Trump

Anything not relating to the X-Universe games (general tech talk, other games...) belongs here. Please read the rules before posting.

Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum

User avatar
Observe
Posts: 2665
Joined: Fri, 30. Dec 05, 18:47

Post by Observe » Thu, 12. Jul 18, 20:10

Masterbagger wrote:I treat accusations of racism with a high level of scrutiny because the race card is being used as a very divisive and unproductive weapon for all parties involved in the debate. It's ultimately the same thing as comparing someone to Hitler. No one is like Hitler. Not even close. It's a means to provoke a negative response without presenting an argument of substance.
There are sociopaths and there are empaths. There is no relevant 'argument of substance'. Either you 'feel' for other life, or you don't. We commonly place these two types of people in opposing political camps. There is no reasoning that will make people feel different.

What we need, is to find common ground between opposites. This is what the political process is for, but for some reason, it seems to have become very dysfunctional.

RegisterMe
Posts: 767
Joined: Sun, 14. Oct 07, 17:47

Post by RegisterMe » Thu, 12. Jul 18, 20:13

BugMeister wrote:I just watched Trey Gowdy spouting utter garbage - as chairman of an official public committee, no less..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fgK8laWlak

- this garbage is nothing more than a pretty poor attempt at propagandising against the FBI
- deliberately designed to undermine public faith in the authority of the law offices of the State
- the fact that it's coming directly from the chairman of an official public committee is appalling..

- if you can't see that, then you're blind,,

- your government needs a serious shaking up - it's in the hands of a cabal of political pygmies.. :o :o :o
The rebuttal is worth watching (this is much shorter than the entire piece):-

https://twitter.com/twitter/statuses/10 ... 1518767106
Gavrushka wrote:The problem with 'freedom of speech' is it makes wackos think they have something of value to say.

*WE WANT THE amtct BACK*
Rapier's search

User avatar
BugMeister
Posts: 3828
Joined: Thu, 15. Jul 04, 04:41

Post by BugMeister » Thu, 12. Jul 18, 20:20

Mr Strzok gives excellent testimony, despite the haranguing from the chairman
- in doing so, he showed precisely how idiotic the line of questioning was..

- he is a man of the highest integrity..
- the whole universe is running in BETA mode - we're working on it.. beep..!! :D :thumb_up:

User avatar
Hank001
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed, 22. Feb 06, 00:50

Post by Hank001 » Thu, 12. Jul 18, 20:23

BugMeister says:
I just watched Trey Gowdy spouting utter garbage - as chairman of an official public committee.
I'm at the campus today and watched the good South Carolina statesman get his ass handed to him by the FBI agent he was spouting at. Just happened, but Trey didn't look to happy the fish on the hook turned out to be a shark. :D

"OMG He's an idiot"
"...a douche..."
This is some of the emails Agent Strzok
read out. Oh the HORROR!
CSPAN3 has never been so entertaining!
It had people here rolling on the floor
when I let out; "Sounded accurate to me so when's
my hearing?" :D
The answer to life, the universe and everything:
MIND THE GAP

User avatar
BugMeister
Posts: 3828
Joined: Thu, 15. Jul 04, 04:41

Post by BugMeister » Thu, 12. Jul 18, 20:36

Observe wrote:
Masterbagger wrote:I treat accusations of racism with a high level of scrutiny because the race card is being used as a very divisive and unproductive weapon for all parties involved in the debate. It's ultimately the same thing as comparing someone to Hitler. No one is like Hitler. Not even close. It's a means to provoke a negative response without presenting an argument of substance.
There are sociopaths and there are empaths. There is no relevant 'argument of substance'. Either you 'feel' for other life, or you don't. We commonly place these two types of people in opposing political camps. There is no reasoning that will make people feel different.

What we need, is to find common ground between opposites. This is what the political process is for, but for some reason, it seems to have become very dysfunctional.
- and yet it's the differences between us that makes us who we are..

