|
Post by Fishn'Aztec on Feb 9, 2021 11:55:05 GMT -8
Quit lying? Never!!
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Feb 9, 2021 12:44:00 GMT -8
I'll have to chime in here and say that you can't compare this press secretary to Trump's so far, based on the fact that there's no difficult questions, only softballs. No critiquing. The whole media isn't against her. I'll say that there's definitely more calm now, which is great!!! ...Sigh. Please freaking stop and watch a damn briefing. I'm sorry, but planting reporters to ask favorable questions is the *previous* administration's doing. To suggest otherwise is ignorance. I am trying desperately to give you rope here, but this isn't it. You're piggybacking false talking points and amplifying them. What hard questions did anyone ask Kayleigh McEnany? She's a complete fraud, so there's that. The reason why the "media" was against her is she constantly lied and is a complete trash human being. Press briefings are meant to share critical information, not act as diluted propaganda sessions to enhance her boss's ego. Ryan, you're not my measuring stick, so I don't need you to throw me any rope. Thanks
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 9, 2021 13:00:00 GMT -8
...Sigh. Please freaking stop and watch a damn briefing. I'm sorry, but planting reporters to ask favorable questions is the *previous* administration's doing. To suggest otherwise is ignorance. I am trying desperately to give you rope here, but this isn't it. You're piggybacking false talking points and amplifying them. What hard questions did anyone ask Kayleigh McEnany? She's a complete fraud, so there's that. The reason why the "media" was against her is she constantly lied and is a complete trash human being. Press briefings are meant to share critical information, not act as diluted propaganda sessions to enhance her boss's ego. Ryan, you're not my measuring stick, so I don't need you to throw me any rope. Thanks If you're comfortable with lying, that's on you. I'm not spreading false information willingly here. No malicious intent, but this is why our country is divided. You have people spreading nonsensical diatribes like this without condemning the abomination of the last four years. Holding people accountable is critical to conquering that divide.
|
|
|
Post by Al-O-Meter on Feb 9, 2021 13:54:06 GMT -8
I'm not spreading false information willingly here. Are you saying that you are being compelled to say things like the Capitol Riot on the 6th was a worse act of sedition than the American Civil War?
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 9, 2021 17:21:06 GMT -8
I'm not spreading false information willingly here. Are you saying that you are being compelled to say things like the Capitol Riot on the 6th was a worse act of sedition than the American Civil War? Worst act of insurrection since the War of 1812. The Confederacy never penetrated D.C. during the Civil War.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 9, 2021 17:54:07 GMT -8
Bill Cassidy calls today for what it was.
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Feb 14, 2021 12:58:35 GMT -8
Are you saying that you are being compelled to say things like the Capitol Riot on the 6th was a worse act of sedition than the American Civil War? Worst act of insurrection since the War of 1812. The Confederacy never penetrated D.C. during the Civil War. Even a cursory reading of history indicates that the South came reasonably close to winning the war. Had it not been for the effective Union naval blockade of southern ports, it is not inconceivable that massive imports of arms and other supplies from Europe could have decided the issue in favor of the Confederacy.
Also, had it not been for the brilliant leadership of Lincoln and the generals he promoted (Grant, Sherman, Sheridan, etc.), the South might well have won.
On the other hand, it's possible that even a Union failure to blockade the South would not have caused the destruction of the Union. I said that a Southern victory was not inconceivable. But, since the North was massively superior in population and assets, such a victory was always going to be a long shot.
Now, compare the South's chances of destroying the Union with those of the rioters of Jan. 6th. First, the rioters, at least the most extreme of them, gave no indication of wanting to destroy the U.S.A. Of course, what they apparently wanted was bad enough. But let's not inflate what happened on Jan. 6th to the threat to the country posed by the succession of eleven of the U.S. states. Those rioters never came even close to breaking up the U.S.A. But that's precisely what the Confederacy wanted to do. The South's chances of gaining their objective were less than 50/50. The chances of the "Insurrectionists" of Jan. 6th were ZERO!
One may argue about what should be the correct response to the events of Jan. 6th. One thing is clear to me. The correct response is NOT to attempt to condemn all those who voted for Trump. As in the events of last summer, most who came to the Capitol were peaceful and just wanted to protest what they thought had been an injustice. Those who broke the law are and should be prosecuted.
