So, who’s the Fascist?
Not a Fascist in the economic sense (which isn’t how most people use the word these days, anyway), but in the “willing and eager to use the apparatus of the state to stomp on your liberties” sense.
Why, Frederica Wilson, current Democratic member of the US House of Representatives:
Democratic Florida Rep. Frederica Wilson asserted that people who mock members of Congress online should face prosecution.
“Those people who are online making fun of members of Congress are a disgrace, and there is no need for anyone to think that is unacceptable [sic],” Wilson said during comments made Tuesday outside of the Homestead Temporary Shelter for Unaccompanied Children in Homestead, Florida.
“We’re gonna shut them down and work with whoever it is to shut them down, and they should be prosecuted,” she continued. “You cannot intimidate members of Congress, frighten members of Congress. It is against the law, and it’s a shame in this United States of America.”
There you have it.
By the way, as far as I can see, this is only a news story on the right. When I Google “Frederica Wilson, CNN” (or NY Times, or MSNBC) I get a bunch of old stories about her. And when I Google a direct quote from this recent statement of Wilson’s, I only get news outlets or blogs on the right.
Wilson seems to be calling for some version of the Sedition Act of 1918, not exactly a high point in American history (although I’m pretty certain that her proposed law would not apply to mockery of Trump and/or other Republicans):
It forbade the use of “disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language” about the United States government, its flag, or its armed forces or that caused others to view the American government or its institutions with contempt. Those convicted under the act generally received sentences of imprisonment for five to 20 years. The act also allowed the Postmaster General to refuse to deliver mail that met those same standards for punishable speech or opinion. It applied only to times “when the United States is in war.”
But at least that had the excuse of having been enacted during wartime and of applying only to wartime. Actually, it was passed towards the end WWI and ended with that war’s end. Later SCOTUS decisions indicate that a similar law would probably be held unconstitutional.
Oh, and that 1918 bill passed the House almost unanimously, with only one dissenting vote. It passed the Senate, too, but with quite a bit of opposition. The opposition to the 1918 act came almost entirely from Republican senators.
She’s an impetuous loudmouth. What’s cute is that she’s a lapsed school administrator. I doubt the superintendent though she was one of his best.
I don’t think she is referring to the Sedition Act.
The Examiner mentions as context a Facebook page for Border Patrol agents, that is currently under investigation.
So it sounds like she is clumsily, imprecisely, (or worse) referring to various “narrowly tailored” 1A exceptions that allow the government to punish governmental employees for otherwise constitutional speech.
A cop who makes a racist statement can be fired, because it may affect his job performance. A government clerk is probably protected however.
Either way, the speech is still allowed. You can’t “shut them down” or “prosecute” them. All the government can do is fire them.
Manju:
Ah, so now you’re defending what she said?
You must be so proud.
Don’t you think that Wilson has the brainpower to not make such a general statement if she doesn’t mean it?
You read that as a defense?
To clarify, I think she is referring to a well-known “narrowly tailored” exception, as opposed to the sedition act, but her interpretation of it is unconstitutional.
The bigotry of low expectations on display by Manju.
Manju:
Yes, it was a defense—you are making excuses for her and imagining some complex way to justify what she really meant rather than what she actually said.
And if you aren’t aware of that, you’re even further gone than I think you are.
She is a dangerous demagogue, and a simple condemnation would suffice. Period.
It’s hard to know without seeing the context, but I doubt its a general statement.
The Washington Examiner mentions the Facebook page, so it sounds like “Those people who are online making fun of members of Congress are a disgrace” is a reference to that.
Wow… neo finally figured out what i meant all those years ago when i said i was taught to be aware of how dangerous the “reasonable person” persona is…
As i said, they are the social calmers the ones who try to be smart or wise by always injecting ‘reasonableness’ into it… they have a huge amount of terms of deflection and so on and often end up speaking for others with their own minds..
they dont necessarily defend the other, which it may appear
what they do is try to make everyone seem more reasonable, even if not
i also explained so long ago, that these are the large group of people that enable the revolution or changes… they are the prozac of the social world.
but that was a long while back when Fred was alive and the conversations were why the nazis werent opposed more..
everyone was trying to be reasonable, like miju..
A maladaptation s a trait that is (or has become) more harmful than helpful
It can also signify an adaptation that, whilst reasonable at the time, has become less and less suitable and more of a problem or hindrance in its own right, as time goes on. This is because it is possible for an adaptation to be poorly selected or become less appropriate or even become on balance more of a dysfunction than a positive adaptation, over time.
