A retired Tennessee law enforcement officer was held in jail for more than a month this fall after police arrested him over a Facebook post of a meme related to the September assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

Prosecutors eventually dropped the criminal charge brought against Larry Bushart, but his stint behind bars came to exemplify the country’s tense political and legal climate following the tragedy, when conservatives sought to stymie public discourse about the late controversial figure that it saw as objectionable.

Now, Bushart is suing over his incarceration.

  • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Was there ever a time that Republicans actually stayed true to their principles when it wasn’t to their advantage?

    In my life experience I honestly can’t think of a time.

    • BassTurd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Almost 100% of the time actually. You gotta think, what are republican principles? The answer is hate and bigotry, and the vast majority have stuck to that in spades.

      • phutatorius@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        39 minutes ago

        The only principle of any conservative is more money and power to the owning class. Everything beyond that is tactics.

      • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        I just read a paper saying that one of the primary objectives of Conservatism has always been to cover up Pedophilia. Many of their members are wealthy, and have transcended normal sexual behavior into more exotic forms, including pedophilia. They know the Dems would throw them under the bus immediately, but the Conservatives will circle the wagons. The Epstein Files is the example that proves the point.

      • KelvarCherry@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        until someone send them hate for their political actions; or they find some fringe group that hates ALL men / ALL white people, and conservatives lose their shit over that for years.

      • Madison420@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        20
        ·
        13 hours ago

        I think you might need to learn less civil war mythology and more actual history.

        They weren’t holding up to their principals then either, the whole thing was genuinely about states rights they just said their rights overruled other states rights because ownership of property didn’t change via interstate travel.

        It’s far more stupid then most textbooks imply.

          • Madison420@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            2 hours ago

            To retain ownership across state lines where the property is considered a limited person in the other state. What part of this makes you think I do not know the property in question were people, that isn’t however why the feds got involved. State sovereignity was. Even after emancipation it was still legal to own people and still technically is to this day as slavery was never outlawed it was simply limited. To add to that children were still held as property until I want to say 1930 to the point that the first successful children’s welfare group was the goddamn ASPCA arguing children are property like livestock that it’s morally and economically unreasonable to abuse.

            Your myopic and arguably ignorant meme usage and is implication is exactly what I mean by mythology.

            • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 hour ago

              To retain ownership across state lines where the property is considered a limited person in the other state.

              But that wouldn’t work for say heroin.

              If your state says heroin is legal and the fed says it’s illegal, you can’t really leave your state and still legally be in possession of it.

              I guess you could claim you own a person in a red state but once they leave, you no longer own them?

              Wasn’t that the red states’ whole complaint? That their slaves shouldn’t be considered free men once they leave?

              So in conclusion, the whole states rights argument doesn’t work because what they actually wanted was to have their state’s laws apply across the country.

              And this doesn’t even talk about the moral issues which imo and most people’s opinion should override the above logic anyway.

              • Madison420@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 hour ago

                That was an actual issue in America, nice of you to point that out for me and it’s also why drug prohibition was federalized.

                Correct, that was their property right claim. It’s nonsensical but quite a lot of wars are over nonsensical shit.

                So in conclusion, the whole states rights argument doesn’t work because what they actually wanted was to have their state’s laws apply across the country.

                No one said it worked, they fought and lost a war about it but that doesn’t actually make it not their argument nor does it imply we shouldn’t teach that property rights across state lines were the cause of the civil war, not in particular slavery as slavery was never outlawed and people were still considered property until well into the 1900s.

                Nuance is sometimes difficult to deal with but that doesn’t mean we should pare away inconvenient truths.

                Morality is subjective and therefore difficult to argue which is why they fought it as a property rights issue instead.

          • Madison420@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            15
            ·
            13 hours ago

            Read a history book those are all facts. Sure repubs were the “good guys” at the moment but that too is warped, Lincoln was against immediate emancipation but for slow rolling emancipation.

