I don't speak or read Spanish so I only read the English translation.
My takeaway is that the Spanish PM is a thoughtful and articulate person who laid out a sane and humane response to the insanity we are unleashing on Iran and the world.
I can only say that I am envious of the Spanish for having a leader who can hold and articulate such a clear moral perspective.
"And yet, in Western societies, boys are often expected to act like girls. Starting in school, where they’re expected to sit down, be still, be quiet, and pay attention. If they don’t, there’s something wrong with them."
Chiming in briefly to note that the underlying assumption in Charles' comment is that sitting still and paying attention are somehow feminine behaviors.
My question is: who are these real leftists? I don't mean college kids, or some online rando. I mean people who have some public voice, and some IRL feasible path to creating an actual outcome, and who also want to "smash bones".
I can think of - maybe - a handful. Thom Hartmann? Bill McKibben? Chomsky? And Hartmann primarily wants something like a restoration of republican self-governance, as opposed to oligarchy. And McKibben primarily wants us to stop burning the world up. So I'm not sure they acually qualify as folks who want to "tear down the institutions", unless "the institutions" are grossly unregulated capital.
Which, perhaps, they actually are at this point.
But I guess I'm looking for names here. Who the hell is Frum talking about? Black bloc kids? Portland anarchists? Are they a realistic example of effective political actors - people who actually might make substantive changes to anything at all?
"Resistance liberal" sounds like, basically, people like me. I understand, and in many cases agree with, the idea that we are ineffective and not quite what is needed at the moment. And it's definitely true that, for most of us, there is a limit to what we are willing to put at risk. It is, frankly, a lot easier to be bold and uncompromising when you have little to lose. So, there is all of that.
FWIW, my wife and I had a conversation a few years ago about the whole carbon economy thing. We both have - and at this point to a large extent live off of - our 401k's. I'm sure we have some holdings in carbon-based energy - oil companies or similar.
A huge amount of the book value of those companies is oil that is still in the ground. Were there to be any public action to prevent that oil (or similar) from being extracted, the value of those companies would probably collapse. At the time I did a sort of very rough back of envelope calculation and figured that, were that to actually happen, we - my wife and I - would take a significant haircut. I forget what the actual seat-of-the-pants number was, but it was a lot. Enough to make a difference in our daily lives, for the rest of our lives.
And we both agreed we'd take the hit if it was on offer.
Maybe we are extraordinarily exceptional, but I find that unlikely. I'm not seeing us as the root of the problem(s). And I really and truly do understand and appreciate that young people coming up now face challenges we did not, but the fact that we have a house and 401k's is not the root cause of all of that.
It is, frankly, not that big of a house. And we only have one.
The regulatory arms of the government have basically been crippled under Trump. The folks who are in a position to do something about that - primarily Congress, but also the freaking SCOTUS - have been captured and are beholden, not to me and people like me, but to the great big bags of money that keep them in office. And, FWIW, line their pockets, personally.
Maybe that's the problem, right there.
I've stood toe to toe with cops to exercise my "resistance liberalism". I didn't see Frum there that day. Maybe he could try it on before he dismisses it.
Not a lurker but FWIW I completely co-sign GFTNC's observations about older guys and underage women back in the day. And general lack of basic respect for women as people, regardless of age. And most definitely to include leftish and hippie types. Late 60's through the 70's.
Not discounting novakant's experience, just sharing my own
My own thought is that it's all about whiteness. And specifically whiteness deriving from a northern European genetic heritage. Which, for similar reasons, they don't want to be right out front with.
Tan won't do, and Marco "my first AND last names end in a vowel" Rubio may need to watch his back.
I'd say glib is sufficiently perjorative, and captures the idea you are describing here.
My question about all of this is "what is this Western civilization you speak of?".
Did "the West" begin with the Romans? Or the Greeks? Would they have thought of themselves as being "the West"?
Does it begin with Europe's early and growing awareness of itself as an entity that *wasn't* Rome, or some descendant of Rome? Like, maybe 11th and 12th C. Europe?
Are we meant to preserve the concept of nation states that emerged from the centuries of non-stop warfare over religious issues and competing wanna-be empires?
Do we get to include the Enlightenment in all of this, or do we need to, a la Rod Dreher, throw all of that away?
Is it capitalism? Christianity? If Christianity, is it just the Western traditions - Roman Catholicism and the Protestant movements that emerged from that? Do the various Eastern traditions get included? African Christianity? South American evangelicalism?
Is it just being white? Who gets to be white?
Oddly, to me, all of this blather comes in the context of the US basically telling Europe to fuck off. Which seems... inconsistent with an emphasis on "preserving our Western identity".
People support Trump for reasons that have little to do with matters of fact in any social or economic or even political sense. It's tribal. They are on Team Trump.
I don't talk with Trump supporters about Trump. Or if and when I do, it's very brief, I just say that I think he's a crook and an asshole, and leave it at that. Oddly enough, they are also generally happy to leave it at that.
I have a friend who suggests talking with Trumpers about what motivates them, but without bringing Trump into it. For example, why is it necessary to deport people who have been here for decades. I haven't really tried that, but I guess it's an option.
The mason in the article has a valid complaint. People who live in southern border communities have valid complaints. People who were concerned about inflation had valid complaints. Whether they are looking in the right places for either causes or solutions is a different story, but the things they are unhappy with are not always unreasonable. They're just (IMO) looking at the wrong villains.
