Scott A
Well-Known Member
Your whole argument is based on logical fallacies. It really is mind numbing.
Jeb Bush Use to Smoke Marijuana and Sell Hash at Boarding School
- Thread starter DabbedOut33
- Start date
- Status
lwien
Well-Known Member
Big oil and coal lobbyists at work.
Ok, I know what I'm about to say is against forum rules, but I gotta say it anyway. Taking a stance on something but then refusing to engage to defend that stance but still baiting the conversation as you have above and as you have in previous posts, in my opinion, is trolling. I really think that that is what is going on here with you.
Sorry for the back to back posts. Guess I just broke two rules.
Last edited by a moderator:
Scott A
Well-Known Member
I thought it was the repubs who were supposed to be the conspiracy theorists?
Ok, I know what I'm about to say is against forum rules, but I gotta say it anyway. Taking a stance on something but then refusing to engage to defend that stance but still baiting the conversation as you have above and as you have in previous posts, in my opinion, is trolling. I really think that that is what is going on here with you.
Sorry for the back to back posts. Guess I just broke two rules.
To be quite frank with you I would say it is the person who cant make a post that doesnt include a logical fallacy that is the one who is trolling here.
t-dub
Vapor Sloth
Careful @lwien its "Climate Change" now. Anyone who thinks for themselves can see the data has been faked, they have been caught RED HANDED more than once now, and that NONE of the computer models reflect reality, they are all too hot just like the data is always "adjusted" upwards. Add to this the fact that human made CO2 accounts for only .03% of the situation and its game over. The climate has to change, only in Camelot is there climate stasis, the whole thing is ridiculous. Al Gore now wants people who think for themselves punished as well. Its very interesting that the climate models really start to diverge from reality when politics was interjected into the equation around the year 2000. Politics and science do not mix. However debating a subject as complex as this on a forum is a complete waste of time as people, for the most part, will not read the info let alone your entire post. Weather is driven by unequal heating and cooling of the Earth's surface and by that big ball of fire in the sky called the Sun. Will this post change anyones mind who likes to just repeat what other people say? No and its why I won't waste my time with it.
If you can't explain the pause then you don't know the cause.
If you can't explain the pause then you don't know the cause.
Last edited:
lwien
Well-Known Member
We disagree Dub and that's perfectly ok by me. And you're correct. You're not going to change my mind on this and I won't change yours. The difference between you and Scott though is that you will engage a bit to qualify why you feel the way you do, thereby offering up a different perspective for me and others to ponder. Scott on the other hand, would rather just bait the conversation without any qualifying statements and right now, that's my main gripe here.
They couldn't deny "global warming" anymore so now they use the term, "climate change". What's really funny about this how many times reporters on Fox will say that "global warming" does not exist because it's snowing in New York. Of course, the other side will blame every tornado or hurricane on "global warming" which is equally as wrong. No one event can be the cause or not the cause, eh?
They couldn't deny "global warming" anymore so now they use the term, "climate change". What's really funny about this how many times reporters on Fox will say that "global warming" does not exist because it's snowing in New York. Of course, the other side will blame every tornado or hurricane on "global warming" which is equally as wrong. No one event can be the cause or not the cause, eh?
Last edited:
lwien
Well-Known Member
Isn't a Libertarian just a costume that Republicans wear on Halloween?
(Just a joke I just came up with Dub. Please take it as nothing more.....
)
lwien
Well-Known Member
Yeah. The GOP is becoming, or has become, a parody of themselves.
lwien
Well-Known Member
I think it's that "divide and conquer" idiom that is coming into play here because it seems like just about every politician is playing this game and the real losers in this game is us.
t-dub
Vapor Sloth
That is absolutely true in my view as well.
I'm glad that we're able to rise above that here for the most part. Topics like this inevitably cross the line between discussion and heated arguing. That's expected, but please let's respect each other as well as the forum rules. Disagreeing with someone on a subject doesn't mean you have to lose respect for them. If you find yourself angry-typing, step back, take a walk and see if you can find a way to support your claims without getting angry.
