Options

John McCain has died at 81

18911131416

Posts

  • Options
    nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    A great example of the McCain white washing was by Leonard Pitts today, talking about how McCain was honorable except when he wasn't. Its such a self serving narrative the media wants to spin. I mean this is a guy that was for immigration until he needed to be for the wall to win reelection, or he stood up for Obama, while also at the same time saying being a muslim is bad. Or how he supported Arizona not recognizing MLK Jr. day.

    His record is full of say one thing do the opposite except the opposite was always in service to a hard right conservative view. Doing the right thing could almost be seen as an accident.


    How about when he said torture is reprehensible then folded like a lawn chair for GWB

  • Options
    jungleroomxjungleroomx It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovels Registered User regular
    edited August 2018
    Wrong thread oops

    jungleroomx on
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Ninjeff wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    I just don’t truck with the idea that anyone is obligated to speak only positive things about someone who’s died. In the presence of McCain’s family I’d absolutely bite my tongue specifically for the sake of the mourning relatives. But in a public forum to discuss matters? No. It only encourages the idea tha it’s okay to do terrible things so long as you’re “civil” about it.

    From my perspective, I said plenty about how much i disagreed with him when he was alive. Voted against him too.
    But, now that he is dead, i dont see the point in putting him on blast. There are alive people I can do that towards. People that are actively doing things i disagree with.

    It just seems.....i don't know....less classy to continue to gripe about someone who is dead this shortly after they died.

    In a few years when his record is more a data point than an immediate reflection on the man? Sure. Go for it.

    Now it just feels....not right.
    Not 100% sure why.

    So many legitimate discussions are shut down in america about it being "too early, not the time" that we never get to have those conversations. I say its a perfect time when someone dies to discuss how they were wrong and why people should do better.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    Ninjeff wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    I just don’t truck with the idea that anyone is obligated to speak only positive things about someone who’s died. In the presence of McCain’s family I’d absolutely bite my tongue specifically for the sake of the mourning relatives. But in a public forum to discuss matters? No. It only encourages the idea tha it’s okay to do terrible things so long as you’re “civil” about it.

    From my perspective, I said plenty about how much i disagreed with him when he was alive. Voted against him too.
    But, now that he is dead, i dont see the point in putting him on blast. There are alive people I can do that towards. People that are actively doing things i disagree with.

    It just seems.....i don't know....less classy to continue to gripe about someone who is dead this shortly after they died.

    In a few years when his record is more a data point than an immediate reflection on the man? Sure. Go for it.

    Now it just feels....not right.
    Not 100% sure why.

    So many legitimate discussions are shut down in america about it being "too early, not the time" that we never get to have those conversations. I say its a perfect time when someone dies to discuss how they were wrong and why people should do better.

    Just as not more importantly, it makes it harder to whitewash the past.

  • Options
    CogCog What'd you expect? Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    A great example of the McCain white washing was by Leonard Pitts today, talking about how McCain was honorable except when he wasn't. Its such a self serving narrative the media wants to spin. I mean this is a guy that was for immigration until he needed to be for the wall to win reelection, or he stood up for Obama, while also at the same time saying being a muslim is bad. Or how he supported Arizona not recognizing MLK Jr. day.

    His record is full of say one thing do the opposite except the opposite was always in service to a hard right conservative view. Doing the right thing could almost be seen as an accident.

    This is really where his legacy lies, with me. My biggest beef with McCain will always be that he was always "deeply concerned" about anything and everything in public, and voted the party line nearly every single time anyway. His deep concern shut off as soon as the TV cameras did.

  • Options
    HamHamJHamHamJ Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    Ninjeff wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    I just don’t truck with the idea that anyone is obligated to speak only positive things about someone who’s died. In the presence of McCain’s family I’d absolutely bite my tongue specifically for the sake of the mourning relatives. But in a public forum to discuss matters? No. It only encourages the idea tha it’s okay to do terrible things so long as you’re “civil” about it.

    From my perspective, I said plenty about how much i disagreed with him when he was alive. Voted against him too.
    But, now that he is dead, i dont see the point in putting him on blast. There are alive people I can do that towards. People that are actively doing things i disagree with.

    It just seems.....i don't know....less classy to continue to gripe about someone who is dead this shortly after they died.

    In a few years when his record is more a data point than an immediate reflection on the man? Sure. Go for it.

    Now it just feels....not right.
    Not 100% sure why.

    So many legitimate discussions are shut down in america about it being "too early, not the time" that we never get to have those conversations. I say its a perfect time when someone dies to discuss how they were wrong and why people should do better.