Remember, with respect to the argument between our major parties, as a Libertarian, I do not have a dog in the fight. For various reasons I oppose both the Dems and the GOP.
AzWm
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Feb 14, 2021 13:20:02 GMT -8
Bill Cassidy calls today for what it was. He is looking at "the job" they did and not so much the facts? Judges find for cases all day long citing legal technicalities regardless of the audio video clips presented by one side or another. If he is saying the law had nothing to do with the impeachment and it was all about emotion and optics, then he has a point.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 14, 2021 13:22:58 GMT -8
Worst act of insurrection since the War of 1812. The Confederacy never penetrated D.C. during the Civil War. Even a cursory reading of history indicates that the South came reasonably close to winning the war. Had it not been for the effective Union naval blockade of southern ports, it is not inconceivable that massive imports of arms and other supplies from Europe could have decided the issue in favor of the Confederacy.
Also, had it not been for the brilliant leadership of Lincoln and the generals he promoted (Grant, Sherman, Sheridan, etc.), the South might well have won.
On the other hand, it's possible that even a Union failure to blockade the South would not have caused the destruction of the Union. I said that a Southern victory was not inconceivable. But, since the North was massively superior in population and assets, such a victory was also going to be a long shot.
Now, compare the South's chances of destroying the Union with those of the rioters of Jan. 6th. First, the rioters, at least the most extreme of them, gave no indication of wanting to destroy the U.S.A. Of course, what they apparently wanted was bad enough. But let's not inflate what happened on Jan. 6th to the threat to the country posed by the succession of eleven of the U.S. states. Those rioters never came even close to breaking up the U.S.A. But that's precisely what the Confederacy wanted to do. The South's chances of gaining their objective were less than 50/50. The chances of the "Insurrectionists" of Jan. 6th were ZERO!
One may argue about what should be the correct response to the events of Jan. 6th. One thing is clear to me. The correct response is NOT to attempt to condemn all those who voted for Trump. As in the events of last summer, most who came to the Capitol were peaceful and just wanted to protest what they thought had been an injustice. Those who broke the law are and should be prosecuted.
Remember, with respect to the argument between our major parties, as a Libertarian, I do not have a dog in the fight. For various reasons I oppose both the Dems and the GOP.
AzWmIt's utterly ridiculous to compare two events from 150 years apart where the foundation of the country is not remotely the same, nor is anything really the same. Understand when you make conflated posts like this, it undermines the seriousness of your argument. We know you are a Libertarian, you mention it in every post, without fail. There is nothing wrong your affiliation. However... Under no circumstances should a comparison between the Floyd protests and the Capitol insurrection be made. They are not in the same category or stratosphere. Period, full stop. There is no premise in which the two events are equal. We need to shelve these false narratives because they do damage to civic responsibility and truth. The insurrectionists are on record as wanting to murder Mike Pence and Nancy Pelosi and to install Trump for another, undefined term. Removing the vice president (first in line in order of succession) and the Speaker of the House (Second in line) threatens the absolute continuity of government. Minimizing that, as you seem to do often, is damaging. It's unnecessary. It's bizarre. We need to get to a premise where we cannot explain away events like this. I'll say it again : Whether they succeeded or would have is NOT the point. You continually miss this, for some inexplicable reason. The one and only point is that we just witnessed a sitting president incite insurrection against a coequal branch of government and get away with it, without political consequence, when people were killed and members of Congress, on a bipartisan level, agreed he was responsible...and acquitted him anyway.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 14, 2021 13:25:07 GMT -8
Bill Cassidy calls today for what it was. He is looking at "the job" they did and not so much the facts? Judges find for cases all day long citing legal technicalities regardless of the audio video clips presented by one side or another. If he is saying the law had nothing to do with the impeachment and it was all about emotion and optics, then he has a point. Technicalities are put in place to protect citizens from abuses. This was not that. The facts were made by the House managers. Stop pretending like this was fair process. Anyone with a brain can see otherwise and should be outraged, regardless of political identity. This was a gross miscarriage of duty.
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Feb 14, 2021 17:50:53 GMT -8
Even a cursory reading of history indicates that the South came reasonably close to winning the war. Had it not been for the effective Union naval blockade of southern ports, it is not inconceivable that massive imports of arms and other supplies from Europe could have decided the issue in favor of the Confederacy.