To the guy who reported himself for breaking the rules: Knock it off or else.
Gunky
Well-Known Member
Similar to discussion w/ His Highness:
They just aren't trying:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/20/opinion/traitors-to-their-class.html
Giant sucking sound of your money going upward to the 1 percent:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/20/opinion/paul-krugman-trillion-dollar-fraudsters.html
They just aren't trying:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/20/opinion/traitors-to-their-class.html
Giant sucking sound of your money going upward to the 1 percent:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/20/opinion/paul-krugman-trillion-dollar-fraudsters.html
Last edited:
cybrguy
Putin is a War Criminal
It is certainly true that the majority of people who refer to themselves as republican are not extremists. It used to be the VAST majority, but that has changed as more republicans have left the party to avoid being lumped in with the crazies. Some call themselves Libertarians, though most of them don't really get what "real" libertarians positions are. Some call themselves independents. Some eschew any party affiliation at all, even when in fact they retain one. Those who they gave the power to, however, continue to do the nearly irreparable damage that their seats at the adult table allow them to do. Like Inhofe, McConnell and Cruz, and Graham and King they feel no fealty to the rules of conduct or the expectation of civility and compromise that our system of government is based on, and indeed needs to operate properly and for the benefit of it's citizens.
Those that remain "officially" in the party, while they may not themselves be extremists, seem perfectly willing to let the extremists represent and speak for them. They either don't get it or they don't care. Many are so uninvolved that they don't even realize what has happened to their party, and they just continue to do what they have always done, and vote for people who have an R after their name. This last, as stated elsewhere, is not wholly a republican problem.
It has always stunned me how competent republican pols have been in getting their followers to vote against their own interests. Chris Hayes once said "The republican party is a con and their base are the marks", and I believe that to be true. While only a very small portion of Rs, for example, are the very rich, R pols manage to get their rank and file to help them protect all their vast wealth from taxes. They get them to protect the large corporations whose benefits go almost exclusively to the rich from having to pay fair wages, protect the environment, or hide their money overseas so that taxes can be avoided. And even though the majority of rank and file Rs want women to get fair pay and to be left alone when visiting their doctor, want EVERYONE to be allowed to vote unencumbered (understanding that vote fraud is a fantasy), believe in evolution and science (including climate change), want sane gun laws and good competent public schools, they continue to vote for pols who stand for the opposite. Republicans LOVE to take advantage of what they know is an ill-informed electorate, and they do whatever they can to keep it that way. They are their own self-fulfilling prophesy.
I don't know how this get's fixed as it is a very difficult problem. The only solution I can see would be a huge risk for the American people, and I find it hard to imagine they will take it. And that would be to choose Hillary as President, and give both the Senate and the House back to the Democrats. Even if the American people chose that, it would be VERY difficult to make it happen given the gerrymandering that occurred after the 2010 election. The Rs have made it all but impossible for Ds to get the House back even when Ds have more votes, as they did in the last election. It can only happen if the rank and file Rs want to let it happen. Is that even possible? Is there anything we can do?
Those that remain "officially" in the party, while they may not themselves be extremists, seem perfectly willing to let the extremists represent and speak for them. They either don't get it or they don't care. Many are so uninvolved that they don't even realize what has happened to their party, and they just continue to do what they have always done, and vote for people who have an R after their name. This last, as stated elsewhere, is not wholly a republican problem.
It has always stunned me how competent republican pols have been in getting their followers to vote against their own interests. Chris Hayes once said "The republican party is a con and their base are the marks", and I believe that to be true. While only a very small portion of Rs, for example, are the very rich, R pols manage to get their rank and file to help them protect all their vast wealth from taxes. They get them to protect the large corporations whose benefits go almost exclusively to the rich from having to pay fair wages, protect the environment, or hide their money overseas so that taxes can be avoided. And even though the majority of rank and file Rs want women to get fair pay and to be left alone when visiting their doctor, want EVERYONE to be allowed to vote unencumbered (understanding that vote fraud is a fantasy), believe in evolution and science (including climate change), want sane gun laws and good competent public schools, they continue to vote for pols who stand for the opposite. Republicans LOVE to take advantage of what they know is an ill-informed electorate, and they do whatever they can to keep it that way. They are their own self-fulfilling prophesy.