    Yeah, and it's not like the other option is not talking about him at all, which would frankly be fine. No, it's hours of NPR whitewashing history and uncritically propagating the myth of a maverick who stood up to his party and whatever. You can't learn from history when you ignore all the messy details of that history.

    While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Ninjeff wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    I just don’t truck with the idea that anyone is obligated to speak only positive things about someone who’s died. In the presence of McCain’s family I’d absolutely bite my tongue specifically for the sake of the mourning relatives. But in a public forum to discuss matters? No. It only encourages the idea tha it’s okay to do terrible things so long as you’re “civil” about it.

    From my perspective, I said plenty about how much i disagreed with him when he was alive. Voted against him too.
    But, now that he is dead, i dont see the point in putting him on blast. There are alive people I can do that towards. People that are actively doing things i disagree with.

    It just seems.....i don't know....less classy to continue to gripe about someone who is dead this shortly after they died.

    In a few years when his record is more a data point than an immediate reflection on the man? Sure. Go for it.

    Now it just feels....not right.
    Not 100% sure why.

    So many legitimate discussions are shut down in america about it being "too early, not the time" that we never get to have those conversations. I say its a perfect time when someone dies to discuss how they were wrong and why people should do better.

    Yeah, and it's not like the other option is not talking about him at all, which would frankly be fine. No, it's hours of NPR whitewashing history and uncritically propagating the myth of a maverick who stood up to his party and whatever. You can't learn from history when you ignore all the messy details of that history.

    Yes this is the other side of it. Its not simply waiting to have a conversation, its letting an unnatural conversation set the tone. Just like Reagan or insert the name of any recent dead gop member.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    NinjeffNinjeff Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    Ninjeff wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    I just don’t truck with the idea that anyone is obligated to speak only positive things about someone who’s died. In the presence of McCain’s family I’d absolutely bite my tongue specifically for the sake of the mourning relatives. But in a public forum to discuss matters? No. It only encourages the idea tha it’s okay to do terrible things so long as you’re “civil” about it.

    From my perspective, I said plenty about how much i disagreed with him when he was alive. Voted against him too.
    But, now that he is dead, i dont see the point in putting him on blast. There are alive people I can do that towards. People that are actively doing things i disagree with.

    It just seems.....i don't know....less classy to continue to gripe about someone who is dead this shortly after they died.

    In a few years when his record is more a data point than an immediate reflection on the man? Sure. Go for it.

    Now it just feels....not right.
    Not 100% sure why.

    So many legitimate discussions are shut down in america about it being "too early, not the time" that we never get to have those conversations. I say its a perfect time when someone dies to discuss how they were wrong and why people should do better.

    *shrug*
    Fair enough.

    I disagree, i think a death is a good time to say what was good about the person (provided they weren't some awful terrible human of course).

    This isn't "cant discuss gun control" tactics.

    Its: Dude died of Brain Cancer. Cancer sucks. Turns out it doesn't care how great or terrible a person you are. In that, it seems he better thing to do (as a culture, not a forum) is lift the memory up for the good bits, and save the bad bits for when they are relevant. In death, i don't find the bad bits as relevant this close to the event. He was a human. Living on the planet, and -whether or not we agree with his record-, he didnt seem to want[ to actively harm, even if that was the (probably obvious) result of his actions.

    Buuuut anyway.

    again, just my lowly opinion. Ya'll carry on.

  • Options
    SleepSleep Registered User regular
    If you don't want people calling you a villain in death, try not to be a villain while you're alive

  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Ninjeff wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Ninjeff wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    I just don’t truck with the idea that anyone is obligated to speak only positive things about someone who’s died. In the presence of McCain’s family I’d absolutely bite my tongue specifically for the sake of the mourning relatives. But in a public forum to discuss matters? No. It only encourages the idea tha it’s okay to do terrible things so long as you’re “civil” about it.

    From my perspective, I said plenty about how much i disagreed with him when he was alive. Voted against him too.
    But, now that he is dead, i dont see the point in putting him on blast. There are alive people I can do that towards. People that are actively doing things i disagree with.

    It just seems.....i don't know....less classy to continue to gripe about someone who is dead this shortly after they died.

    In a few years when his record is more a data point than an immediate reflection on the man? Sure. Go for it.

    Now it just feels....not right.
    Not 100% sure why.

    So many legitimate discussions are shut down in america about it being "too early, not the time" that we never get to have those conversations. I say its a perfect time when someone dies to discuss how they were wrong and why people should do better.