So, talking to the mason about undocumented labor and how that affects him could be useful. Etc.
But I really do think that Trump's base - the more or less 27-ish percent hard core - are basically unshakeable and there is nothing I'm gonna say or do that will move that.
If bad things happen to them, personally, or to someone in their family or close circle of friends, it could make a dent. Other than that, it ain't gonna happen.
Oddly, the nearest thing to really undermining his base support that I can think of was Trump et al saying that people shouldn't carry firearms to a protest. If there's one thing that might pry some of his base away, it's any hint of weakness around the 2nd A.
The paranoid style has always been a significant factor in the US. They aren't going away.
Re: Archie Bunker - when All In The Family first rolled out, some folks saw the Archie Bunker character as a bigoted clown, and some other folks (and not a small number) saw him as their kind of guy. A sort of folk anti-hero.
Plus ca change.
My own sense of what will make folks step away from supporting Trump is that there are two likely avenues:
1. Bad things are done to somebody they know and care about.
2. Discomfort with the egregious violence of the immigration stuff
It's possible that Minneapolis will be Trump's Selma. We'll see.
And yeah, these people are farging iceholes. I'm kinda looking forward to the Epstein stuff clearing the decks - send them all to jail. If that includes Bill Clinton, I'm OK with it.
I gotta go play some music now so I don't lose my mind.
"We're prioritizing the types of people we're arresting. We're going after the worst of the worst. And we're not just going out there willy-nilly picking up people."
Is bullshit.
Miller has set a quota for deportations that is orders of magnitude greater than the number of criminal undocumented people. ICE and CBP folks are getting bonuses for making their quotas. So they grab anyone who is brown or has an accent.
Immigration enforcement is not the job of local police. We don't ask ICE or CBP to enforce traffic violations etc., and we should not ask local cops to do immigration work. For all the reasons discussed in the piece.
You don't need 6 or 8 guys to arrest a criminal undocumented alien. You don't need an MRAP, or a sound cannon, or "less lethal" ordinance to arrest a criminal undocumented alien.
ICE has to go to somebody's house to arrest someone? OMFG, what a burden.
How did the local cops get that person in jail in the first place? They got a warrant and went and took physical custody of them. In many cases, they went to their house and arrested them.
Without an MRAP.
So I think ICE is capable of doing the same.
These guys have killed people, blinded people, shot people, rammed into people's cars, beaten the shit out of people, threatened people with guns drawn. It's an exercise in dominance. Aimed in particular at blue cities in blue states.
Fuck that.
Want co-operation? Stop terrorizing people. Short of that, get the fuck out.
And I appreciate that Homan is a kinder gentler version of Bovino, but we have the man on tape taking a $50K bribe.
That's the best Trump and Miller can come up with?
These guys have a long history of killing and abusing people and coloring outside the legal lines. The only difference now is they're killing white people.
Time to burn it down and start over from a clean slate.
"russell, I am truly shocked that anyone, much less multiple rank and file conservatives, have said anything like that to you."
I appreciate your saying this. Truly.
None of it worries me that much, because nearly all of that has been online, and a lot of folks use the online world to basically vent.
I don't think I've ever run into it here on ObWi. I spent some time on RedState, where it was dead common, and I also hang on Facebook a lot (for my sins), where it is not quite as common, but not uncommon.
I really don't worry about it, it's just an observation. Some people like to talk the big talk.
The example of Llangari does indeed sound messed up. I'm sure many such examples can be found. As can be many examples of situations where the operation of local PD's have been confounded by the actions of ICE and CBP.
A detainer is a non-binding request from immigration to a non-federal police force or prison to hold someone for 48 hours, so they can come and pick that person up.
As has been pointed out numerous times, immigration enforcement IS NOT the responsibility of local police. Further, having local police involved in immigration enforcement makes their work much more complicated in communities where there are a lot of immigrants. By "makes more complicated", I mean it undermines any relationship of trust between the immigrant community and the local police.
Who have to deal with that community, regardless of the immigration status of folks who are in it. This is not a trivial concern. People won't call the cops if they think it could result in their being deported. Especially under the current implementation of ICE/CBP operations, where people are seized and deported EVEN IF THEY HAVE LEGAL STANDING TO BE IN THE COUNTRY.
Happens every day.
So some communities decline to honor detainers. They have other things for their cops to do.
There is a simple solution for ICE / CBP, which is to get a judicial warrant. I'm sure it's a PITA to get a judge to sign off on every person they want to grab, but it provides a basic amount of oversight to their operations, and gives the local PD some guarantee that there actually is a basis for holding the person.
In any case, the idea that MN as a jurisdiction declines to honor detainers "leaves ICE little choice" but to literally invade Minneapolis, assault and shoot people for protesting (see also 1st A), violently break into people's homes without a warrant (see also 4th A), and generally create an environment of utter chaos, seems excessive.
To me.
I suspect other options - other choices - were available to them.
"I thought you might be focused on the homicidal crazies"
When the homicidal crazies on one side outnumber those on the other by multiples, yes, I find that worth noting.
They are "outliers" who the current POTUS has described as "beautiful people".
The left brought us the George Floyd riots, after a man was murdered in cold blood by a police officer on video.
The right brought us J6, after their candidate lost a legitimate election. They beat the crap out of Capitol police, leading to the death of some, and literally dropped trou and shit in the Capitol. We came extremely close to an honest-to-god violent autogolpe, at the instigation of the man who currently holds the office of POTUS. We came damned close to the murder of members of Congress.