*WARNING: profundity alert..* :lol:
- the whole universe is running in BETA mode - we're working on it.. beep..!! :D :thumb_up:

Mightysword
Posts: 2181
Joined: Wed, 10. Mar 04, 06:11

Post by Mightysword » Thu, 12. Jul 18, 20:52

Observe wrote: What we need, is to find common ground between opposites. This is what the political process is for, but for some reason, it seems to have become very dysfunctional.
With equal blame going to all sides ... how many there are.
... So The right of Transgenders to enter little girls bathrooms ...
And here is a good example of the dysfunctional. I don't know about other countries, but here in the US whenever this issue comes up it's very toxic, and there are barely anything represents a proper discussion. The pattern is always seem like this: this is my god given right and none of your concern matter, otherwise you are an "insert degenerate label of choice here". Specifically, I have seen people who support all equal right for transgenders, but they have issues/concern when it comes to the bathroom right. In my opinion, regardless of what side of the argument one is one, objectively those are valid concerns. Concerns that should be discussed and addressed. The problem is ... there is rarely any ground for that discussion in the first place, everyone hit the ground running yelling and labeling each others on the first step. Luckily, most public institution I visited had now installed a third option for the bathroom, so the silent majority with a cooler head prevail ... at least for now.

The same-thing can be said about most other issues like immigrant. Either you are supporter of immigrant, or you are not, no in between is allowed, and everyone will be labelled appropriately. This is just something I come up to quantify the argument a bit, but for example, if I gonna break down where people stand on the issue it would be like this, in an certain order (ascending or descending is up to you to decide)

1 - Real Racism and Xenophobia: America belongs to the white, other races are a disease.
2 - Nationalist: American citizen comes first, everything else is second.
3 - Negative Cautious: Don't particular have anything against immigrants themselves, but worry the impact of an influx will have to the society.
4 - Neutral: don't particular care either way. If an immigrant come work for me it's a boon, if an immigrant took a job that could have been mine then it's bad, mileage varied.
5 - Positive Cautious: would like to help people in need, but only within reasonable capacity. Would prefer to see long term plan instead of spontaneous response.
6 - This nation is a country of refugee: we should do all we can and what we can to help, I'll do my part and hope to see everyone will do the same.
7 - The extreme: unless you are #6, then you are an "insert degenerate label here".

I had brought this up in the past, and it was quickly dismissed by the #7 because to them, there is no such thing as "valid concerns" when it comes to this issue. If you have any, than you are simply #1 and #2. And that means, there is no room for discussion or debate. And this lead to while there are a wide range of spectrum where the population scatter across, ultimately the narrative are controlled and driven by only the two most extreme outer edges, just like we're seeing now. Eventually, the #3 people are pushed toward and become #1 or #2. The #4 and #5 do not have anything to do with #1 or #2, but they are also rejected by #6 and #7 and in turn considered to be in the same lot as #1 and #2.

And people keeps wondering why the middle ground doesn't exist any more, it's because they're not even acknowledged. ;)

User avatar
BugMeister
Posts: 3828
Joined: Thu, 15. Jul 04, 04:41

Post by BugMeister » Thu, 12. Jul 18, 21:01

- this might get interesting - only because I greatly admire Miss Page :roll:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1oqc-WQzOw
- the whole universe is running in BETA mode - we're working on it.. beep..!! :D :thumb_up:

User avatar
Hank001
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed, 22. Feb 06, 00:50

Post by Hank001 » Thu, 12. Jul 18, 21:04

Mightysword stated:
And why people keep wondering why the middle ground doesn't exist any more, it's because they're not even acknowledged. :wink:
Excuse me. I'm picking myself up off the floor since I on this point agree with you.

(And still watching CSPAN3 and the Republicans just broke their own rules to hush the Democrats to let Gowdy do a follow up question. The Republicans aren't happy that they're pulling no insights into what Mueller has out of Strzok.)