    *shrug*
    Fair enough.

    I disagree, i think a death is a good time to say what was good about the person (provided they weren't some awful terrible human of course).

    This isn't "cant discuss gun control" tactics.

    Its: Dude died of Brain Cancer. Cancer sucks. Turns out it doesn't care how great or terrible a person you are. In that, it seems he better thing to do (as a culture, not a forum) is lift the memory up for the good bits, and save the bad bits for when they are relevant. In death, i don't find the bad bits as relevant this close to the event. He was a human. Living on the planet, and -whether or not we agree with his record-, he didnt seem to want[ to actively harm, even if that was the (probably obvious) result of his actions.

    Buuuut anyway.

    again, just my lowly opinion. Ya'll carry on.

    You literally can not say this of John McCain who advocated for war and torture. This is a person who campaigned on harm, he sung about bombing iran, its not an accident his policies supported sending young men to die, it was his policy.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    Ninjeff wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    I just don’t truck with the idea that anyone is obligated to speak only positive things about someone who’s died. In the presence of McCain’s family I’d absolutely bite my tongue specifically for the sake of the mourning relatives. But in a public forum to discuss matters? No. It only encourages the idea tha it’s okay to do terrible things so long as you’re “civil” about it.

    From my perspective, I said plenty about how much i disagreed with him when he was alive. Voted against him too.
    But, now that he is dead, i dont see the point in putting him on blast. There are alive people I can do that towards. People that are actively doing things i disagree with.

    It just seems.....i don't know....less classy to continue to gripe about someone who is dead this shortly after they died.

    In a few years when his record is more a data point than an immediate reflection on the man? Sure. Go for it.

    Now it just feels....not right.
    Not 100% sure why.

    Reverence for the dead has, for some folks, taken a back seat to using a man's final moment in the public eye to advance their political position.

    That's at least part of what makes it feel not right to me.

  • Options
    NinjeffNinjeff Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Ninjeff wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    I just don’t truck with the idea that anyone is obligated to speak only positive things about someone who’s died. In the presence of McCain’s family I’d absolutely bite my tongue specifically for the sake of the mourning relatives. But in a public forum to discuss matters? No. It only encourages the idea tha it’s okay to do terrible things so long as you’re “civil” about it.

    From my perspective, I said plenty about how much i disagreed with him when he was alive. Voted against him too.
    But, now that he is dead, i dont see the point in putting him on blast. There are alive people I can do that towards. People that are actively doing things i disagree with.

    It just seems.....i don't know....less classy to continue to gripe about someone who is dead this shortly after they died.

    In a few years when his record is more a data point than an immediate reflection on the man? Sure. Go for it.

    Now it just feels....not right.
    Not 100% sure why.

    Reverence for the dead has, for some folks, taken a back seat to using a man's final moment in the public eye to advance their political position.

    That's at least part of what makes it feel not right to me.

    Thats probably it. Well stated.

    Goes for both sides too.

  • Options
    SleepSleep Registered User regular
    Just cause a gangster's nice and hands out turkeys to his neighborhood for Christmas doesn't mean we don't call em a gangster when they die. We might say he was a classy gangster, but notable gangster none the less.

  • Options
    Spicy Like FlourSpicy Like Flour Registered User regular
    idk but I can't really hold it against people who had their lives directly and negatively affected by his beliefs and actions to be relieved or even happy that he's dead

  • Options
    EncEnc A Fool with Compassion Pronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered User regular
    That reads to me as no different than the "too soon to talk about gun control" discourse. Using civility as a tool to silence other voices.

    You can practice reverence for the dead literally anywhere you like. Poking your head to demand others do the same isn't doing that. It's seeking to control the behavior of others to align with your own goals. That's just as much advancing a political position as anything else.

  • Options
    DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    edited August 2018
    spool32 wrote: »
    Ninjeff wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    I just don’t truck with the idea that anyone is obligated to speak only positive things about someone who’s died. In the presence of McCain’s family I’d absolutely bite my tongue specifically for the sake of the mourning relatives. But in a public forum to discuss matters? No. It only encourages the idea tha it’s okay to do terrible things so long as you’re “civil” about it.

    From my perspective, I said plenty about how much i disagreed with him when he was alive. Voted against him too.
    But, now that he is dead, i dont see the point in putting him on blast. There are alive people I can do that towards. People that are actively doing things i disagree with.