Also, had it not been for the brilliant leadership of Lincoln and the generals he promoted (Grant, Sherman, Sheridan, etc.), the South might well have won.
On the other hand, it's possible that even a Union failure to blockade the South would not have caused the destruction of the Union. I said that a Southern victory was not inconceivable. But, since the North was massively superior in population and assets, such a victory was also going to be a long shot.
Now, compare the South's chances of destroying the Union with those of the rioters of Jan. 6th. First, the rioters, at least the most extreme of them, gave no indication of wanting to destroy the U.S.A. Of course, what they apparently wanted was bad enough. But let's not inflate what happened on Jan. 6th to the threat to the country posed by the succession of eleven of the U.S. states. Those rioters never came even close to breaking up the U.S.A. But that's precisely what the Confederacy wanted to do. The South's chances of gaining their objective were less than 50/50. The chances of the "Insurrectionists" of Jan. 6th were ZERO!
One may argue about what should be the correct response to the events of Jan. 6th. One thing is clear to me. The correct response is NOT to attempt to condemn all those who voted for Trump. As in the events of last summer, most who came to the Capitol were peaceful and just wanted to protest what they thought had been an injustice. Those who broke the law are and should be prosecuted.
Remember, with respect to the argument between our major parties, as a Libertarian, I do not have a dog in the fight. For various reasons I oppose both the Dems and the GOP.
AzWm It's utterly ridiculous to compare two events from 150 years apart where the foundation of the country is not remotely the same, nor is anything really the same. Understand when you make conflated posts like this, it undermines the seriousness of your argument. We know you are a Libertarian, you mention it in every post, without fail. There is nothing wrong your affiliation. However... Under no circumstances should a comparison between the Floyd protests and the Capitol insurrection be made. They are not in the same category or stratosphere. Period, full stop. There is no premise in which the two events are equal. We need to shelve these false narratives because they do damage to civic responsibility and truth. The insurrectionists are on record as wanting to murder Mike Pence and Nancy Pelosi and to install Trump for another, undefined term. Removing the vice president (first in line in order of succession) and the Speaker of the House (Second in line) threatens the absolute continuity of government. Minimizing that, as you seem to do often, is damaging. It's unnecessary. It's bizarre. We need to get to a premise where we cannot explain away events like this. I'll say it again : Whether they succeeded or would have is NOT the point. You continually miss this, for some inexplicable reason. The one and only point is that we just witnessed a sitting president incite insurrection against a coequal branch of government and get away with it, without political consequence, when people were killed and members of Congress, on a bipartisan level, agreed he was responsible...and acquitted him anyway. I congratulate you for making a number of good points. But I disagree with what I think is your basic premise. Let's see if I can get it right.
Forgive the history, but what happened in the 1860s will never be irrelevant. What happened was that eleven of the United States declared themselves independent, then demonstrated that they were willing, perhaps even eager, to kill thousand of other U.S. citizens to achieve that goal. Obviously, their success would have destroyed the U.S.A. Excepting a termolecular war or a country-killing asteroid strike, there could not be anything worse.
Now let's consider the events of Jan. 6th in DC. Where do I think it ranks on a scale of possible American disasters?
* In first place, at ten, I'll put termolecular war or a country-killing asteroid strike.
* 9th place: a pandemic in which the disease kills over half those who become infected and for which no vaccine can be produced in less than several years.
* 8th place: an invasion by a hostile power. We lose the war and as a result have to cede most of the South West to Mexico and Alaska to Russia.
* 7th place: An out-of-hand riot in which a number of the rioters storm the capitol, disrupt the legislature's normal activities, and make serious threats aimed at some of the legislators.
On second thought, in 7th place should be a riot such as described above, but which results in the death of a number of the legislators.
6th: place should be what I first put in 7th.
I'm sure you disagree. Okay, one by one, explain why Jan.6th was really worse than the disasters I put in 10th, 9th,and 8th places. Sure, those in places 8-10 are very, very unlikely to happen. But that was what people thought, beforehand, about what happened to the Titanic, the Hindenburg, and the Tacoma Narrows Bridge. Very unlikely disasters are just that . . . unlikely. But they have a greater than zero probability of actually happening.
What happened on the 6th of Jan. was both outrageous and unforgiveable. But a much worse disaster (which I did not add to the list) would be if those events were used as excuse to destroy one political party, turning America into a one-party state. Anyone with any degree of objectivity can see that the Dems are trying to do just that.
