• ox0r@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      People who have a large following and magic emojis next to their name will keep using it because it gives them their validation. Twitter celebs are really in a sad state of existence

  • Hello_there@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I have an issue when the same people who were cheering during the Bush years, gave grudging acceptance at drone strikes during Obama, and were silent during the Trump years, pipe up and say drone strikes are bad now.
    Progressives have been saying this the whole time.

    Also, a reminder that Obama tried to write regs limiting the use of drone strikes at the end of his presidency. Trump promptly threw them out on entering.

  • Remember when Obama saw the largest transfer of wealth away from black US citizens to the wealthy in the history of the United States?

    Remember when he set the precedent that it us cool to assassinate US citizens in the open (as opposed to covertly) without trial?

    Honestly I get being mad at “Obama’s biggest controversy was the mustard”

    • epicspongee [they/them or he/him]@midwest.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Obama’s biggest controversy was the mustard

      That’s not what she said lol. Sorry as a neurodivergent person I get that this tweet might be hard to read possibly, but she’s being sarcastic here. Maybe in poor taste, but it’s a joke. She’s well-aware of the shit Obama’s done and isn’t a fan of him.

      • sawne128 [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        She says that Obama was bad. Everyone understands she was being sarcastic. Since she was being sarcastic it means that she is trying to say that Obama wasn’t bad (because that’s how sarcasm works).

        • epicspongee [they/them or he/him]@midwest.socialOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Since she was being sarcastic it means that she is trying to say that Obama wasn’t bad (because that’s how sarcasm works).

          I mean… no? Sarcasm works in multiple ways lol. This is like a children’s picture book-level of understanding of sarcasm.

          • Leate Woncelsace@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Never argue with someone from Hexbear. They’re all at least comfortable with being in a community overrun by tankie trolls.

  • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I mean. It definitely carries the implication that Obama has done very little wrong whether or not you intended it that way. Natalie’s inability to own up to mistakes is either a serious character flaw or she thinks that the murderous actions he took were justified.

    • AdmiralShat@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think, still, it’s a reflection of what the conservative media at the time was making a big deal about. It wasn’t the drone strikes or war crimes, it was the tan suit that was run on Fox for several weeks.

      It’s like they never gave a shit about civilian deaths. Ever.

  • UFO@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Observation selection bias is an easy one the GOP likes to take advantage of. Eg: not testing for covid to show covid went down.

    Also: drone strike civilian casualties.

      • UFO@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Lol. Look at this galaxy brain equivicating there start of a pandemic with an endemic with vaccine.

        I mean, obviously the covid hospital occupancy rates would be identical if the actual case rate was the same.

        Oh wait…

        https://ourworldindata.org/covid-hospitalizations

        What’s that? Less then 10k vs over 140k? Definitely the exact same situation! /s

        Don’t trip over yourself making excuses now

    • Ajen@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also: drone strike civilian casualties.

      When did they change how they count civilian casualties? I heard it was under Obama’s administration, but I’d be happy to be proven wrong.

      • UFO@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        There is quite the back and forth between Democrats pushing for accountability and the GOP pushing against.

        From Wikipedia, which has all the references one might need:

        "On July 1, 2016, President Barack Obama signed an executive order requiring annual accounting of civilian and enemy casualties in U.S. drone strikes outside war zones (“Areas Outside of Active Hostilities”), and setting a deadline of May 1 each year for the release of such report. However, soon after taking office, President Donald Trump designated large areas in Yemen and Somalia to be “areas of active hostilities,” thus exempting them from disclosure. The Trump administration also ignored the 2017 and 2018 deadlines for an annual accounting, and on March 6, 2019, Trump issued an order revoking the requirement. "

        The executive order:

        https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2017-title3-vol1/pdf/CFR-2017-title3-vol1-eo13732.pdf

        Trump recinding the order:

        https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/06/us/politics/trump-civilian-casualties-rule-revoked.html

        Plus some other dumb shit by Trump:

        "During the Obama administration, proposed U.S. drone strikes in locations outside active war zones (i.e., in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia) required high-level approval. The Obama administration process for approving drone strikes in such locations featured centralized, high-level oversight, based on intelligence about individuals suspected of terrorism activity. Obama’s approval was required for every strike in Yemen and Somalia, as well as “the more complex and risky strikes in Pakistan” (about one-third of the total as of 2012), and insisted on deciding whether to approve a strike unless the CIA had a “near certainty” that no civilian deaths would result.

        October 2017, Trump abolished the Obama-era approval system in favor of a looser, decentralized approach, which gave the military and CIA officials the discretion to decide to launch drone strikes against targets without White House approval. "

        All sorts of references corroborating those summary:

        https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/05/22/obama-drones-trump-killings-count/

        The short version is: Obama demanded accountability and his approval. Which did not exist before and was revoked after. Hence, the different counts of casualties is not representative of an actually difference. Only representative of the GOP being shit.