    It just seems.....i don't know....less classy to continue to gripe about someone who is dead this shortly after they died.

    In a few years when his record is more a data point than an immediate reflection on the man? Sure. Go for it.

    Now it just feels....not right.
    Not 100% sure why.

    Reverence for the dead has, for some folks, taken a back seat to using a man's final moment in the public eye to advance their political position.

    That's at least part of what makes it feel not right to me.

    There's reverence for the dead, and then there's writing a hagiography for someone as soon as they've passed. McCain wasn't a saint, had problematic viewpoints, and carried a lot of political baggage, and people are going to feel compelled to set the record straight when faced with that.

    DoctorArch on
    Switch Friend Code: SW-6732-9515-9697
  • Options
    Beef AvengerBeef Avenger Registered User regular
    Politicians and news organizations tripping over themselves to lionize a dead dude isn't political, but calling out that lionization as bullshit is. Sure is a great system

    Steam ID
    PSN: Robo_Wizard1
  • Options
    KaputaKaputa Registered User regular
    edited August 2018
    Preacher wrote: »
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Ninjeff wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    I just don’t truck with the idea that anyone is obligated to speak only positive things about someone who’s died. In the presence of McCain’s family I’d absolutely bite my tongue specifically for the sake of the mourning relatives. But in a public forum to discuss matters? No. It only encourages the idea tha it’s okay to do terrible things so long as you’re “civil” about it.

    From my perspective, I said plenty about how much i disagreed with him when he was alive. Voted against him too.
    But, now that he is dead, i dont see the point in putting him on blast. There are alive people I can do that towards. People that are actively doing things i disagree with.

    It just seems.....i don't know....less classy to continue to gripe about someone who is dead this shortly after they died.

    In a few years when his record is more a data point than an immediate reflection on the man? Sure. Go for it.

    Now it just feels....not right.
    Not 100% sure why.

    So many legitimate discussions are shut down in america about it being "too early, not the time" that we never get to have those conversations. I say its a perfect time when someone dies to discuss how they were wrong and why people should do better.

    Yeah, and it's not like the other option is not talking about him at all, which would frankly be fine. No, it's hours of NPR whitewashing history and uncritically propagating the myth of a maverick who stood up to his party and whatever. You can't learn from history when you ignore all the messy details of that history.

    Yes this is the other side of it. Its not simply waiting to have a conversation, its letting an unnatural conversation set the tone. Just like Reagan or insert the name of any recent dead gop member.
    Yeah, this is why I bothered to post in the thread. Initially I thought "eh, no real need to oppose him anymore now that he's dead, he can't cause any more harm" and ignored the discussion. Then I was subjected to a couple days of uncritical lionization by pretty much every major press outlet. The tone of this thread is pretty negative (myself included) but I feel like part of that is as a reaction to the news media's narrative.

    Kaputa on
  • Options
    NinjeffNinjeff Registered User regular
    Kaputa wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Ninjeff wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    I just don’t truck with the idea that anyone is obligated to speak only positive things about someone who’s died. In the presence of McCain’s family I’d absolutely bite my tongue specifically for the sake of the mourning relatives. But in a public forum to discuss matters? No. It only encourages the idea tha it’s okay to do terrible things so long as you’re “civil” about it.

    From my perspective, I said plenty about how much i disagreed with him when he was alive. Voted against him too.
    But, now that he is dead, i dont see the point in putting him on blast. There are alive people I can do that towards. People that are actively doing things i disagree with.

    It just seems.....i don't know....less classy to continue to gripe about someone who is dead this shortly after they died.

    In a few years when his record is more a data point than an immediate reflection on the man? Sure. Go for it.

    Now it just feels....not right.
    Not 100% sure why.

    So many legitimate discussions are shut down in america about it being "too early, not the time" that we never get to have those conversations. I say its a perfect time when someone dies to discuss how they were wrong and why people should do better.

    Yeah, and it's not like the other option is not talking about him at all, which would frankly be fine. No, it's hours of NPR whitewashing history and uncritically propagating the myth of a maverick who stood up to his party and whatever. You can't learn from history when you ignore all the messy details of that history.

    Yes this is the other side of it. Its not simply waiting to have a conversation, its letting an unnatural conversation set the tone. Just like Reagan or insert the name of any recent dead gop member.
    Yeah, this is why I bothered to post in the thread. Initially I thought "eh, no real need to oppose him anymore now that he's dead, he can't cause any more harm" and ignored the discussion. Then I was subjected to a couple days of uncritical lionization by pretty much every major press outlet. The tone of this thread is pretty negative (myself included) but I feel like part of that is as a reaction to the news media's narrative.