AzWm[/font]
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 14, 2021 18:23:51 GMT -8
It's utterly ridiculous to compare two events from 150 years apart where the foundation of the country is not remotely the same, nor is anything really the same. Understand when you make conflated posts like this, it undermines the seriousness of your argument. We know you are a Libertarian, you mention it in every post, without fail. There is nothing wrong your affiliation. However... Under no circumstances should a comparison between the Floyd protests and the Capitol insurrection be made. They are not in the same category or stratosphere. Period, full stop. There is no premise in which the two events are equal. We need to shelve these false narratives because they do damage to civic responsibility and truth. The insurrectionists are on record as wanting to murder Mike Pence and Nancy Pelosi and to install Trump for another, undefined term. Removing the vice president (first in line in order of succession) and the Speaker of the House (Second in line) threatens the absolute continuity of government. Minimizing that, as you seem to do often, is damaging. It's unnecessary. It's bizarre. We need to get to a premise where we cannot explain away events like this. I'll say it again : Whether they succeeded or would have is NOT the point. You continually miss this, for some inexplicable reason. The one and only point is that we just witnessed a sitting president incite insurrection against a coequal branch of government and get away with it, without political consequence, when people were killed and members of Congress, on a bipartisan level, agreed he was responsible...and acquitted him anyway. I congratulate you for making a number of good points. But I disagree with what I think is your basic premise. Let's see if I can get it right.
Forgive the history, but what happened in the 1860s will never be irrelevant. What happened was that eleven of the United States declared themselves independent, then demonstrated that they were willing, perhaps even eager, to kill thousand of other U.S. citizens to achieve that goal. Obviously, their success would have destroyed the U.S.A. Excepting a termolecular war or a country-killing asteroid strike, there could not be anything worse.
Now let's consider the events of Jan. 6th in DC. Where do I think it ranks on a scale of possible American disasters?
* In first place, at ten, I'll put termolecular war or a country-killing asteroid strike.
* 9th place: a pandemic in which the disease kills over half those who become infected and for which no vaccine can be produced in less than several years.
* 8th place: an invasion by a hostile power. We lose the war and as a result have to cede most of the South West to Mexico and Alaska to Russia.
* 7th place: An out-of-hand riot in which a number of the rioters storm the capitol, disrupt the legislature's normal activities, and make serious threats aimed at some of the legislators.
On second thought, in 7th place should be a riot such as described above, but which results in the death of a number of the legislators.
6th: place should be what I first put in 7th.
I'm sure you disagree. Okay, one by one, explain why Jan.6th was really worse than the disasters I put in 10th, 9th,and 8th places. Sure, those in places 8-10 are very, very unlikely to happen. But that was what people thought, beforehand, about what happened to the Titanic, the Hindenburg, and the Tacoma Narrows Bridge. Very unlikely disasters are just that . . . unlikely. But they have a greater than zero probability of actually happening.
What happened on the 6th of Jan. was both outrageous and unforgiveable. But a much worse disaster (which I did not add to the list) would be if those events were used as excuse to destroy one political party, turning America into a one-party state. Anyone with any degree of objectivity can see that the Dems are trying to do just that.