And all of them were, to a person, subsequently pardoned. Every single one. Regardless of what they had done that day.
Show me anything on the left remotely comparable.
The right brought us the Bundy episode, where a bunch of self-appointed "militia" bros stood down federal officers at gunpoint. And then occupied and thoroughly trashed a public park facility.
Because Bundy didn't want to pay his grazing fees.
The left brought protests against Israel's Gaza invasion.
The right brought us Charlottesville, with bands of punk ass thugs brandishing torches and chanting "Jews will not replace us". And a fine young right wing asshole driving his car into a crowd and killing a young woman. The right brought us the Tree Of Life shooting and the firebombing of Governor Shapiro's home.
The left brought us antifa, whoever the hell they are. The right brought us the KKK (still here), the Order, the Base, Patriot Front, the Oath Keepers, the Proud Boys, and a smattering of explicitly Nazi-aligned groups. The right brought us people holding office and positions of public responsibility who are on record as being "fans of Hitler".
And I'm leaving aside the number of times - the very large number of times - that I've been told that it's only a matter of time before People Like Me are subject to summary execution by the patriots on the right who own all the guns. I've been hearing that for 25 years now. Not from fringe actors, from regular rank and file conservatives. It ain't likely to happen, but it kind of sucks to try to have a conversation with people who apparently can't wait to shoot me.
When "the left" gets out of hand, stuff gets broken. When the right gets out of hand, people get killed.
Hell yeah, the homicidal folks are an issue. And your side has most of them.
I don’t share your view on the balance of violence in the past years, and curious why you see it that way.
I believe it's a matter of public record.
Per the NIJ (National Institute of Justice, a division of the DOJ):
In fact, the number of far-right attacks continues to outpace all other types of terrorism and domestic violent extremism. Since 1990, far-right extremists have committed far more ideologically motivated homicides than far-left or radical Islamist extremists, including 227 events that took more than 520 lives.1 In this same period, far-left extremists committed 42 ideologically motivated attacks that took 78 lives
Not that it's a contest, but the imbalance is striking.
That report, BTW, was removed from the DOJ website after the assassination of Charlie Kirk. Make of that what you will.
And this from PBS, assuming you will consider them a reliable source:
Based ongovernment and independent analyses, right-wing extremist violence has been responsible for the overwhelming majority of fatalities, amounting to approximately 75% to 80% of U.S. domestic terrorism deaths since 2001.
From the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the historical pattern changed in 2025, with left-wing incidents outnumbering right-wing for the first time in recent memory. If you look at the numbers cited, that is mostly due to the dramatically lower number of right-wing incidents last year. Compared to previous years, the left-wing attacks grew from something like 2 to 5, Right wing attacks dropped from something like 30 to 1, where that 1 was the assassination and attempted assassination of MN elected officials.
Basically, the predominance of the right wing in US political violence is a pretty well established fact.
I find the organized and calculated obstruction tactics coupled with the apparent involvement of socialist organizations and other far left groups (and maybe even local politicians) troubling because it tends to indicate there is much more going on here than opposition to immigration policy.
Unless I'm mistaken, "obstruction" in Minneapolis has consisted of using vehicles to get in the way of ICE/CBP vehicles, and making noise to alert people of the presence of ICE/CBP. That arguably interferes with the ability of the federal agents to move easily around Minneapolis and to capture people by surprise.
They also make a lot of noise outside of hotels where ICE/CBP people are staying, which I'm sure sucks for them.
They've also thrown snowballs at ICE/CBP agents.
There are some cases of throwing fireworks at them, which strikes me as an incredibly stupid exercise in poking the bear.
In general, they are doing their best to make the federal agents feel as unwelcome as they possibly can, without rising to physical violence toward them.
You are correct, there is much more going on than opposition to immigration policy. It is opposition to heavily armed and armored federal agents arriving in numbers that are multiples of civilian public safety officers, grabbing people off the street, from their cars, and from their homes on the flimsiest pretexts (skin color, accent) and assaulting people who are legally following and/or filming them as they go about their work.
None of what ICE and CBP are doing in Minneapolis and elsewhere is necessary for them to carry out their actual duty, which is to execute removal orders, whether judicial or of their own authoring. None of it.
The people they are grabbing are generally unarmed and pose no threat to anyone. They are line cooks, teachers, daycare providers, landscaping and trade laborers, etc. Most of the people - by far - who are being grabbed have no criminal history whatsoever.
The level of violence that ICE and CBP are bringing into American cities is insane, and utterly unnecessary for the work they are supposed to be doing.
Which makes me, in turn, think there is much more going on here than immigration policiy.
Chiming in briefly to apologize, again, for the combative tone of my recent comments. In particular, in my responses to bc, whose participation here I appreciate and value.
This stuff is getting inside my head. Sorry about that.
To follow up on Michael's comment about the FBI seizure of voting records from 2020: the man simply cannot give it up. He cannot accept losing. So they will undoubtedly attempt to find heretofore undiscovered "anomalies".
If "discovered", they will be bullshit, and I'm not sure what the point is, other than to further fluff his highness.
I guess I'd also like to comment on the whole accelerationist / looking for the revolution thing.