AS with the other psych point i showed in which peoples get used to what works.. the reasonable person is what all ‘civilized’ people aspire
the person doing this wants things to be civilized and doesnt want to believe that some of the most civilized were the most evil and brutal…
ie. its their desire for order and fear of the disorder in which they wont know what to do…
ie. do you attack someone? what if your wrong? what if your right?
“Cant we just go back to everyone being reasonable”?
and so, that is what they seek…
not by fixing the issue, but by trying to be concerned and point out the excuse or thought that they have that would turn the unreasonable into a reasonbable thing
its a very evil dishonest practice that until you understand it, and how it causes breakdown, would appear to be the opposite
but when it was reasonable to oppose the feminists and their adjenda and the exterminations and population controls and more..
we were reasonable.. now with all the stuff, the racialist stuff, the movement to communism and such, was being reasonable the right thing?
you let me knwo when we turn into venzeula and the war starts when we cant defend ourselves.
Artfldgr:
You often refer to positions you believe I once held, without offering a link to where I said what you seem to think I said.
I’d be curious to see exactly what you’re referring to. You very often misinterpret what I say, so perhaps you’re misinterpreting something I said in the past.
There is a reason Congress has such an abysmally low approval rating from the public, and here is one such reason.
But, presuming that there wasn’t a lot of voter fraud involved, people had to have voted for her, and for her re-election as well.
So, its really the fault of those who voted for her, and continue her in office.
They talk these days about the Democrat’s “clown car,” full of candidates, but, honestly, there are enough “clowns”–with different acts, in Congress, that they could probably fill up an entire “clown train,” and might even have to add on a few extra cars to deal with the overcrowding.
See any real progress in Congress on what every member of Congress now admits is our actual Border “crisis,” on defending our country’s border, our sovereignty as a nation, and us citizens from the current invasion of illegal aliens?
See a whole bunch of members of Congress out there defending us citizens and our rights, freedom, safety, and economic well being vs. that of illegal aliens, pushing back against the claims made for illegal aliens, their well being, and their supposed “rights” in our country”–to citizenship, to driver’s licenses, to in state tuition, to free health care, and to a cornucopia of other taxpayer paid for social welfare and other benefits?
Me neither.
How about the annual passage of an actual full and complete budget, one that’s on time, as–up until several years ago–used to be the rule–instead of today’s constant atmosphere of “crisis” and “brinkmanship,” as Congress lurches from one short term Continuing Resolution to another?
Nope, not that either.
How about a host of other major and pressing issues–the massive number of annual Opioid deaths, or Health care, our failing schools (check out how we stack up against other countries–it ain’t pretty), the soon to be massive wave of perfectly foreseeable low skilled worker unemployment, as AI and robots replace them, how about all of the cities which are turning back to Medieval levels of squalor and disease, MS-13, or the rising tide of violence by masked ANTIFA thugs–scenes of violence starting to be reminiscent of Hitler’s SA in the waning days of the Weimar Republic, or the overwhelmingly Leftist Social Media giant’s apparently successful attempts to manipulate search results, to censor and shut down debate and Conservative information, views and voices, to put their heavy thumbs on the scale, with plans to be the concealed but dominant force that determines who wins the next Presidential election, and–if they have their way–all succeeding elections, etc., etc., etc.?
Lots of traveling around the country, and spouting off in front of the cameras but, do you see any actual progress, any new ideas–or any ideas at all, any action by Congress?
I sure don’t, and you probably don’t either.
They’ve tuned us out–from their studied and deliberate inaction its obvious that they now ignore our calls, emails and letters–and they aren’t doing a damn thing.
But, they sure do complain about and denigrate the only high government official who is trying to do something, actually a whole lotta somethings–working dawn to dusk, seven days a week–and that would be President Trump.
There are a few standouts in Congress, here and there, who are trying to live up to their oath of office, and to do their jobs but, in general, its a pretty pathetic bunch, and the “good guys” are swimming against a very powerful tide.
Not to worry, though, there is, at least, some action.
I bet a whole lotta them manage to show up for the fancy cocktail parties, celebrations, and galas, and for the fitting of their new, $3,000 dollar custom suit.
She did say “they should be prosecuted,” whoever it is she’s talking about. This, from a Representative who has said publicly that President Trump is “crazy” and suffering from “a brain disorder.”
If the said persons are posting threats aimed at members of Congress, that’s a serious matter. Criticism alone is not enough to trigger prosecution, or even firing, depending upon what the criticisms are. Grounds for firing would require evidence of the Border Patrol agents being unwilling to do their jobs, or that they are unreasonably biased against people they work with.