    That could very well be.

    I stepped back from the news race about 4 months ago when i just couldn't handle the barrage of vitriol from either side. So i havent really noticed the wave of McCain positive media as much as other folks here.

  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Ninjeff wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    I just don’t truck with the idea that anyone is obligated to speak only positive things about someone who’s died. In the presence of McCain’s family I’d absolutely bite my tongue specifically for the sake of the mourning relatives. But in a public forum to discuss matters? No. It only encourages the idea tha it’s okay to do terrible things so long as you’re “civil” about it.

    From my perspective, I said plenty about how much i disagreed with him when he was alive. Voted against him too.
    But, now that he is dead, i dont see the point in putting him on blast. There are alive people I can do that towards. People that are actively doing things i disagree with.

    It just seems.....i don't know....less classy to continue to gripe about someone who is dead this shortly after they died.

    In a few years when his record is more a data point than an immediate reflection on the man? Sure. Go for it.

    Now it just feels....not right.
    Not 100% sure why.

    Reverence for the dead has, for some folks, taken a back seat to using a man's final moment in the public eye to advance their political position.

    That's at least part of what makes it feel not right to me.

    This is, in itself, a political stance you’re attempting to advance using his death. Specifically you’re advocating people who have suffered or have seen others suffer from a person’s malign actions remain silent. For the benefit of people who don’t care as much or are okay with those actions.

    It’s fine that this is a strongly held belief for you. But please don’t treat other people’s strongly held beliefs as somehow skeevier or more selfish. That is unless you refuse to speak poorly of literally anyone who’s ever died, which I suspect is unlikely.

  • Options
    shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited August 2018
    spool32 wrote: »
    Ninjeff wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    I just don’t truck with the idea that anyone is obligated to speak only positive things about someone who’s died. In the presence of McCain’s family I’d absolutely bite my tongue specifically for the sake of the mourning relatives. But in a public forum to discuss matters? No. It only encourages the idea tha it’s okay to do terrible things so long as you’re “civil” about it.

    From my perspective, I said plenty about how much i disagreed with him when he was alive. Voted against him too.
    But, now that he is dead, i dont see the point in putting him on blast. There are alive people I can do that towards. People that are actively doing things i disagree with.

    It just seems.....i don't know....less classy to continue to gripe about someone who is dead this shortly after they died.

    In a few years when his record is more a data point than an immediate reflection on the man? Sure. Go for it.

    Now it just feels....not right.
    Not 100% sure why.

    Reverence for the dead has, for some folks, taken a back seat to using a man's final moment in the public eye to advance their political position.

    That's at least part of what makes it feel not right to me.

    Death improves no man. Someone who's a shitbird while they are alive is not suddenly a better person after they die.

    The dead deserve no reverence the living weren't getting already.

    shryke on
  • Options
    ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    What is reverence for the dead? No one is saying "haha i'm glad he's dead fuck him." except our president. There are two discussions going on right now. Blind praise for a fiction, and statements of factual actions by the person.

    Joe Biden gave a very moving eulogy for someone else at McCains funeral in Arizona.

  • Options
    KaputaKaputa Registered User regular
    edited August 2018
    Athenor wrote: »
    Er... I just was raised to respect everyone (who isn't a Trump sycophant) even if I feel they are making the world worse in every conceivable way...

    I figure that's the Midwest in me talking.
    The bolded seems to defeat the point you're trying to make, though. You admit that you have a metric by which you judge if people are worthy of respect or not, and that some ('Trump sycophants') fail by that metric. I'd bet there are plenty of other categories of people who also fail by your metric (Nazis? ISIS? Serial killers? Rapists? I dunno). McCain evidently does not fail by your metric. That's fine, but the reasons for that are more complex and individualized than "I was raised to respect everyone."

    Also, in case my post is somehow badly misinterpreted I do not mean to imply an equivalence between John McCain and Nazis/ISIS/serial killers.

    Kaputa on
  • Options
    DouglasDangerDouglasDanger PennsylvaniaRegistered User regular
    The whole thing with "politics" and the praising of an absolutely monstrous person who committed war crimes and did everything he could to make things worse for millions of people, most of them minorities, is infuriating

    I mean, all rich people have a certain level of immorality about them, and this sort of thing really highlights the oligarchy of modern politics

    I don't know if it matches up well, but it's a bit similar to the arching thing in Venture Bros.