Here are my politics:
I affirm the commonwealth with a small-r republican form of government as my own idea of the best available form of government. In Lincoln's formulation, a government of, by, and for the people. And I think in general, at least for certain definitions of "the people", that's what the sainted founders tried to establish, and they did a pretty good job considering the conditions under which they were working. Which is to say, basically in a contentious social and political climate and while at war. And I think we've been trying to expand the definition of "the people" since then, with some success, and at some significant cost.
I also affirm the ideas presented by Locke in the 2nd Treatise on Government. We're born with certain inherent rights, but in the absence of society - which is to say government - we're on our own to defend those rights. And as a result, the strong take what they want and the less strong suffer what they must. So we have governments. And because there are lots of different kinds of people, almost anything a government does will piss off some of those people. So, assuming a government that is remotely representative of the people governed, we accept that there be some limitations on what we can and cannot do - some limitations on the exercise of our inherent rights - in the interest of not living in a world of warlords.
That's my political manifesto, FWIW.
You have to go back at least 50 years - Vietnam War days - to find people "on the left" who had any interest in anything resembling revolution.
Over the last 30 years at least, the people who have been unwilling to abide by the basic social contract I described above have all been on the right. The people who have consisted threated the lives of People Like Me if they don't get their way, all on the right. The people organizing themselves into unaccountable militias - private unaccountable armies - are all on the right. The people engaging in political violence and terror, not all on the right, but overwhelmingly on the right.
And most recently, the people who engaged in a deliberate scheme to overturn a lawful election, all on the right. And I am talking not just about the J6 rioters, although they most certainly are included. But also people in government, including people who are in Congress as I write this.
I won't even get into the current POTUS' fanciful understandings of, and disrespect for, the institutions that have allowed this country to persist as something resembling a republic for 250 years.
So I am not interested in, as Paul Simon had it, hints and allegations that people like me are trying to spur on some kind of revolution. We are holding on by our fingertips hoping this republic survives the next three years.
I hope I make myself clear.
I apologize for the belligerent tone of my last few comments. I wake up every day wondering what fresh hell awaits, and trying to get my head around the idea that somebody like our current POTUS not only holds that office, but does so with the support of a significant percent of the population. I have utterly lost respect for the Republican party and the soi-disant "conservative movement" as it currently exists, and also for a lot of people I know personally, because as far as I can tell they have no regard whatsoever for the institutions and traditions of this country. And saying that brings me no pleasure whatsoever. And all of that puts me in a truly foul mood, one which I do not enjoy and would be glad to be rid of.
But nonetheless, here we are.
What is going on now is utter bullshit. If you are offended by my referring to the likes of Miller, Noem, Patel, et al as "freaks", pick another word. Sociopaths. Corrupt lickspittles. Whores to power. Opportunistic sycophants to a sick, sad, increasingly demented old man.
They are deeply and profoundly corrupt, starting with Trump, and they are destroying this nation. We're rich and have a formidable military, so we'll survive in some form, but our standing in the world will be diminished for at least a generation, and our cohesion as a polity is in tatters.
So yes, I am pissed off. Thank you all for your patience.
"And this is where we part company on this issue."
I can live with that.
What I would submit for your consideration is that some people dehumanize themselves. I don't have to lift a finger.
Comport yourself like a sociopath and eventually people are gonna consider you to be a sociopath.
"My point is that by defunding ICE, you do give Trump what I think (I’m doing a bit of mind reading here) you fear"
The reality is that DHS has all the money they will ever realistically need, and more, in the bank already. The BBB gave them $178 billion, $30B for ops and $45B for detention. The DHS piece of the current package is $64 billion, with about $10 billion for ICE.
So they'll be okay unless they keep spending like a bunch of drunken sallors on shore leave. They just delivered a couple dozen brand spanking new SUVs to the ICE facility near me, so I think they're all set for a while.
None of which likely has any bearing on whether Trump sends the military into US cities. If he wants to and thinks he can get away with it, he'll find a reason. Or no reason.
The man does whatever the f*** pops into his head on any given day, unless and until somebody tells him no. So let's tell him no, whenever that opportunity presents itself.
That is asking Trump to deploy the military for immigration enforcement without actually asking him, IMO.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. And we can't all spend our lives trying to figure out WTF Trump is going to do on a given day.
Or is that the point?
The point is to get DHS to stop beating the shit out of people, breaking into their homes, and shooting them.
Clear?
Push escalation until the revolution?
First, I'm not sure holding funding for DHS until they stop acting like the Gestapo counts as "escalation".
"Escalation" is when People Like Me start shooting back. Which is not on the calendar.
And I'm really not interested in hearing anything about "escalation" from any conservative voice, at all, right now and probably for the forseeable future.
You're a conservative, get your freaking Congress people to stop giving these freaks the space to destroy this country.
Thank you.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “A little language practice”
I don't speak or read Spanish so I only read the English translation.
My takeaway is that the Spanish PM is a thoughtful and articulate person who laid out a sane and humane response to the insanity we are unleashing on Iran and the world.
I can only say that I am envious of the Spanish for having a leader who can hold and articulate such a clear moral perspective.
On “Perpwalk Imperial”
"And yet, in Western societies, boys are often expected to act like girls. Starting in school, where they’re expected to sit down, be still, be quiet, and pay attention. If they don’t, there’s something wrong with them."
Chiming in briefly to note that the underlying assumption in Charles' comment is that sitting still and paying attention are somehow feminine behaviors.
Girls don't get restless in class?