OMG Gohmet from Texas has just insulted the hell out of Strzok and the Chairman backed him up! It's now okay to impune the character of a witness in hearings! That rule was put in place after the McCarthy Hearing and the floor is pandemonium!
The answer to life, the universe and everything:
MIND THE GAP

RegisterMe
Posts: 767
Joined: Sun, 14. Oct 07, 17:47

Post by RegisterMe » Thu, 12. Jul 18, 21:29

Hank001 wrote:OMG Gohmet from Texas has just insulted the hell out of Strzok and the Chairman backed him up! It's now okay to impune the character of a witness in hearings! That rule was put in place after the McCarthy Hearing and the floor is pandemonium!
What are the consequences of something like this?
Gavrushka wrote:The problem with 'freedom of speech' is it makes wackos think they have something of value to say.

*WE WANT THE amtct BACK*
Rapier's search

User avatar
BugMeister
Posts: 3828
Joined: Thu, 15. Jul 04, 04:41

Post by BugMeister » Thu, 12. Jul 18, 21:32

- it's designed to cast aspersions on the FBI - ahead of Mueller's eventual report..

- at a time when Supreme Court nominations are being directly influenced by a criminal in the White House..

- dangerous times.. :o
- the whole universe is running in BETA mode - we're working on it.. beep..!! :D :thumb_up:

User avatar
Observe
Posts: 2665
Joined: Fri, 30. Dec 05, 18:47

Post by Observe » Thu, 12. Jul 18, 21:44

Skism wrote:- Support women's rights - if you mean rights to murder children then no....
Does this come from concern for the unborn, hatred of women, both or neither?

It is interesting how often we see evangelistic concern for the unborn, while at the same time, general disdain for those who actually made it into this world. The only explanation, is indignation being used as a cover-up for 'I don't care'.

User avatar
Morkonan
Posts: 1782
Joined: Sun, 25. Sep 11, 04:33

Post by Morkonan » Thu, 12. Jul 18, 22:30

Mightysword wrote:With equal blame going to all sides ... how many there are.
You know, there are some sorts of subjects where I'm just tired of hearing the "equal blame" or "both sides are at fault" excuse. It's often a placating remark designed to disarm opponents while attempting to cut through the appearance of bias.

And, sometimes, there isn't an equal share of blame. Sometimes, people are just doing the "wrong thing."

I truly mean individual "people," here. Both collective "Parties" are full of crap and guilty of adding fuel to the fire at every step. But, those parties are made up of willing individuals who have made a choice to say or do something - They are responsible for their own actions, not the collective innocence of some imagined political party ideal.

So, yeah, I can't always accept the "both sides are at fault" argument, simply because I do not accept a viable argument that consists of me having to acknowledge that seeking to do good is, in someway, at "fault." The methods can be, of course, but when you make a stand against "wrong" and you do that "right," you're not liable for being blamed for the "wrong."

So, what's an example? OK, let's look at the separation of children under five years old from their legitimate parent or guardian who has, supposedly, entered the United States illegally or applied incorrectly for "asylum."

That's bad. We shouldn't do that. In fact, I think we can all agree that it's a "bad thing." So, we should fix that, right? Probably so, so let's do that.

And then comes the finger pointing, the "it's your fault too" and shovel-fulls of BS and foot-dragging.

None of that matters. What matters is that we acknowledge that this is a "wrong thing to do" and that "we should fix this problem." Period. There is no further discussion necessary on whether or not there should be a solution put in place immediately and acted upon positively.

And yet, there is still an undercurrent at times that has people saying "Well, it's everyone's fault." That's wrong. The "fault" lies in those who did it and knew it was morally wrong, but failed to act legally to prevent it. And, at this point, we should be very busy correcting the problem rather than continuing to justify acting by trying to find someone to blame, first.

Screw that. FIX the problem, first, and then you can take your time fixing the blame.

Sorry, a bit of a rant, I know. But, there are times when it should be obvious to us that "Right" or "Wrong" is just not defined by a political party and this sort of opposition isn't the type that should be "sharing blame."