  • Options
    AthenorAthenor Battle Hardened Optimist The Skies of HiigaraRegistered User regular
    .
    Kaputa wrote: »
    Athenor wrote: »
    Er... I just was raised to respect everyone (who isn't a Trump sycophant) even if I feel they are making the world worse in every conceivable way...

    I figure that's the Midwest in me talking.
    The bolded seems to defeat the point you're trying to make, though. You admit that you have a metric by which you judge if people are worthy of respect or not, and that some ('Trump sycophants') fail by that metric. I'd bet there are plenty of other categories of people who also fail by your metric too (Nazis? ISIS? Serial killers? Rapists? I dunno). McCain evidently does not fail by your metric. That's fine, but the reasons for that are more complex and individualized than "I was raised to respect everyone."

    Also, in case my post is somehow badly misinterpreted I do not mean to imply an equivalence between John McCain and Nazis/ISIS/serial killers.

    It's a weird hypocritical stance I've been grappling with for the last few years, if not longer. It's why I am not trying to tell anyone else how to feel, but only relaying how I feel.. which is damned hard to explain. :(

    He/Him | "A boat is always safest in the harbor, but that’s not why we build boats." | "If you run, you gain one. If you move forward, you gain two." - Suletta Mercury, G-Witch
  • Options
    IncenjucarIncenjucar VChatter Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    I'd they'd just let him pass on quietly I wouldn't feel the need to make a big deal about it. But after visiting my folks and finding and endless parade of BS on TV and my Dad talking nice about him I set the record straight.

    I'm not going to sit idly by while my family is tricked into talking nicely about a traitor whose very last act was to screw over the citizens he duped throughout his life.

  • Options
    KaputaKaputa Registered User regular
    edited August 2018
    I think calling him a traitor is a bit far unless there are a whole lot of traitors; he did not seem outside the norm of American politicians.

    Kaputa on
  • Options
    HamHamJHamHamJ Registered User regular
    One of the things that infuriates me is comments about how they may have disagreed with his politics but X as though disagreeing on politics was equivalent to disagreeing about which sports team to support.

    While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
  • Options
    FrankiedarlingFrankiedarling Registered User regular
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    One of the things that infuriates me is comments about how they may have disagreed with his politics but X as though disagreeing on politics was equivalent to disagreeing about which sports team to support.

    We're not supposed to be at war with ourselves, hating and despising opposing political parties and all those within them. That is an abnormal and unhealthy state of affairs and not one the country can bear indefinitely. I won't begrudge anyone their own breaking point where that becomes unimportant to them, but likewise I respect those who attempt to maintain some level of understanding or civility for their political opponents.

  • Options
    Magus`Magus` The fun has been DOUBLED! Registered User regular
    What is the line between Hitler and McCain where it's socially acceptable to call someone on their shit? Obviously not trying to conflate the two, but it seems the level needed for (reasonable) criticism is very high for some.

    Also this is exactly like the gun control thing. Only difference is the events are every few years, not daily.

  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    One of the things that infuriates me is comments about how they may have disagreed with his politics but X as though disagreeing on politics was equivalent to disagreeing about which sports team to support.

    We're not supposed to be at war with ourselves, hating and despising opposing political parties and all those within them. That is an abnormal and unhealthy state of affairs and not one the country can bear indefinitely. I won't begrudge anyone their own breaking point where that becomes unimportant to them, but likewise I respect those who attempt to maintain some level of understanding or civility for their political opponents.

    I'm not at war with ourselves. I'm at war with racists, bigots, war profiteers, those who value greed over the lives of others, and so on. I do not consider this a bad thing.

  • Options
    RedTideRedTide Registered User regular
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    One of the things that infuriates me is comments about how they may have disagreed with his politics but X as though disagreeing on politics was equivalent to disagreeing about which sports team to support.

    We're not supposed to be at war with ourselves, hating and despising opposing political parties and all those within them. That is an abnormal and unhealthy state of affairs and not one the country can bear indefinitely. I won't begrudge anyone their own breaking point where that becomes unimportant to them, but likewise I respect those who attempt to maintain some level of understanding or civility for their political opponents.

    Tolerance of one side while it dehumanizes the other will always lead to oppression or a breakdown of civil society.

    We tolerated the views of slaveholders at the birth of our country and eventually the bottom fell out. We went back to tolerance with the small fits and starts of pushing back against these folks being the only thing that's held the line.

    We're on the eve of being a minority majority country. They've launched an offensive to hold onto their white supremacy. You push back or you accept it.