On “As it all falls down around our ears: An open thread”
My question is: who are these real leftists? I don't mean college kids, or some online rando. I mean people who have some public voice, and some IRL feasible path to creating an actual outcome, and who also want to "smash bones".
I can think of - maybe - a handful. Thom Hartmann? Bill McKibben? Chomsky? And Hartmann primarily wants something like a restoration of republican self-governance, as opposed to oligarchy. And McKibben primarily wants us to stop burning the world up. So I'm not sure they acually qualify as folks who want to "tear down the institutions", unless "the institutions" are grossly unregulated capital.
Which, perhaps, they actually are at this point.
But I guess I'm looking for names here. Who the hell is Frum talking about? Black bloc kids? Portland anarchists? Are they a realistic example of effective political actors - people who actually might make substantive changes to anything at all?
"Resistance liberal" sounds like, basically, people like me. I understand, and in many cases agree with, the idea that we are ineffective and not quite what is needed at the moment. And it's definitely true that, for most of us, there is a limit to what we are willing to put at risk. It is, frankly, a lot easier to be bold and uncompromising when you have little to lose. So, there is all of that.
FWIW, my wife and I had a conversation a few years ago about the whole carbon economy thing. We both have - and at this point to a large extent live off of - our 401k's. I'm sure we have some holdings in carbon-based energy - oil companies or similar.
A huge amount of the book value of those companies is oil that is still in the ground. Were there to be any public action to prevent that oil (or similar) from being extracted, the value of those companies would probably collapse. At the time I did a sort of very rough back of envelope calculation and figured that, were that to actually happen, we - my wife and I - would take a significant haircut. I forget what the actual seat-of-the-pants number was, but it was a lot. Enough to make a difference in our daily lives, for the rest of our lives.
And we both agreed we'd take the hit if it was on offer.
Maybe we are extraordinarily exceptional, but I find that unlikely. I'm not seeing us as the root of the problem(s). And I really and truly do understand and appreciate that young people coming up now face challenges we did not, but the fact that we have a house and 401k's is not the root cause of all of that.
It is, frankly, not that big of a house. And we only have one.
The regulatory arms of the government have basically been crippled under Trump. The folks who are in a position to do something about that - primarily Congress, but also the freaking SCOTUS - have been captured and are beholden, not to me and people like me, but to the great big bags of money that keep them in office. And, FWIW, line their pockets, personally.
Maybe that's the problem, right there.
I've stood toe to toe with cops to exercise my "resistance liberalism". I didn't see Frum there that day. Maybe he could try it on before he dismisses it.
On “Perpwalk Imperial”
Not a lurker but FWIW I completely co-sign GFTNC's observations about older guys and underage women back in the day. And general lack of basic respect for women as people, regardless of age. And most definitely to include leftish and hippie types. Late 60's through the 70's.
Not discounting novakant's experience, just sharing my own
On “Take your’n and beat his’n”
But which Christianity? There are a lot of them.
My own thought is that it's all about whiteness. And specifically whiteness deriving from a northern European genetic heritage. Which, for similar reasons, they don't want to be right out front with.
Tan won't do, and Marco "my first AND last names end in a vowel" Rubio may need to watch his back.
"
I'd say glib is sufficiently perjorative, and captures the idea you are describing here.
My question about all of this is "what is this Western civilization you speak of?".
Did "the West" begin with the Romans? Or the Greeks? Would they have thought of themselves as being "the West"?
Does it begin with Europe's early and growing awareness of itself as an entity that *wasn't* Rome, or some descendant of Rome? Like, maybe 11th and 12th C. Europe?
Are we meant to preserve the concept of nation states that emerged from the centuries of non-stop warfare over religious issues and competing wanna-be empires?
Do we get to include the Enlightenment in all of this, or do we need to, a la Rod Dreher, throw all of that away?
Is it capitalism? Christianity? If Christianity, is it just the Western traditions - Roman Catholicism and the Protestant movements that emerged from that? Do the various Eastern traditions get included? African Christianity? South American evangelicalism?
Is it just being white? Who gets to be white?
Oddly, to me, all of this blather comes in the context of the US basically telling Europe to fuck off. Which seems... inconsistent with an emphasis on "preserving our Western identity".
On “Open Thread”
Ok, open thread:
AI agents now have their own social network. Humans can observe but (I think) not participate actively.
The agents have a lot to say to each other, apparently. They've even invented their own religion.
https://www.moltbook.com/
Between AI and the ever-larger Epstein blast radius, the world is just getting too freaking weird for me. I'm glad I'm old.
On “Unsure on the definition of ‘torn’”
People support Trump for reasons that have little to do with matters of fact in any social or economic or even political sense. It's tribal. They are on Team Trump.
I don't talk with Trump supporters about Trump. Or if and when I do, it's very brief, I just say that I think he's a crook and an asshole, and leave it at that. Oddly enough, they are also generally happy to leave it at that.
I have a friend who suggests talking with Trumpers about what motivates them, but without bringing Trump into it. For example, why is it necessary to deport people who have been here for decades. I haven't really tried that, but I guess it's an option.
The mason in the article has a valid complaint. People who live in southern border communities have valid complaints. People who were concerned about inflation had valid complaints. Whether they are looking in the right places for either causes or solutions is a different story, but the things they are unhappy with are not always unreasonable. They're just (IMO) looking at the wrong villains.
So, talking to the mason about undocumented labor and how that affects him could be useful. Etc.