This no doubt has the moonbats at Rolling Stone reveling in their adolescent edginess. Muriatic acid is industrial grade hydrochloric acid.
The threats were made on a popular right wing Telegram channel. A user with the name “POUND ON YOUR BOY” made several threats against the rally…
This is the sort of discourse you can expect from Antifa animals:
“I just want to toss as many balloons of Muriatic acid in the faces as many Proud Boys I can [sic]”, wrote the user, “I just want to blind as many of you c**k suckers are possible [sic].”
The viral video machine that was Ava “Mini AOC” Martinez will no longer be making videos mocking socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), because reports are surfacing that supporters of Ocasio-Cortez have allegedly repeatedly harassed, doxxed and made “death threats” against the child and her family. A Twitter account that is supposedly a family member of Martinez tweeted out that the family has deleted “all Mini AOC accounts” in order to attempt to preserve the safety of both the child and the family.
Manju:
It’s not hard at all.
I gave you a quote that involves 71 words. This is not some slip of the tongue. If she meant to limit what she said to a particular group of people and a particular law, she needed to specify that.
Take a look at more context (by the way, she also does make one slip of the tongue at around 0:20-0:21 when she says “unacceptable” instead of “acceptable”):
One has to look at the words used carefully.
The Rep. fluidly moves from “online making fun of,” to “intimidate” and “frighten.”
Maybe in her mind it’s all the same, but maybe not. She should know that making fun of politicians, privately or publicly, is the essence of free speech. If she is feeling intimidated or frightened merely because she is a hypersensitive fraidy cat, then that’s on her.
On the other hand, if someone is threatening violence, then that is already against the law. That, and a hundred leftists should be prosecuted for threats of violence against G.W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Ted Cruz, Allen West, etc. Comics not excepted, because explicit threats are explicit.
According to the (RWing) Washington Free Beacon; “The full press conference, which is available on Wilson’s Facebook page, clarifies who she was referring to in her comments. Around the 9:00 minute mark, someone asks for comment about the border patrol agents involved in the secret Facebook group.
Highlight mine. If you follow the link to the full video, you will hear someone ask; “Congresswoman, can you please address the secret Facebook page…”
Oooo, “the secret Facebook page” well that is some unintended satire. Like the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” were a secret plan. Trust you congress critter if you know what’s good for you, and shut up or else. Anything else Manju?
Manju:
Actually, someone else answers that question first, and the original question includes not just a reference to the Facebook page, but also asks a more general question: “Does it speak to a systematic issue?” After the first woman speaks (and her remarks include a lot of other issues, by the way), then Wilson gets around to speaking. If her remarks are limited to that Facebook group, she should not only have made that clear, and also explained under what law their speech can be “shut down” and they can be “prosecuted.” She also goes on to blame President Trump, of course!
Even regarding the Facebook group, I have seen no allegations that they have made threats against a member of Congress. They made highly inappropriate and deeply offensive jokes. Some of them are also private citizens who are former employees of the border patrol rather than current ones.
The border patrol is investigating, and if appropriate, the ones who are still employed by border patrol could be fired. It doesn’t sound as though anyone made a threat of any sort, nor was that threat communicated in any way to any member of Congress.
Wilson is nevertheless saying that they should be prosecuted and “shut down.” But what’s more, she speaks very generally rather than pointedly, making no distinctions between border guards and others who are not employed as border guards but are private citizens, between public and private communications, and between jokes (even nasty ones) and threats (as I said, apparently these all were nasty jokes and not threats). There is and should be a huge difference.
And as I already said, it is not at all clear—nor does she make it clear—exactly to whom her remarks are addressed or what law she wants to use to prosecute them and shut them down.
I repeat: she is a dangerous demagogue. She clearly would love the power to shut down anyone who disagrees with her.
Snow on Pine,
While Congress does indeed have an abysmally low approval rating, nearly all individual Congressional incumbents have a high enough approval rating to be repeatedly reelected. Polls repeatedly show that the majority of voters like their representative, it’s the other guy’s representative they don’t like. In the aggregate, we have exactly the Congress we deserve because, in the aggregate, that Congress fairly accurately reflects the varied mind set of America.
“Lord, what fools these mortals be!”
Even regarding the Facebook group, I have seen no allegations that they have made threats against a member of Congress.
Rep. Wilson may have gotten the idea of threats from AOC:
Don’t know why all those question marks are there — maybe I used the wrong quotation marks?
Ann:
Actually, I was already well aware of AOC’s allegations. I didn’t just mean “allegations”—after all, Wilson herself seems to be making such allegations. I actually meant allegations in the sense of a quote that at least shows something that would ordinarily be defined as a threat.
