▲ 768 ▼ Sen. Lindsey Graham dies at 71 after ‘brief and sudden illness’ (www.nbcnews.com) submitted 4 weeks ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world 396 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] jordanlund@lemmy.world [M] -34 points 4 weeks ago (2 children) Reason enough for people with basic human empathy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Kellenved@sh.itjust.works 25 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) I have empathy for the people whose lives were made miserable by republican policies graham championed and I celebrate one less champion of those policies fucking people over permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] baines@lemmy.cafe 12 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) those policies killed people not just made miserable fucking killed but we’re not supposed to be happy he’s dead? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 4 weeks ago Civility politics says you must grieve for monsters who's life choices killed others. No being happy when he dies. I wonder if this place would ban anyone happy when Trump dies. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Axolotl_cpp@feddit.it 2 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Would you react the same if he killed directly instead of indirectly? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jordanlund@lemmy.world -3 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) There's a big difference between Kissinger and Graham, I mentioned this in another reply, but it bears repeating... Kissinger had the power and ability to act alone in his atrocities. Graham, as a member of the Senate, did not have that ability. Whatever evils he enacted, he was able to do so with the consent of a majority of the House, Senate and President. Kissinger did what he wanted, Graham literally could not on his own. Not saying he did good things, he was a complete tool, but a majority of the Legislative branch signed off on the things he did. Not the same thing at all. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Axolotl_cpp@feddit.it 5 points 3 weeks ago* he was able to do so with the consent of a majority of the House, Senate and President. So he was still a bad person but also other people agreed with him and enabled him to do bad stuff This is like saying "Jeff was not a bad person, they would restrain him so he couldn't kill, while Josh was a very bad person because he could kill without restriction" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kellenved@sh.itjust.works 25 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) I have empathy for the people whose lives were made miserable by republican policies graham championed and I celebrate one less champion of those policies fucking people over permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] baines@lemmy.cafe 12 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) those policies killed people not just made miserable fucking killed but we’re not supposed to be happy he’s dead? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 4 weeks ago Civility politics says you must grieve for monsters who's life choices killed others. No being happy when he dies. I wonder if this place would ban anyone happy when Trump dies. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] baines@lemmy.cafe 12 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) those policies killed people not just made miserable fucking killed but we’re not supposed to be happy he’s dead? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 4 weeks ago Civility politics says you must grieve for monsters who's life choices killed others. No being happy when he dies. I wonder if this place would ban anyone happy when Trump dies. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 4 weeks ago Civility politics says you must grieve for monsters who's life choices killed others. No being happy when he dies. I wonder if this place would ban anyone happy when Trump dies. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Axolotl_cpp@feddit.it 2 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Would you react the same if he killed directly instead of indirectly? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jordanlund@lemmy.world -3 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) There's a big difference between Kissinger and Graham, I mentioned this in another reply, but it bears repeating... Kissinger had the power and ability to act alone in his atrocities. Graham, as a member of the Senate, did not have that ability. Whatever evils he enacted, he was able to do so with the consent of a majority of the House, Senate and President. Kissinger did what he wanted, Graham literally could not on his own. Not saying he did good things, he was a complete tool, but a majority of the Legislative branch signed off on the things he did. Not the same thing at all. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Axolotl_cpp@feddit.it 5 points 3 weeks ago* he was able to do so with the consent of a majority of the House, Senate and President. So he was still a bad person but also other people agreed with him and enabled him to do bad stuff This is like saying "Jeff was not a bad person, they would restrain him so he couldn't kill, while Josh was a very bad person because he could kill without restriction" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world -3 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) There's a big difference between Kissinger and Graham, I mentioned this in another reply, but it bears repeating... Kissinger had the power and ability to act alone in his atrocities. Graham, as a member of the Senate, did not have that ability. Whatever evils he enacted, he was able to do so with the consent of a majority of the House, Senate and President. Kissinger did what he wanted, Graham literally could not on his own. Not saying he did good things, he was a complete tool, but a majority of the Legislative branch signed off on the things he did. Not the same thing at all. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Axolotl_cpp@feddit.it 5 points 3 weeks ago* he was able to do so with the consent of a majority of the House, Senate and President. So he was still a bad person but also other people agreed with him and enabled him to do bad stuff This is like saying "Jeff was not a bad person, they would restrain him so he couldn't kill, while Josh was a very bad person because he could kill without restriction" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Axolotl_cpp@feddit.it 5 points 3 weeks ago* he was able to do so with the consent of a majority of the House, Senate and President. So he was still a bad person but also other people agreed with him and enabled him to do bad stuff This is like saying "Jeff was not a bad person, they would restrain him so he couldn't kill, while Josh was a very bad person because he could kill without restriction" permalink fedilink source parent