But I really do think that Trump's base - the more or less 27-ish percent hard core - are basically unshakeable and there is nothing I'm gonna say or do that will move that.
If bad things happen to them, personally, or to someone in their family or close circle of friends, it could make a dent. Other than that, it ain't gonna happen.
Oddly, the nearest thing to really undermining his base support that I can think of was Trump et al saying that people shouldn't carry firearms to a protest. If there's one thing that might pry some of his base away, it's any hint of weakness around the 2nd A.
The paranoid style has always been a significant factor in the US. They aren't going away.
On “What fresh hell is this?”
The vast resources of the world's most powerful nation (just ask them!) devoted to crafting ever more persuasive lies.
Orwell would be amazed.
On “Separated by a common language”
Re: Archie Bunker - when All In The Family first rolled out, some folks saw the Archie Bunker character as a bigoted clown, and some other folks (and not a small number) saw him as their kind of guy. A sort of folk anti-hero.
Plus ca change.
My own sense of what will make folks step away from supporting Trump is that there are two likely avenues:
1. Bad things are done to somebody they know and care about.
2. Discomfort with the egregious violence of the immigration stuff
It's possible that Minneapolis will be Trump's Selma. We'll see.
"
Props to the UK for at least finding it scandalous.
Here in the US it's more like a national exercise in "la la la la I can't hear you"
On “It is never “Simple as that””
Maybe I'll go with the Johnny Dangerously lingo.
Farging iceholes! Sonamabatch!!
A little humor with the spice can't be bad.
And yeah, these people are farging iceholes. I'm kinda looking forward to the Epstein stuff clearing the decks - send them all to jail. If that includes Bill Clinton, I'm OK with it.
I gotta go play some music now so I don't lose my mind.
"
I can tell from the increasing frequency of F-bombs in my comments that it's time for me to take a little break from current events.
We are governed by greedheads and sociopathic weirdos. It is what it is, and it is what it's gonna be until we can figure out how to change it.
And, nonetheless, we all still need to live our lives as best we can.
Stay safe and sane out there, keep on keeping on, and don't let the bastards get inside your head. Saying that to myself as much as anything else.
"
Here's the thing. This statement right here:
"We're prioritizing the types of people we're arresting. We're going after the worst of the worst. And we're not just going out there willy-nilly picking up people."
Is bullshit.
Miller has set a quota for deportations that is orders of magnitude greater than the number of criminal undocumented people. ICE and CBP folks are getting bonuses for making their quotas. So they grab anyone who is brown or has an accent.
Immigration enforcement is not the job of local police. We don't ask ICE or CBP to enforce traffic violations etc., and we should not ask local cops to do immigration work. For all the reasons discussed in the piece.
You don't need 6 or 8 guys to arrest a criminal undocumented alien. You don't need an MRAP, or a sound cannon, or "less lethal" ordinance to arrest a criminal undocumented alien.
ICE has to go to somebody's house to arrest someone? OMFG, what a burden.
How did the local cops get that person in jail in the first place? They got a warrant and went and took physical custody of them. In many cases, they went to their house and arrested them.
Without an MRAP.
So I think ICE is capable of doing the same.
These guys have killed people, blinded people, shot people, rammed into people's cars, beaten the shit out of people, threatened people with guns drawn. It's an exercise in dominance. Aimed in particular at blue cities in blue states.
Fuck that.
Want co-operation? Stop terrorizing people. Short of that, get the fuck out.
And I appreciate that Homan is a kinder gentler version of Bovino, but we have the man on tape taking a $50K bribe.
That's the best Trump and Miller can come up with?
These guys have a long history of killing and abusing people and coloring outside the legal lines. The only difference now is they're killing white people.
Time to burn it down and start over from a clean slate.
On “Moral insanity”
CBP has a history of shooting people. Also of doing the "stand in front of the vehicle so I can say my life was threatened" thing.
"
"russell, I am truly shocked that anyone, much less multiple rank and file conservatives, have said anything like that to you."
I appreciate your saying this. Truly.
None of it worries me that much, because nearly all of that has been online, and a lot of folks use the online world to basically vent.
I don't think I've ever run into it here on ObWi. I spent some time on RedState, where it was dead common, and I also hang on Facebook a lot (for my sins), where it is not quite as common, but not uncommon.
I really don't worry about it, it's just an observation. Some people like to talk the big talk.
"
"Minneapolis leaves ICE little choice."
Little choice to do what?
The example of Llangari does indeed sound messed up. I'm sure many such examples can be found. As can be many examples of situations where the operation of local PD's have been confounded by the actions of ICE and CBP.
A detainer is a non-binding request from immigration to a non-federal police force or prison to hold someone for 48 hours, so they can come and pick that person up.
As has been pointed out numerous times, immigration enforcement IS NOT the responsibility of local police. Further, having local police involved in immigration enforcement makes their work much more complicated in communities where there are a lot of immigrants. By "makes more complicated", I mean it undermines any relationship of trust between the immigrant community and the local police.
Who have to deal with that community, regardless of the immigration status of folks who are in it. This is not a trivial concern. People won't call the cops if they think it could result in their being deported. Especially under the current implementation of ICE/CBP operations, where people are seized and deported EVEN IF THEY HAVE LEGAL STANDING TO BE IN THE COUNTRY.
Happens every day.
So some communities decline to honor detainers. They have other things for their cops to do.
