Not sure why you’re trying to extend this disagreement. I am aware of what anecdotal means. The point is that there’s not much more to discuss. Thanks for doubling down. 

I thought the whole, ‘move to Spain on a lark to avoid living like spoiled Americans’ bit was going to take the cake, no matter what came next. But honestly, I don’t think I can ever move past this line:

I wasn’t talking about the article’s perspective, I am referring to many of the comments. I am aware of the purpose of the article and generally agree with it.

I don’t think Vermont is more racist, I think Vermont is more naive. I did not clarify. Your experience is your experience. I also live in Maryland, and that has not been my, or my wife’s, experience here.

It was the third prosecutor assigned to the case, and he did the right thing. 

I’d argue that this is more prevalent in places where the population is largely homogeneous, like it is in Vermont.

Yes, that’s right. And it’s fucked up. But it’s public outcry, and finally, a prosecutor with a moral compass, that enabled this to happen. What you’re saying in this post is different than what you said before. What you said before was not factual, whereas this is the truth, and I don’t disagree with you.  

“Well - there’s absolutely zero comparison to maga flag waiving science denying chuds armed, at state capitols crying about their freedoms being infringed because they have to wear a mask to the store and can’t go to a bar right now”

I disagree with the premise that we need to choose between one and the other. You seem to assume that I am saying the status quo is good enough. That’s not it at all. I am saying that implicit threats of armed violence are wrong and counterproductive at almost every level, and tantalizing as it might be, it’s not…

I think that’s a dangerous premise. Note that these guys aren’t confronting armed rednecks, so it’s also not a premise you can really back up. If you think these militia types are scared of conflict, you’d do well to remember the Cliven Bundy drama where they were basically arrayed against armed federal agents.…

Reality is that it’s not a fight that can be won this way. It’s fine to fantasize about some glorious revolution, but it’s a pipedream that ends in suffering. 

Goddamn this makes me sick. Vermont is an interesting case. Heavily white, and about 50% libertarian, 50% progressive liberal, and cutting across both categories of political allegiance, 40% racist. Never impacted me directly but my wife has spent a lot of time in VT and had some interesting experiences; she stands…

Why? In what fantasy world will that solve the problem? 

You are not wrong. It feels good on the surface, but it’s not making anyone safer. All of this triumphalism is short sighted.

You have no ground to stand on. Those “protesters” were no better than terrorists. Multiple participants have actively threatened violence against politicians, and have made it very clear that this was a “warning” to the governor and Michigan lawmakers. Using force and the threat of violence - implicit or explicit -…

In no way is that how this will work. 

Not a snowflake and not a cracker, but reality is that the direction we’re heading in, where more people have more guns, more extreme viewpoints, and more tolerance for that kind of display, is not a good one. White people are driving this 100%, but it’s still a minority of crazy assholes who are getting outsize…

I agree with you, broadly, that their arguments were not in good faith. 100%

Not here for the anti-Omar crew. But you were wrong here, they are married. 

“I think this is just a typical marriage gone sour, and Omar has bad luck to be in the middle it.”