AzWm[/font] [/quote] Again, none of your examples are remotely realistic or plausible, and I'm not comparing a meteor strike with the erosion of democracy. It's silly nonsense that once again distracts from the real issue. Please illustrate where on any planet the Democrats are trying to create a one-party state. It's more huff and puff hyperbole from you, as per usual, with no evidence. Did you see what just happened? The GOP by and large admitted that the president was responsible for his actions. Yet they hid behind a cowardly and false narrative that the trial was unconstitutional. We are witnessing the largest underreaction to insurrection, INSURRECTION, in history. But yeah, that's the Democrats, right? Nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Feb 14, 2021 18:41:48 GMT -8
What happened on the 6th of Jan. was both outrageous and unforgiveable. But a much worse disaster (which I did not add to the list) would be if those events were used as excuse to destroy one political party, turning America into a one-party state. Anyone with any degree of objectivity can see that the Dems are trying to do just that. AzWm Yeah, but, here's the thing - the Republicans have done it to themselves. They hitched their wagon to a guy with no moral compass whatsoever, no sense of ethics at all, a complete narcissist who is both arrogant AND foolish, and is willing to do or say ANYTHING to maintain his power, including attempting a coup. THEN a vast majority of Republican congressmen and women DEFEND Trump and vote to NOT hold him accountable at all. They kind of deserve to be marginalized at this point. Right now, they represent an attack on democracy. Trump tried to have a valid election overturned, and he did it in multiple ways. That is treason. The Republicans aided and abetted treason. For a second, imagine the parties were reversed, and Trump were a Democrat, and it was the Democratic Senators and Congressmen and women who were defending him tooth and nail and trying to make sure that he wasn't held accountable. Don't you think that they deserve to be marginalized for a period of time until they turned back from that path? The actions of the Republicans in both houses of Congress have been reprehensible. They deserve to be marginalized and have little say in the guiding of legislation and governmental policy - until they reverse course and stop following the INSANE Q'Anon led bull$#!+ that is being spouted by those who have become the most influential in the party. They have put the Republican party ABOVE democracy itself. I hate to say it, but they deserve anything and everything they get as a result.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 14, 2021 21:13:55 GMT -8
What happened on the 6th of Jan. was both outrageous and unforgiveable. But a much worse disaster (which I did not add to the list) would be if those events were used as excuse to destroy one political party, turning America into a one-party state. Anyone with any degree of objectivity can see that the Dems are trying to do just that. AzWm Yeah, but, here's the thing - the Republicans have done it to themselves. They hitched their wagon to a guy with no moral compass whatsoever, no sense of ethics at all, a complete narcissist who is both arrogant AND foolish, and is willing to do or say ANYTHING to maintain his power, including attempting a coup. THEN a vast majority of Republican congressmen and women DEFEND Trump and vote to NOT hold him accountable at all. They kind of deserve to be marginalized at this point. Right now, they represent an attack on democracy. Trump tried to have a valid election overturned, and he did it in multiple ways. That is treason. The Republicans aided and abetted treason. For a second, imagine the parties were reversed, and Trump were a Democrat, and it was the Democratic Senators and Congressmen and women who were defending him tooth and nail and trying to make sure that he wasn't held accountable. Don't you think that they deserve to be marginalized for a period of time until they turned back from that path? The actions of the Republicans in both houses of Congress have been reprehensible. They deserve to be marginalized and have little say in the guiding of legislation and governmental policy - until they reverse course and stop following the INSANE Q'Anon led bull$#!+ that is being spouted by those who have become the most influential in the party. They have put the Republican party ABOVE democracy itself. I hate to say it, but they deserve anything and everything they get as a result. Great points, but I'm sure we'll get historical examples like the Spanish Armada, the Great Schism, Henry Ford and dinosaurs.
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Feb 15, 2021 15:14:54 GMT -8
Glad to oblige. So long as we have one party will enact laws that import mass poverty at the expense of the middle class, empower Teachers Unions who refuse to serve their paying customers, that kowtows to the Chinese Communist Party (thus allowing perpetual unfair trade practices and to stifle criticism for human rights violations or failure to act responsibly at the outbreak of the Corona Virus (~to do so is Xenophobic and racist, you know!)), voice support for extraordinarily stupid policies like defunding the police, proposes to cripple our economy with green laws all while simultaneously allowing China and India to increase carbon emissions, keeps National Guard troops, concertina wire & steel barricades as props around the Capital in an effort to convey that all previous Trump Voters are deranged & dangerous, that wants to unleash lawyers to bankrupt Gun Manufacturers (~ to deny our 2nd Amendment Rights by other means), that kowtows to the terrorist Iranian theocracy, that wants to send troops to fight civil wars in failed Islamic States, that want to pack the Judicial Branch (thus "cancelling" their independence from the other two branches of Government), pushes totalitarian censorship by proxy (see Academia, Social Media, Press, Corporate policies (~Realtors are now told their social media accounts will be watched 24/7, for example)), that enacts rules, regulations, mandates and taxes on business that limits the growth of the economy, that enables entire states to be primarily controlled by Labor Unions, that mocks voting procedures demanding less personal identification than someone buying a beer, that makes out that good people are racists by virtue of their skin color alone, that push government funded and late-term abortion, supports transgender hormone therapy for minors, and eviscerates women's sports with transgender athletes, etc., etc., you will have a demand for an opposition party.