    You can have a civil disagreement over 7% sales tax or a 10% one. You can have a civil disagreement over having one at all.

    You can't have a civil disagreement over the persecution of your fellow Americans. There is no civility to be found in it's very premise.

  • Options
    SleepSleep Registered User regular
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    One of the things that infuriates me is comments about how they may have disagreed with his politics but X as though disagreeing on politics was equivalent to disagreeing about which sports team to support.

    We're not supposed to be at war with ourselves, hating and despising opposing political parties and all those within them. That is an abnormal and unhealthy state of affairs and not one the country can bear indefinitely. I won't begrudge anyone their own breaking point where that becomes unimportant to them, but likewise I respect those who attempt to maintain some level of understanding or civility for their political opponents.

    Bruh we're stripping folks of their birth record and insisting they aren't citizens... we're in a pretty fuckin dark place.

    Folks trying to maintain understanding of the political opponents supporting that action aren't doing something laudable. They are burying their heads and ignoring our blatant civil rights abuses.

  • Options
    MadicanMadican No face Registered User regular
    Ninjeff wrote: »
    I don't see any particular worth in blasting McCain for the things i disagreed with. That fight ended when he passed away. I'd rather loft the good things about him if only because it feels like the classier, more civilized way to behave.

    The fight over the things he's responsible for are still raging and will continue to need to be fought for a very long time because of his actions.

    He started the fires. Just because he's gone doesn't mean they're magically going to put themselves out.

  • Options
    PaladinPaladin Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Ninjeff wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    I just don’t truck with the idea that anyone is obligated to speak only positive things about someone who’s died. In the presence of McCain’s family I’d absolutely bite my tongue specifically for the sake of the mourning relatives. But in a public forum to discuss matters? No. It only encourages the idea tha it’s okay to do terrible things so long as you’re “civil” about it.

    From my perspective, I said plenty about how much i disagreed with him when he was alive. Voted against him too.
    But, now that he is dead, i dont see the point in putting him on blast. There are alive people I can do that towards. People that are actively doing things i disagree with.

    It just seems.....i don't know....less classy to continue to gripe about someone who is dead this shortly after they died.

    In a few years when his record is more a data point than an immediate reflection on the man? Sure. Go for it.

    Now it just feels....not right.
    Not 100% sure why.

    Reverence for the dead has, for some folks, taken a back seat to using a man's final moment in the public eye to advance their political position.

    That's at least part of what makes it feel not right to me.

    Death improves no man. Someone who's a shitbird while they are alive is not suddenly a better person after they die.

    The dead deserve no reverence the living weren't getting already.

    Dead people get some reverence. It's less respecting the person and more respecting death.

    Marty: The future, it's where you're going?
    Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    Paladin wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Ninjeff wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    I just don’t truck with the idea that anyone is obligated to speak only positive things about someone who’s died. In the presence of McCain’s family I’d absolutely bite my tongue specifically for the sake of the mourning relatives. But in a public forum to discuss matters? No. It only encourages the idea tha it’s okay to do terrible things so long as you’re “civil” about it.

    From my perspective, I said plenty about how much i disagreed with him when he was alive. Voted against him too.
    But, now that he is dead, i dont see the point in putting him on blast. There are alive people I can do that towards. People that are actively doing things i disagree with.

    It just seems.....i don't know....less classy to continue to gripe about someone who is dead this shortly after they died.

    In a few years when his record is more a data point than an immediate reflection on the man? Sure. Go for it.

    Now it just feels....not right.
    Not 100% sure why.

    Reverence for the dead has, for some folks, taken a back seat to using a man's final moment in the public eye to advance their political position.

    That's at least part of what makes it feel not right to me.

    Death improves no man. Someone who's a shitbird while they are alive is not suddenly a better person after they die.

    The dead deserve no reverence the living weren't getting already.

    Dead people get some reverence. It's less respecting the person and more respecting death.

    One can respect death without making up a story about someone's life.

  • Options
    PaladinPaladin Registered User regular
    Quid wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Ninjeff wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    I just don’t truck with the idea that anyone is obligated to speak only positive things about someone who’s died. In the presence of McCain’s family I’d absolutely bite my tongue specifically for the sake of the mourning relatives. But in a public forum to discuss matters? No. It only encourages the idea tha it’s okay to do terrible things so long as you’re “civil” about it.

    From my perspective, I said plenty about how much i disagreed with him when he was alive. Voted against him too.
    But, now that he is dead, i dont see the point in putting him on blast. There are alive people I can do that towards. People that are actively doing things i disagree with.

