or at most two of those items, plus one very very busy little store that had about as much selection as a picked over gas-station quickie mart in the U.S. (still, orders of magnitude more than the other "stores.") Still, the two private homes I stayed in, and even the youth hostels, had much better food available for guests - but they couldn't articulate where to buy it, you knew someone who knew someone and it wasn't traded for money.

              Yep, Iran-Contra, Ollie North, if anybody cared that should have been enough to flush every Republican out of the House and Senate... apparently we don't actually care - I think we should, but what I think doesn't count for a lot come November.

              ...It was just another fake news war. Remember the Kuwaiti babies in incubators that never existed?

              There's so little that we can actually trust in the news / blogosphere - I prefer to disregard the wilder side of speculations.

              Things we actually do know: there was an invasion (who told who it was O.K. will always remain a speculation) - there was a response - the response was both successful and impressively cleanly executed (no, I'm not forgetting Gulf War Syndrome... just comparing Gulf War I to the other overseas quagmire disasters.)

              --
              🌻🌻 [google.com]
              • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @08:50PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @08:50PM (#1003947)

                "Yep, Iran-Contra, Ollie North, if anybody cared that should have been enough to flush every Republican out of the House and Senate... apparently we don't actually care"

                The power of mass media and lies. Only many years later did the details become more widely known, and if you ask the average person on the street they wouldn't be able to tell you much about it.

                We need true transparent oversight and an educated public that can at least grasp the basics of such stories.

              • (Score: 2) by Arik on Friday June 05 2020, @11:09PM

                by Arik (4543) on Friday June 05 2020, @11:09PM (#1003994) Journal
                "What I'm saying is: I agree with Heinlein. Absent radical aggressive policy maneuvers by the Reagan/Bush admin in the 1980s, the USSR would probably have come apart within 30 years, instead of 10."

                I'd say Heinlein simply overestimated their longevity. By the time Reagan came to power they were spent. Instead of fielding more weapons they were only able to lay out more decoys. Their economy was moribund, their people hungry. They were putting on a brave face but they would likely have collapsed shortly no matter what he did or didn't do.

                "Things we actually do know: there was an invasion (who told who it was O.K. will always remain a speculation)"

                Nope, wikileaks published the cables. https://news.antiwar.com/2011/01/02/glaspie-memo-leaked-us-dealings-with-iraq-ahead-of-1990-invasion-of-kuwait-detailed/

                "there was a response"

                "A response" you say? Let's make a little analogy here.

                Your having trouble with your neighbor. He's undermining your property lines stealing from you, and refuses to negotiate, refuses arbitration, just thumbs his nose at you and dares you to stop him. You come talk with me, I live all the way across town but I'm heavily armed and I talk to both of you; sometimes I even have this neighbor of yours come over and shoot in my range, as you've also done on occasion. You're worried that if you get into it with this neighbor I might come in on his side; but I reassure you that I have "no position" on the issue, it's between y'all.

                So then you go back again to negotiate, again get nothing but the middle finger, and now reassured I won't be jumping in you go ahead and confront this troublesome neighbor - and then I just jump right in anyway.

                A response? A response from halfway across town, from someone who's not involved and proclaimed no desire to become involved... not a response. Just a trap.

                "the response was both successful and impressively cleanly executed"

                Tens of thousands of men were murdered, "impressive" in a sense but certainly nothing to emulate.
                --
                If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 06 2020, @12:18AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 06 2020, @12:18AM (#1004008)

              but then again he was the greatest living Economist of his time,

              This explains so much about Arik. Like how he is khallow's sockpuppet. Or the other way around. Or maybe they mutually sockpuppet each other. But that is just too weird to even contemplate.

          • (Score: 2) by dry on Saturday June 06 2020, @06:21AM (4 children)

            by dry (223) on Saturday June 06 2020, @06:21AM (#1004111) Journal

            You are talking about Kuwait illegally taking Iraq's oil right when you refer to "unlawful invasion"? To me, they seem to have got away with it. Shame about those 100,000 conscripts who died. Same with the Kurds and the children who couldn't get medicine to punish Saddam. At least the Saudi's mission to make sure women couldn't get educated or expose their legs, arms or faces was successful.

            • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday June 06 2020, @12:19PM (3 children)

              by JoeMerchant (3937) on Saturday June 06 2020, @12:19PM (#1004155)

              My impression of the region, based in part on family who worked there in the 1950s, is that it has been an ongoing clusterfuck of atrocities (in no small part rooted in the usual suspects of imperialism, arbitrary national boundaries drawn with the object of weakening the resulting countries through destabilization, and propped up puppet leaders) with gradual movement toward stability from 1960-1990 when the so-called "New World Order" was attempted to be imposed, sort of like a game of musical chairs where the adult in the room stops the music and the children are expected to stop running in circles. Until Bush Jr crashed the party it seemed to be working.

              All of these things are a matter of perspective, not only position but especially time. At the time Iraq invaded Kuwait, that was something seen as unacceptable by many - I was in Germany at the time and they were all a-twitter about how terrible it was, but powerless to do anything. Of course, their perspective on the world is a little different - their newspaper called out Hurricane Bertha as the first storm of the season, I tried to explain how that wasn't possible because of the way storms are named, but the Germans insisted that the newspaper was correct (possible that "storm" was their translation of "Hurricane" - missing the distinction with "Tropical Storm".)

              --
              🌻🌻 [google.com]
              • (Score: 2) by dry on Saturday June 06 2020, @04:48PM (2 children)

                by dry (223) on Saturday June 06 2020, @04:48PM (#1004234) Journal

                I think your impression is mostly correct. It was a cluster fuck for various reasons, some directly tied to WWI. Their whole culture is also foreign to us. No traditions like free speech or representative government which led to the weird state of affairs that countries like Iraq were actually somewhat free, at least as long as you stayed clear of politics. Women were free to show their knees and elbows, get educated and go to work for example of a type of freedom. Meanwhile the absolute monarchs seemed to be worse at dictatorship with their religious overtones.
                Here in Canada, the whole Kuwait thing didn't seem that bad, it's not like Kuwait was a free country, there was evidence that Kuwait was sideways drilling to steal Iraq's oil and Saddam did ask the Americans for permission to invade. It was a shit show but their business at the time.
                As your comment about the Germans interpretation of storm/hurricane shows, just using a different language changes peoples perspectives.

                • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday June 06 2020, @07:24PM (1 child)

                  by JoeMerchant (3937) on Saturday June 06 2020, @07:24PM (#1004282)

                  Here, now, 30 years after the fact, is the first time that the idea that Saddam asked permission to invade Kuwait from the U.S. and was granted any kind of permission to do so has crossed my awareness. If such a thing was done, one would presume it would be very highly classified - any release of "secrets" from that level would seem to be as likely to be fabrication as not, but it's really impossible to know. I returned to the US about a month after the invasion started, and had a friend from Jordan - his father owned "the" chicken ranch in Jordan, apparently was pretty well off to send his son overseas to University, anyway - he spent his nights on shortwave radio trying to get the "real news" about what was going on over there - very different perspective on events than we had.

                  When you mash up all the perspectives that were available to me, some things remain fairly constant: Iraq invaded Kuwait, set a bunch of oil rigs on fire. U.S. troops invaded Kuwait/Iraq and threw their weight around to highly lethal effect with ridiculously low U.S. casualties (I think the death rate in combat actually dropped as compared to training...), and pretty minimal collateral damage. The fires got put out eventually, a bunch of U.S. soldiers returned home without visible injuries like missing limbs, but screwed up nonetheless. And the region was relatively quiet for about 10 years - quite a long time for that part of the world.

                  Now if we've actually been invaded by aliens and they are in control of our leadership, lizard people if you will, then it's quite possible that the lizard people had an argument over the distribution of oil resources and this back and forth was a little family squabble between the top lizard people currently ruling Earth. I have zero evidence to support this, besides a few bizarre Hollywood productions that may have been released in order to fictionalize the truth, but, then, if it really is true: we'd never know, would we?