And the demand for someone Trump-esque will not go away as long as these inane policies continue. Reagan was the prototypical Republican and I supported most of his policies including free trade. But since then, the experiment to try and "Westernize" China with their normalization into the Capitalist world economy has created a monster. The corporate and political elite in the US and elsewhere are addicted to their money (or the potential for more of their money) and the long term ramifications of that reality will have to be dealt with or we will soon be dictated to (just like the Chinese are now).
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 15, 2021 15:20:03 GMT -8
Glad to oblige. So long as we have one party will enact laws that import mass poverty at the expense of the middle class, empower Teachers Unions who refuse to serve their paying customers, that kowtows to the Chinese Communist Party (thus allowing perpetual unfair trade practices and to stifle criticism for human rights violations or failure to act responsibly at the outbreak of the Corona Virus (~to do so is Xenophobic and racist, you know!)), voice support for extraordinarily stupid policies like defunding the police, proposes to cripple our economy with green laws all while simultaneously allowing China and India to increase carbon emissions, keeps National Guard troops, concertina wire & steel barricades as props around the Capital in an effort to convey that all previous Trump Voters are deranged & dangerous, that wants to unleash lawyers to bankrupt Gun Manufacturers (~ to deny our 2nd Amendment Rights by other means), that kowtows to the terrorist Iranian theocracy, that wants to send troops to fight civil wars in failed Islamic States, that want to pack the Judicial Branch (thus "cancelling" their independence from the other two branches of Government), pushes totalitarian censorship by proxy (see Academia, Social Media, Press, Corporate policies (~Realtors are now told their social media accounts will be watched 24/7, for example)), that enacts rules, regulations, mandates and taxes on business that limits the growth of the economy, that enables entire states to be primarily controlled by Labor Unions, that mocks voting procedures demanding less personal identification than someone buying a beer, that makes out that good people are racists by virtue of their skin color alone, that push government funded and late-term abortion, supports transgender hormone therapy for minors, and eviscerates women's sports with transgender athletes, etc., etc., you will have a demand for an opposition party. And the demand for someone Trump-esque will not go away as long as these inane policies continue. Reagan was the prototypical Republican and I supported most of his policies including free trade. But since then, the experiment to try and "Westernize" China with their normalization into the Capitalist world economy has created a monster. The corporate and political elite in the US and elsewhere are addicted to their money (or the potential for more of their money) and the long term ramifications of that reality will have to be dealt with or we will soon be dictated to (just like the Chinese are now). Yawn.
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Feb 17, 2021 15:12:55 GMT -8
Glad to oblige. So long as we have one party will enact laws that import mass poverty at the expense of the middle class, empower Teachers Unions who refuse to serve their paying customers, that kowtows to the Chinese Communist Party (thus allowing perpetual unfair trade practices and to stifle criticism for human rights violations or failure to act responsibly at the outbreak of the Corona Virus (~to do so is Xenophobic and racist, you know!)), voice support for extraordinarily stupid policies like defunding the police, proposes to cripple our economy with green laws all while simultaneously allowing China and India to increase carbon emissions, keeps National Guard troops, concertina wire & steel barricades as props around the Capital in an effort to convey that all previous Trump Voters are deranged & dangerous, that wants to unleash lawyers to bankrupt Gun Manufacturers (~ to deny our 2nd Amendment Rights by other means), that kowtows to the terrorist Iranian theocracy, that wants to send troops to fight civil wars in failed Islamic States, that want to pack the Judicial Branch (thus "cancelling" their independence from the other two branches of Government), pushes totalitarian censorship by proxy (see Academia, Social Media, Press, Corporate policies (~Realtors are now told their social media accounts will be watched 24/7, for example)), that enacts rules, regulations, mandates and taxes on business that limits the growth of the economy, that enables entire states to be primarily controlled by Labor Unions, that mocks voting procedures demanding less personal identification than someone buying a beer, that makes out that good people are racists by virtue of their skin color alone, that push government funded and late-term abortion, supports transgender hormone therapy for minors, and eviscerates women's sports with transgender athletes, etc., etc., you will have a demand for an opposition party. And the demand for someone Trump-esque will not go away as long as these inane policies continue. Reagan was the prototypical Republican and I supported most of his policies including free trade. But since then, the experiment to try and "Westernize" China with their normalization into the Capitalist world economy has created a monster. The corporate and political elite in the US and elsewhere are addicted to their money (or the potential for more of their money) and the long term ramifications of that reality will have to be dealt with or we will soon be dictated to (just like the Chinese are now). Yawn. Once again, your unwillingness to answer another poster's response point by point is a strong indication that your argument is weak.
