473
I love Twitter rule
(midwest.social)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2023
473 points (100.0% liked)
196
17512 readers
264 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
Other rules
Behavior rules:
- No bigotry (transphobia, racism, etc…)
- No genocide denial
- No support for authoritarian behaviour (incl. Tankies)
- No namecalling
- Accounts from lemmygrad.ml, threads.net, or hexbear.net are held to higher standards
- Other things seen as cleary bad
Posting rules:
- No AI generated content (DALL-E etc…)
- No advertisements
- No gore / violence
- Mutual aid posts are not allowed
NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.
Other 196's:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Natalie should know better. But also... the really nasty shit under Obama was heavily under-reported and only ever seemed to penetrate media in a select few circuits. Casually tossing off a "What even did Obama do that was so bad?" is almost forgivable if you're not a terminally online 30-year-old who makes hour long YouTube videos about politics, history, and culture.
Am I reading this wrong? I assume Natalie is making a joke about how people under report Obama's nasty shits
I think she's joking about how people over-report his trivial shit. But it can be read as blithely ignoring the monstrous crimes Obama did commit while in office, because it echoes a lot of the liberal apologia of the administration that amounted to "The worst thing Obama ever did was wear a tan suit".
While I don't think she has talked about Obama's war crimes or things adjacent to it, I find it hard to believe that she would be saying that seriously especially the both sides part. Tho her response to the criticism doesn't make it better.
You're reading it wrong, she's stating you can't make a moral equivalence between Obama and, say, Trump or something because supposedly the worst things obama did were silly.
For me, it's someone that savvy casually dropping a "both sides" comment. If I didn't know better I'd assume it was bait. Its hard to imagine that level of cluelessness.