There is a simple solution for ICE / CBP, which is to get a judicial warrant. I'm sure it's a PITA to get a judge to sign off on every person they want to grab, but it provides a basic amount of oversight to their operations, and gives the local PD some guarantee that there actually is a basis for holding the person.
In any case, the idea that MN as a jurisdiction declines to honor detainers "leaves ICE little choice" but to literally invade Minneapolis, assault and shoot people for protesting (see also 1st A), violently break into people's homes without a warrant (see also 4th A), and generally create an environment of utter chaos, seems excessive.
To me.
I suspect other options - other choices - were available to them.
"
"I thought you might be focused on the homicidal crazies"
When the homicidal crazies on one side outnumber those on the other by multiples, yes, I find that worth noting.
They are "outliers" who the current POTUS has described as "beautiful people".
The left brought us the George Floyd riots, after a man was murdered in cold blood by a police officer on video.
The right brought us J6, after their candidate lost a legitimate election. They beat the crap out of Capitol police, leading to the death of some, and literally dropped trou and shit in the Capitol. We came extremely close to an honest-to-god violent autogolpe, at the instigation of the man who currently holds the office of POTUS. We came damned close to the murder of members of Congress.
And all of them were, to a person, subsequently pardoned. Every single one. Regardless of what they had done that day.
Show me anything on the left remotely comparable.
The right brought us the Bundy episode, where a bunch of self-appointed "militia" bros stood down federal officers at gunpoint. And then occupied and thoroughly trashed a public park facility.
Because Bundy didn't want to pay his grazing fees.
The left brought protests against Israel's Gaza invasion.
The right brought us Charlottesville, with bands of punk ass thugs brandishing torches and chanting "Jews will not replace us". And a fine young right wing asshole driving his car into a crowd and killing a young woman. The right brought us the Tree Of Life shooting and the firebombing of Governor Shapiro's home.
The left brought us antifa, whoever the hell they are. The right brought us the KKK (still here), the Order, the Base, Patriot Front, the Oath Keepers, the Proud Boys, and a smattering of explicitly Nazi-aligned groups. The right brought us people holding office and positions of public responsibility who are on record as being "fans of Hitler".
And I'm leaving aside the number of times - the very large number of times - that I've been told that it's only a matter of time before People Like Me are subject to summary execution by the patriots on the right who own all the guns. I've been hearing that for 25 years now. Not from fringe actors, from regular rank and file conservatives. It ain't likely to happen, but it kind of sucks to try to have a conversation with people who apparently can't wait to shoot me.
When "the left" gets out of hand, stuff gets broken. When the right gets out of hand, people get killed.
Hell yeah, the homicidal folks are an issue. And your side has most of them.
"
I think a long comment of mine is out there in the ether somewhere...
[ed. plucked from the bin and posted!]
"
I believe it's a matter of public record.
Per the NIJ (National Institute of Justice, a division of the DOJ):
Not that it's a contest, but the imbalance is striking.
That report, BTW, was removed from the DOJ website after the assassination of Charlie Kirk. Make of that what you will.
Here's an archive of it:
https://www.scribd.com/document/918595498/Wayback-Machine-NIJ-Issue-285-44
The removal is discussed here:
https://www.congress.gov/119/meeting/house/118612/documents/HHRG-119-JU00-20250917-SD057-U57.pdf
And this from PBS, assuming you will consider them a reliable source:
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/right-wing-extremist-violence-is-more-frequent-and-deadly-than-left-wing-violence-data-shows
From the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the historical pattern changed in 2025, with left-wing incidents outnumbering right-wing for the first time in recent memory. If you look at the numbers cited, that is mostly due to the dramatically lower number of right-wing incidents last year. Compared to previous years, the left-wing attacks grew from something like 2 to 5, Right wing attacks dropped from something like 30 to 1, where that 1 was the assassination and attempted assassination of MN elected officials.
https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-united-states
Basically, the predominance of the right wing in US political violence is a pretty well established fact.
Unless I'm mistaken, "obstruction" in Minneapolis has consisted of using vehicles to get in the way of ICE/CBP vehicles, and making noise to alert people of the presence of ICE/CBP. That arguably interferes with the ability of the federal agents to move easily around Minneapolis and to capture people by surprise.
They also make a lot of noise outside of hotels where ICE/CBP people are staying, which I'm sure sucks for them.
They've also thrown snowballs at ICE/CBP agents.
There are some cases of throwing fireworks at them, which strikes me as an incredibly stupid exercise in poking the bear.
In general, they are doing their best to make the federal agents feel as unwelcome as they possibly can, without rising to physical violence toward them.
You are correct, there is much more going on than opposition to immigration policy. It is opposition to heavily armed and armored federal agents arriving in numbers that are multiples of civilian public safety officers, grabbing people off the street, from their cars, and from their homes on the flimsiest pretexts (skin color, accent) and assaulting people who are legally following and/or filming them as they go about their work.
None of what ICE and CBP are doing in Minneapolis and elsewhere is necessary for them to carry out their actual duty, which is to execute removal orders, whether judicial or of their own authoring. None of it.
The people they are grabbing are generally unarmed and pose no threat to anyone. They are line cooks, teachers, daycare providers, landscaping and trade laborers, etc. Most of the people - by far - who are being grabbed have no criminal history whatsoever.
The level of violence that ICE and CBP are bringing into American cities is insane, and utterly unnecessary for the work they are supposed to be doing.
Which makes me, in turn, think there is much more going on here than immigration policiy.