Imagine if in a court trial, after one side has made its case in a detailed manner, the other side responded with "Yawn." I figure whoever had hired that second attorney would demand different legal representation.
AzWm
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 17, 2021 15:27:44 GMT -8
Once again, your unwillingness to answer another poster's response point by point is a strong indication that your argument is weak.
Imagine if in a court trial, after one side has made its case in a detailed manner, the other side responded with "Yawn." I figure whoever had hired that second attorney would demand different legal representation.
AzWm
My unwillingness to answer stupidity is clear when the drum gets banged over and over with unoriginal, hyperbolic takes that don't deserve a response. We get it. The OP has a clear track record on this board of trolling, not giving credit to media bias or established loaded language in clearly off-kilter media. "IDENTITY POLITICS BAD" as the right leans into victimhood, racism and cowardice, tying their kite to Donald Trump. I literally can disagree point by point (Ronald Reagan is awful, for example) but who really cares? Dealing with convoluted opinion that reeks of bias isn't my thing. I asked the OP a while back about getting news from far-right, discredited sources and was told "bias doesn't matter." I tuned out at that point.
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Feb 18, 2021 9:13:42 GMT -8
Once again, your unwillingness to answer another poster's response point by point is a strong indication that your argument is weak.
Imagine if in a court trial, after one side has made its case in a detailed manner, the other side responded with "Yawn." I figure whoever had hired that second attorney would demand different legal representation.
AzWm
My unwillingness to answer stupidity is clear when the drum gets banged over and over with unoriginal, hyperbolic takes that don't deserve a response. We get it. The OP has a clear track record on this board of trolling, not giving credit to media bias or established loaded language in clearly off-kilter media. "IDENTITY POLITICS BAD" as the right leans into victimhood, racism and cowardice, tying their kite to Donald Trump. I literally can disagree point by point (Ronald Reagan is awful, for example) but who really cares? Dealing with convoluted opinion that reeks of bias isn't my thing. I asked the OP a while back about getting news from far-right, discredited sources and was told "bias doesn't matter." I tuned out at that point. Probably not replying because it would be overly difficult with any level of intellectual honesty. Somehow, the "sourcing" that gives us Russian collusion with the Trump Campaign versus the political hit job from the Clinton Campaign/DNC by way of the nation's intelligence and law enforcement agencies, that gives us that the Hunter Biden Laptop discovery as a Russian Disinformation campaign versus evidence of a corrupt political crime family left on a PC abandoned by a dazed and confused drug addict, that gives us a capital policeman murdered with a bludgeoning by a fire extinguisher (at Trump's command if you ask Pelosi) versus a man who died of natural causes - oh wait - bear spray ) is better than the truth itself.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 18, 2021 12:24:58 GMT -8
My unwillingness to answer stupidity is clear when the drum gets banged over and over with unoriginal, hyperbolic takes that don't deserve a response. We get it. The OP has a clear track record on this board of trolling, not giving credit to media bias or established loaded language in clearly off-kilter media. "IDENTITY POLITICS BAD" as the right leans into victimhood, racism and cowardice, tying their kite to Donald Trump. I literally can disagree point by point (Ronald Reagan is awful, for example) but who really cares? Dealing with convoluted opinion that reeks of bias isn't my thing. I asked the OP a while back about getting news from far-right, discredited sources and was told "bias doesn't matter." I tuned out at that point. Probably not replying because it would be overly difficult with any level of intellectual honesty. Somehow, the "sourcing" that gives us Russian collusion with the Trump Campaign versus the political hit job from the Clinton Campaign/DNC by way of the nation's intelligence and law enforcement agencies, that gives us that the Hunter Biden Laptop discovery as a Russian Disinformation campaign versus evidence of a corrupt political crime family left on a PC abandoned by a dazed and confused drug addict, that gives us a capital policeman murdered with a bludgeoning by a fire extinguisher (at Trump's command if you ask Pelosi) versus a man who died of natural causes - oh wait - bear spray ) is better than the truth itself. So you assert that Sicknick died of natural causes?
|
|