Note: The Dems have made a huge deal out of this, not because the politicians "care," but because they can wave the torch of righteous anger in hopes of getting votes. Every darn Democrat politician I have seen say two words on this subject has been offering as a solution "Elect Democrats." Jackals prey on the kills of greater animals and that's exactly the sort of party they're building if they don't change that painfully obvious tactic.

User avatar
Hank001
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed, 22. Feb 06, 00:50

Post by Hank001 » Thu, 12. Jul 18, 23:00

@ Morkonan

You might have missed this I posted earlier.
It shows what happens when ones tries to face the
left from the middle:
The end of discussion and dielectrics on
campuses the case of Professor Weinstein:

https://youtu.be/2cMYfxOFBBM

Weinstein before congress:

https://youtu.be/uRIKJCKWla4

Weinstein interview "Is the left eating itself?":

https://youtu.be/9osjKN5VWfM

The result on campus two months later as seen from the left:

https://youtu.be/kCTZ_QQV6Fw
Watching the House Oversight, Judiciary, and "Government Reform" committees' grilling Peter Strzok and both parties turning it into partisan badmouthings on CSPAN3 I'd stay that the time to fix the wagon has passed as the wheels have done flown off. :cry:
The answer to life, the universe and everything:
MIND THE GAP

Mightysword
Posts: 2181
Joined: Wed, 10. Mar 04, 06:11

Post by Mightysword » Thu, 12. Jul 18, 23:02

@Morkonan: the difference in our perspective is that you're talking about what happening NOW, and I'm talking about how did we get to that NOW.
How do you feel about someone saying that American is the biggest evil of WW2 by the virtual we were the only one dropping the atomic bombs? Without considering any other factors? ;)


Specifically I said this:
And this lead to while there are a wide range of spectrum where the population scatter across, ultimately the narrative are controlled and driven by only the two most extreme outer edges, just like we're seeing now.
Using the # I did in my previous post as a reference:

62985106 American voted for Trump, do you believe that all those 62985106 are #1 and #2? I believe most are not, however for those who are not, there are no other platforms to voice their opinion or concern. Because ultimately it's matter very little if you are 3, 4, 5. Especially even if you are #5, the moment you show any kind of hesitation and instead of your unconditional 100% support, #6 and 7 will label you as the same category as #1 and 2 anyway. When is the last time you hear in the mainstream narrative that people talk about those in the 3, 4, 5 categories? Personally, I never do, because like I said, they're either not acknowledge, or treated the same as #1 and 2 anyway. Tolerance is something are often not practiced by those preaching it the most.

We're in something equivalent of a civil war in term of ideology. And frankly, when a war is in full swing, do you think it's matter a lot to talk about its brutality, collateral damage? Do you think it's matter to talk about who kill who more? Personally, I don't. There is this saying that I really like: "In a war everyone think they have a reason, yet no one does". The point is, I want to go back to the explore the root cause of the war itself. Are people saying bad things now? Yes they are. But why are they, what enable them, what trigger them, what compel them to say such things. Because like I said, I refuse to believe a good chunk of us are the bigot that the rest of us are trying to make them appear to be.


And yes, on that count, there are enough blame to go to every parties.

Skism
Posts: 382
Joined: Mon, 22. Mar 10, 22:36

Post by Skism » Thu, 12. Jul 18, 23:08

Mightysword wrote:
Observe wrote: What we need, is to find common ground between opposites. This is what the political process is for, but for some reason, it seems to have become very dysfunctional.
With equal blame going to all sides ... how many there are.
... So The right of Transgenders to enter little girls bathrooms ...
And here is a good example of the dysfunctional. I don't know about other countries, but here in the US whenever this issue comes up it's very toxic, and there are barely anything represents a proper discussion. The pattern is always seem like this: this is my god given right and none of your concern matter, otherwise you are an "insert degenerate label of choice here". Specifically, I have seen people who support all equal right for transgenders, but they have issues/concern when it comes to the bathroom right. In my opinion, regardless of what side of the argument one is one, objectively those are valid concerns. Concerns that should be discussed and addressed. The problem is ... there is rarely any ground for that discussion in the first place, everyone hit the ground running yelling and labeling each others on the first step. Luckily, most public institution I visited had now installed a third option for the bathroom, so the silent majority with a cooler head prevail ... at least for now.