            Look it up, the mythology behind the civil war in this country is fuckin wild.

            • ngdev@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              12 hours ago

              youre fucking dumb and any conversation about the civil war, states rights, and property that does not mention slaves and that people are not property is disingenuous and fucking stupid. youre a fucking moron lol like fr? it was about states not recognizing property? you fucking clown lmao it was about (southern) states not recognizing people

              • HarneyToker@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                12 hours ago

                Yeah, I’m pretty sick of the “It was a different time” bullshit too. It was not about property because people are not property, and humans decided that slavery is wrong LONG before the Civil War. Look in the fucking Bible, the most disseminated piece of literature of all time, and the book that many dumbasses say the US was founded on.

                • Madison420@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  12 hours ago

                  I don’t believe people are property but we aren’t talking about what I believe we’re talking about how the civil war was framed and specifically the mythology it’s evolved into. Sure sane people don’t believe slavery is a righteous endeavor but clearly that’s not changed anything today nor in the past given that slavery hasn’t ended globally and in the US slavery specifically and legislatively isn’t illegal in certain instances like lawful imprisonment, again mythology.

                  • HarneyToker@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    12 hours ago

                    Not talking about other places. I’m suggesting that the arguments about “states rights” and “property” are disingenuous because they imply that we didn’t agree that slavery is fucked to begin with. If we are a country founded on Christian values as many would suggest, then it is not possible to have an argument about “property” when you’re referring to people. This was true in 1860, as well.

              • Madison420@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                12 hours ago

                That’s clearly the property that was being referred to, I’m sorry I didn’t specifically spell that out for you.

                It was about states rights, they just framed it as interstate property rights because slaves were property. Again I apologize for not pandering to the dumbest among us but you’re making a good point that I shouldn’t discount just how dumb people can be.

              • Madison420@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                5 hours ago

                No one is sitting anything but teaching history instead of mythology. Though I do think you might need to work on your teaching comprehension if you got support or of anything I’ve said.

                  • Madison420@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    4 hours ago

                    It was dude. When people say it wasn’t about states rights they’re simply wrong. The only reason the federal government stepped in was to protect the federal governments right to control interstate trade. Yes the trade was slavery but to ignore history because it makes you feel icky is to be willfully ignorant.

          • Madison420@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 hours ago

            Traitors clearly, I’m legitimately amazed you think knowing history is supporting the Confederacy. I know quite a bit about WW2 and want that taught directly as well, does that make me a Nazi?

            • DylanMc6 [any, any]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              5 hours ago

              that’s NOT what i mean - just because you know history and want it to be taught DOESN’T mean you support the confederacy and also DOESN’T make you a fascist in any way, shape and form.

              i DON’T wanna put words in your mouth, so let me just ask you this: do you think the civil war is about “states’ rights”, and if so, do you have any reason why?

              • Madison420@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                4 hours ago

                You don’t want to put words in my mouth but you advise me of being devil’s advocate and imply I’m a racist or Confederate supporter. You’re full of shit.

                Because that’s how it was fucking started read a goddamn history book. Or I dunno if you need it dumbed down watch the John Oliver bit on it.

                https://jeffersondavis.rice.edu/archives/documents/jefferson-davis-resolutions-relations-states

                As for himself, he asserted, “I shall die, as I have lived, firm in the State rights faith.” He told an appreciative audience of Southerners in 1882: “Our cause was so just, so sacred, that had I known all that has come to pass, had I known all that was to be inflicted upon me, all that my country was to suffer, all that our posterity was to endure, I would do it all over again.”

                • DylanMc6 [any, any]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  4 hours ago

                  choose your words carefully, madison. lemmy is full of leftists such as myself, and i assume that you’d get told off if you say antisocialist stuff. seriously!

                  • Madison420@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    4 hours ago

                    I’m a leftist you buffoon. Seriously!

                    Maybe don’t accuse people of being Confederate sympathizers for knowing fucking history.