"
Chiming in briefly to apologize, again, for the combative tone of my recent comments. In particular, in my responses to bc, whose participation here I appreciate and value.
This stuff is getting inside my head. Sorry about that.
To follow up on Michael's comment about the FBI seizure of voting records from 2020: the man simply cannot give it up. He cannot accept losing. So they will undoubtedly attempt to find heretofore undiscovered "anomalies".
If "discovered", they will be bullshit, and I'm not sure what the point is, other than to further fluff his highness.
But here we go, again.
Three years to go.
"
I guess I'd also like to comment on the whole accelerationist / looking for the revolution thing.
Here are my politics:
I affirm the commonwealth with a small-r republican form of government as my own idea of the best available form of government. In Lincoln's formulation, a government of, by, and for the people. And I think in general, at least for certain definitions of "the people", that's what the sainted founders tried to establish, and they did a pretty good job considering the conditions under which they were working. Which is to say, basically in a contentious social and political climate and while at war. And I think we've been trying to expand the definition of "the people" since then, with some success, and at some significant cost.
I also affirm the ideas presented by Locke in the 2nd Treatise on Government. We're born with certain inherent rights, but in the absence of society - which is to say government - we're on our own to defend those rights. And as a result, the strong take what they want and the less strong suffer what they must. So we have governments. And because there are lots of different kinds of people, almost anything a government does will piss off some of those people. So, assuming a government that is remotely representative of the people governed, we accept that there be some limitations on what we can and cannot do - some limitations on the exercise of our inherent rights - in the interest of not living in a world of warlords.
That's my political manifesto, FWIW.
You have to go back at least 50 years - Vietnam War days - to find people "on the left" who had any interest in anything resembling revolution.
Over the last 30 years at least, the people who have been unwilling to abide by the basic social contract I described above have all been on the right. The people who have consisted threated the lives of People Like Me if they don't get their way, all on the right. The people organizing themselves into unaccountable militias - private unaccountable armies - are all on the right. The people engaging in political violence and terror, not all on the right, but overwhelmingly on the right.
And most recently, the people who engaged in a deliberate scheme to overturn a lawful election, all on the right. And I am talking not just about the J6 rioters, although they most certainly are included. But also people in government, including people who are in Congress as I write this.
I won't even get into the current POTUS' fanciful understandings of, and disrespect for, the institutions that have allowed this country to persist as something resembling a republic for 250 years.
So I am not interested in, as Paul Simon had it, hints and allegations that people like me are trying to spur on some kind of revolution. We are holding on by our fingertips hoping this republic survives the next three years.
I hope I make myself clear.
I apologize for the belligerent tone of my last few comments. I wake up every day wondering what fresh hell awaits, and trying to get my head around the idea that somebody like our current POTUS not only holds that office, but does so with the support of a significant percent of the population. I have utterly lost respect for the Republican party and the soi-disant "conservative movement" as it currently exists, and also for a lot of people I know personally, because as far as I can tell they have no regard whatsoever for the institutions and traditions of this country. And saying that brings me no pleasure whatsoever. And all of that puts me in a truly foul mood, one which I do not enjoy and would be glad to be rid of.
But nonetheless, here we are.
What is going on now is utter bullshit. If you are offended by my referring to the likes of Miller, Noem, Patel, et al as "freaks", pick another word. Sociopaths. Corrupt lickspittles. Whores to power. Opportunistic sycophants to a sick, sad, increasingly demented old man.
They are deeply and profoundly corrupt, starting with Trump, and they are destroying this nation. We're rich and have a formidable military, so we'll survive in some form, but our standing in the world will be diminished for at least a generation, and our cohesion as a polity is in tatters.
So yes, I am pissed off. Thank you all for your patience.
"
Also, too:
"Sanctuary cities/counties/states are actively resisting the enforcement of federal law."
You're gonna have to show some receipts on that one.
"
"And this is where we part company on this issue."
I can live with that.
What I would submit for your consideration is that some people dehumanize themselves. I don't have to lift a finger.
Comport yourself like a sociopath and eventually people are gonna consider you to be a sociopath.
"My point is that by defunding ICE, you do give Trump what I think (I’m doing a bit of mind reading here) you fear"
The reality is that DHS has all the money they will ever realistically need, and more, in the bank already. The BBB gave them $178 billion, $30B for ops and $45B for detention. The DHS piece of the current package is $64 billion, with about $10 billion for ICE.
So they'll be okay unless they keep spending like a bunch of drunken sallors on shore leave. They just delivered a couple dozen brand spanking new SUVs to the ICE facility near me, so I think they're all set for a while.
None of which likely has any bearing on whether Trump sends the military into US cities. If he wants to and thinks he can get away with it, he'll find a reason. Or no reason.
The man does whatever the f*** pops into his head on any given day, unless and until somebody tells him no. So let's tell him no, whenever that opportunity presents itself.
"
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. And we can't all spend our lives trying to figure out WTF Trump is going to do on a given day.
The point is to get DHS to stop beating the shit out of people, breaking into their homes, and shooting them.
Clear?
First, I'm not sure holding funding for DHS until they stop acting like the Gestapo counts as "escalation".
"Escalation" is when People Like Me start shooting back. Which is not on the calendar.
And I'm really not interested in hearing anything about "escalation" from any conservative voice, at all, right now and probably for the forseeable future.
You're a conservative, get your freaking Congress people to stop giving these freaks the space to destroy this country.
Thank you.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.