The same-thing can be said about most other issues like immigrant. Either you are supporter of immigrant, or you are not, no in between is allowed, and everyone will be labelled appropriately. This is just something I come up to quantify the argument a bit, but for example, if I gonna break down where people stand on the issue it would be like this, in an certain order (ascending or descending is up to you to decide)

1 - Real Racism and Xenophobia: America belongs to the white, other races are a disease.
2 - Nationalist: American citizen comes first, everything else is second.
3 - Negative Cautious: Don't particular have anything against immigrants themselves, but worry the impact of an influx will have to the society.
4 - Neutral: don't particular care either way. If an immigrant come work for me it's a boon, if an immigrant took a job that could have been mine then it's bad, mileage varied.
5 - Positive Cautious: would like to help people in need, but only within reasonable capacity. Would prefer to see long term plan instead of spontaneous response.
6 - This nation is a country of refugee: we should do all we can and what we can to help, I'll do my part and hope to see everyone will do the same.
7 - The extreme: unless you are #6, then you are an "insert degenerate label here".

I had brought this up in the past, and it was quickly dismissed by the #7 because to them, there is no such thing as "valid concerns" when it comes to this issue. If you have any, than you are simply #1 and #2. And that means, there is no room for discussion or debate. And this lead to while there are a wide range of spectrum where the population scatter across, ultimately the narrative are controlled and driven by only the two most extreme outer edges, just like we're seeing now. Eventually, the #3 people are pushed toward and become #1 or #2. The #4 and #5 do not have anything to do with #1 or #2, but they are also rejected by #6 and #7 and in turn considered to be in the same lot as #1 and #2.

And people keeps wondering why the middle ground doesn't exist any more, it's because they're not even acknowledged. ;)
This ladies and Gentleman is an example of a REAL centrist one of the few left...

Not the type of person who claims to be a centrist then calls others far right....

Now on this list I'm a 3 on a good day and a 2 when practicality sets in (replace America with Britain)

In my mind this does not make me far right - Only if the overton window has moved so far left that anyone to the right that Joesph Stalin is now far right....

It does make me unashamed to be right wing.

You could actually add a 1a the "its the Jews" camp

I got into a blazing argument with a blogger over his treatment of someone who called him out and his statement that you must be against both Jews and SJWS and that being pro free speech was not enough, and that if he was not he was effectively in the ranks of the enemy...

Oh man that was a blazing argument...Purity spirals effectively :roll:

1a are Nazis like actual scary NEO NAZIS that hate Jews with a passion and think all things originate with them.
1 qualify for Far right and they are THE ONLY ONES WHO DO (of this list anyway)

No one else there qualifies for far right and the amount of people there in those categories is tiny

Like you could fit them all in one place and do what you liked with them we are talking a few thousand at most - the left wing media (and its left wing btw ) like to claim they are massive- they are not.

1 and 1a are not welcome with 2 , 3. 4 or 5 and for example UKIP (Unitied Kingdom Independence Party) would kick out any people who where of that category


They really are a very small minority

2 is a hard line but a realistic one and one I can respect.
3 is the default position of conservatives
4 really is neutral but as you said are made out to be the same as 2 when really they are not
5 gets attacked and called a racist - and is scared of the label so shuts up (and I have not heard many of those)
6 seems to tbe default position of several here.
and 7 is what they end up with with suggesting everyone is Racist that Trump is a NAZI, that hertonormative values are transphobia and so on...

There are a few here who fit 7 frankly and whose stated posts fit that definition.

the 7s outnumber the 1s by order of magnitude they are taking over mainstream media and labeling everyone as far right.

And thats why I concentrate on the far left more than the far right.
Last edited by Skism on Fri, 13. Jul 18, 01:34, edited 5 times in total.
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest."

-Thomas Paine-

Post Reply

Return to “Off Topic English”