Maybe this will work better:
If someone asks you; “Neo, could you please address the Milli Vanilli Facebook page” and you reply “Those people who are online lip sinking to other people’s voices are a disgrace” it’s pretty clear to whom your comments are limited.
Jesus.
Neo, Sorry to fill up the comments — still something wonky with those question marks.
This sort of rhetoric is very dangerous. It needs to be roundly and soundly condemned. There can be no excuse for such a blatant attack on the First Article of the Bill of Rights of the Constitution.
Manju:
I already explained that there’s quite a time lag between the question and her answer, with another woman speaking in-between and talking about a variety of topics. So it’s not at all clear that Wilson is speaking of just that group and she needed to make that clear if that was the case.
If someone asked a question about Milli Vanilli and then someone else spoke about other things before I spoke, you better believe that I would restate the question and/or make it crystal clear who I was talking about and why it applied to Milli Vanilli before I spent many words saying that people should be prosecuted for their speech.
And I already explained that Wilson doesn’t just say one sentence. She goes on about threats, and it is hardly clear who she’s talking about and/or what law they would be prosecuted under. There is no evidence (nor does she cite any) that any agents made threats.
Her remarks are irresponsible and demagogic and attention-getting, which is actually a specialty of hers. They are also general.
I really find it hard to believe that anyone with a modicum of intelligence could believe in such a thing as a “secret” Facebook page.
So, when Maxine Waters was talking about going after members of the trump Administration, making them “feel uncomfortable in public”, etc.
THAT was okay? But, making fun of members of congress is not?
“Secret Facebook page” most likely refers to a page closed to anyone not explicitly given access by the owner(s) of the page. This definitely does exist. I’m in a couple.
“Closed group” is the Facebook term.
f someone asked a question about Milli Vanilli
Somebody had teenage kids in 1989. Ha ha ha.
now on Pine on July 3, 2019 at 4:09 pm said:
There is a reason Congress has such an abysmally low approval rating from the public, and here is one such reason.
But, presuming that there wasn’t a lot of voter fraud involved, people had to have voted for her, and for her re-election as well.
So, its really the fault of those who voted for her, and continue her in office.
* * *
Geoffrey remarked on the “my representative is okay, it’s the other ones who are lousy” phenomenon, but I think there is another factor in operation as well: although our party system gives the illusion that we are voting for individuals, in many cases it functions more like a parliamentary system, where electors in a district vote for the Party Name on the Ballot, or even for a particular party without knowing who will be appointed as their representative.
When the American Party with dominance in a district puts up candidates, gets them elected a couple of times, knows their votes can be controlled, and finally moves them into leadership (aka super-graft-worthy) positions, they will not let a little thing like imbecility and incompetence lead them to remove that person from Congress and allow another (untried & now-junior) candidate to replace them.
The party is getting value from their representatives; they don’t really care if the voters do.
h/t Artfldgr.
https://pjmedia.com/trending/sick-8-year-old-mini-aoc-has-to-delete-parody-accounts-after-doxxing-death-threats-against-her-family/
Threatening a child is pretty far gone down the road of social fascism.
Mac:
I wouldn’t consider anything on Facebook private or secure. You (your data) is the product that Facebook sells.
Of course. The point is that it’s not visible to other Facebook users.
One of the lasting takeaways I learned from my experiences with “21st Century Socialism” in Venezuela is that the Socialists inevitably accuse their enemies of exactly those sins or transgressions which they themselves are most guilty. One of the favorite epithets for them to throw at the Opposition is “Fascists”. In fact, that label is most apt in describing the Chavistas.
This is propaganda at it best and it works. If you repeat a lie often and loudly enough, it becomes accepted as truth. Unfortunately, as R. A. Heinlein wrote, “The truth of a proposition has nothing to do with its credibility, and vice versa.”
Mac:
I assume that Facebook will release information about or from “Closed groups” if the politics of such Closed groups are not in keeping with progressive expectations.
Does this low IQ person have any trouble with ‘Death of a President,’ a movie about assassinating George W. Bush?
om, that may well be true. But I understood a comment above to be saying that no such thing as a closed group exists on Facebook.
I wouldn’t assume that this disclosure is Facebook’s doing. That’s possible but more likely that someone in the group did it. If there really were thousands of members it wouldn’t be surprising if one either accidentally or deliberately let it out. All it would take is a screen shot or two. Possibly done by someone who joined it with that intention.
“Lord, what fools these mortals be!”
I wouldn’t have put it that way, but it is good seeing the Ymar style catch on : )