    It just seems.....i don't know....less classy to continue to gripe about someone who is dead this shortly after they died.

    In a few years when his record is more a data point than an immediate reflection on the man? Sure. Go for it.

    Now it just feels....not right.
    Not 100% sure why.

    Reverence for the dead has, for some folks, taken a back seat to using a man's final moment in the public eye to advance their political position.

    That's at least part of what makes it feel not right to me.

    Death improves no man. Someone who's a shitbird while they are alive is not suddenly a better person after they die.

    The dead deserve no reverence the living weren't getting already.

    Dead people get some reverence. It's less respecting the person and more respecting death.

    One can respect death without making up a story about someone's life.

    I think respect occupies a different dimension than fact. Like, you can disrespect someone who agrees with you on everything but respect someone who is actively out to destroy you.

    Marty: The future, it's where you're going?
    Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    Paladin wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Ninjeff wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    I just don’t truck with the idea that anyone is obligated to speak only positive things about someone who’s died. In the presence of McCain’s family I’d absolutely bite my tongue specifically for the sake of the mourning relatives. But in a public forum to discuss matters? No. It only encourages the idea tha it’s okay to do terrible things so long as you’re “civil” about it.

    From my perspective, I said plenty about how much i disagreed with him when he was alive. Voted against him too.
    But, now that he is dead, i dont see the point in putting him on blast. There are alive people I can do that towards. People that are actively doing things i disagree with.

    It just seems.....i don't know....less classy to continue to gripe about someone who is dead this shortly after they died.

    In a few years when his record is more a data point than an immediate reflection on the man? Sure. Go for it.

    Now it just feels....not right.
    Not 100% sure why.

    Reverence for the dead has, for some folks, taken a back seat to using a man's final moment in the public eye to advance their political position.

    That's at least part of what makes it feel not right to me.

    Death improves no man. Someone who's a shitbird while they are alive is not suddenly a better person after they die.

    The dead deserve no reverence the living weren't getting already.

    Dead people get some reverence. It's less respecting the person and more respecting death.

    One can respect death without making up a story about someone's life.

    I think respect occupies a different dimension than fact. Like, you can disrespect someone who agrees with you on everything but respect someone who is actively out to destroy you.

    Nah. I do my best to base my respect for someone on facts. The facts of McCain are that he was a POW and super genial guy who promoted racism, homophobia, war, and so on. The first two facts don't weigh nearly as heavily for me as everything else that followed.

  • Options
    SorceSorce Not ThereRegistered User regular
    I'm not going to say I'm glad McCain is dead. But I'm sure as fuck glad he's not in Congress anymore.

    sig.gif
  • Options
    PaladinPaladin Registered User regular
    Quid wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Ninjeff wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    I just don’t truck with the idea that anyone is obligated to speak only positive things about someone who’s died. In the presence of McCain’s family I’d absolutely bite my tongue specifically for the sake of the mourning relatives. But in a public forum to discuss matters? No. It only encourages the idea tha it’s okay to do terrible things so long as you’re “civil” about it.

    From my perspective, I said plenty about how much i disagreed with him when he was alive. Voted against him too.
    But, now that he is dead, i dont see the point in putting him on blast. There are alive people I can do that towards. People that are actively doing things i disagree with.

    It just seems.....i don't know....less classy to continue to gripe about someone who is dead this shortly after they died.

    In a few years when his record is more a data point than an immediate reflection on the man? Sure. Go for it.

    Now it just feels....not right.
    Not 100% sure why.

    Reverence for the dead has, for some folks, taken a back seat to using a man's final moment in the public eye to advance their political position.

    That's at least part of what makes it feel not right to me.

    Death improves no man. Someone who's a shitbird while they are alive is not suddenly a better person after they die.

    The dead deserve no reverence the living weren't getting already.

    Dead people get some reverence. It's less respecting the person and more respecting death.

    One can respect death without making up a story about someone's life.

    I think respect occupies a different dimension than fact. Like, you can disrespect someone who agrees with you on everything but respect someone who is actively out to destroy you.

    Nah. I do my best to base my respect for someone on facts. The facts of McCain are that he was a POW and super genial guy who promoted racism, homophobia, war, and so on. The first two facts don't weigh nearly as heavily for me as everything else that followed.

    Then you're better than me, because I find it almost impossible to respect people I don't personally know.

    Marty: The future, it's where you're going?
    Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
This discussion has been closed.