                  --
                  🌻🌻 [google.com]
                  • (Score: 2) by dry on Saturday June 06 2020, @11:06PM

                    by dry (223) on Saturday June 06 2020, @11:06PM (#1004358) Journal

                    Well, about America not caring about Iraq invading Kuwait, we have are the transcripts from the Bush library and the Margaret Thatcher foundation, which I'd think are trustworthy. There's also a slightly different version from the NY Times.
                    One quote from the Bush library,

                    We have no opinion on your Arab-Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait. Secretary Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction, first given to Iraq in the 1960s, that the Kuwait issue is not associated with America.

                    so not exactly permission but the implication that America would not react as it did. More here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_Glaspie#Meetings_with_Saddam_Hussein [wikipedia.org]
                    DDG has lots of other links, https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Saddam+permission+to+invade+Iraq&t=seamonkey&ia=web [duckduckgo.com] for example.
                    Afghanistan too, where America asked for Bin Laden, Afganistan asked for evidence before extraditing and America then invaded rather then going the legal route.
                    As for the first Iraq war, I thought those 100,00 conscripts getting murdered by America and then America stopping was pretty shitty. Saddam was not a nice man and the way those conscripts were conscripted was the regular army showed up in a village, gathered all the men together, took one and shot him dead to show they were serious, and conscripted the rest for cannon fodder. America really let the Kurds down too in the aftermath, promising support and then not doing it. That's the America for you. Best propaganda machine ever, and it consists of private industry.

  • (Score: 2) by bussdriver on Friday June 05 2020, @06:20PM (2 children)

    by bussdriver (6876) Subscriber Badge on Friday June 05 2020, @06:20PM (#1003874)

    The Reagan/Bush short term gains created the Bush mess that resulted in him LOSING, creating a bogus war (Saddam basically asked permission 1st, look what bush's ambassador to Iraq said) and then needing Clinton's cleanup crew to turn things around. Even so, the corporate take over was essentially complete after Reagan, who was an actual corporate spokesperson (for a military weapons maker... no surprise he did the bidding of the military industrial complex.) Clinton was a "new" democrat an actual term back in the day that didn't mean sell out (but it was.) Throw the people some bones and let all the jobs go away - both sides have been doing that since. The Dems appologetically argue it's the way of the modern world they must play in while the Repukes strongly advocate for it and how it'll trickle down on you...

    One side thinks being pissed on is rain, and the other tries to get you an umbrella.

    • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday June 05 2020, @06:38PM (1 child)

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Friday June 05 2020, @06:38PM (#1003882)

      I agree, none of 'em are good. Reagan accidentally set my Granny up for life with his insane interest rates just after she got her lump-sum teacher's retirement - I think she tripled her retirement fund in 10 years or something insane like that, just by putting it in insured 5 year CDs. Meanwhile, everybody trying to buy a new house was completely screwed, and even the price of housing was restrained far below baseline inflation by the inability to get financing. My student loans came with an 8% APR, but luckily they ran interest free all the way through grad school and I was able to pay them off relatively quickly on graduation.

      Trickle down was a huge insult, but I was more concerned about being forced to sign up for selective service at a time when the only open jobs on the market were for nuclear technicians.

      It has been past time for a revolution - the man under the tinfoil hat might suggest that this whole "BLM" thing is a diversion from the real issues that "Occupy Wall Street" tried to bring to light. Get the economy fixed and the "black disadvantages" will mostly disappear. Also: reinstate federal oversight of anti-segregation laws at a local level - that shit has gone on long enough, it's time for Bubba to be told: no, you can't break the law just because your daddy (and his daddy and his daddy and his daddy...) did.

      --
      🌻🌻 [google.com]
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 06 2020, @12:20AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 06 2020, @12:20AM (#1004010)

        it's time for Bubba to be told: no, you can't break the law just because your daddy (and his daddy and his daddy and his daddy...) did.

        That is exactly what they are telling those white racist crackers down in Georgia!! Cain't jus' go shootin' joggers, Billybob!