I don't know how this get's fixed as it is a very difficult problem. The only solution I can see would be a huge risk for the American people, and I find it hard to imagine they will take it. And that would be to choose Hillary as President, and give both the Senate and the House back to the Democrats. Even if the American people chose that, it would be VERY difficult to make it happen given the gerrymandering that occurred after the 2010 election. The Rs have made it all but impossible for Ds to get the House back even when Ds have more votes, as they did in the last election. It can only happen if the rank and file Rs want to let it happen. Is that even possible? Is there anything we can do?
lwien
Well-Known Member
It's a generation that just needs to die off, cybr, and I say that even though it is my generation.
What I find really odd though is that we were the WoodStock Generation. We goosed and poured fire on liberalism like never before. Fire, not to destroy it, but to feed it.
We were always against the "establishment", that is, until we became it.
Gunky
Well-Known Member
His_Highness
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king
I think a lot of what happened to the Woodstock folk and the boomers in general is due to fear. When you're young, have no responsibilities to anyone other than yourself and spend most of your time trying to get buzzed and laid .... it doesn't take much courage to be idealistic. Add the requirement to care for a family, yourself as you age, bills and some babies and all of a sudden safety becomes the priority. What confuses me is why idealism, in some cases, was replaced by the need for safety. Can't us old folk be safe and idealistic at the same time?
cybrguy
Putin is a War Criminal
God I hope not. Cause if that is what it takes we are doomed. This country may not last that long.
But here is what happens if the Dems DO take over. In the first 6 months the infrastructure repair begins, allowing any unemployed willing to do construction to find work. That is the roads and the bridges and the water and electrical systems. We start working on highspeed rail in many parts of the country.
MJ is taken off schedule 1 (assuming this hasn't already happened) and states are allowed to do what they like with MJ laws.
Another 6 months or a year in we have repaired the Voting Rights Act, and federally stopped any more attempts to keep people from voting. We start fixing some of the problems with the ACA. Not KILLING it, fixing it. Assault weapons and their ammo get banned. Women begin to see the light at the end of the tunnel and the legislative fight for equal rights and privacy in the doctors office and the bedroom begins.
Comprehensive Immigration reform is passed, including a path to citizenship. Reasonable laws pertaining to political contributions and campaign laws are passed. Citizens united is repealed and burned in effigy. Lobbying laws are made that prevent the revolving door between lobbyists and elected officials.
Probably in her second term, America gets single payer health insurance, for EVEYONE!
These are just some of my political wet dreams that COULD come to fruition with a functioning Democratic (big and little D) government. Anyone wanna play?
I had to kill the picture because it makes me queasy.
It's not a risk for us, we who believe in Democratic ideals. But I'm sure you can see why it is a risk for those others who have been taught that we are reaching into their pocket to take care of a segment of the population that is in trouble and NEEDS our help. If they have the "Pull yourself up" way of looking at the world they may not recognize that many folks just can't DO that. And only after we have helped them and the Country is noticeably better for it will they understand how necessary it was.
It is only with the result of millions of old people not starving to death that we have come, as a nation, to really appreciate social security. And some still don't.
Edit: Oops, I see I double posted. Sorry, I thought someone else had slipped in there. My bad.
Last edited by a moderator:
Chill Dude
Well-Known Member
I don't think repeating what 98% of scientists view as fact to be wrong, as most of us don't have PHDs in the science field. I'm an MBA not a PHD....so yes, I will listen to the experts in the field to help forge my opinion. Global Warming is real and at this point in time any politician that rejects it just appears ignorant in my view.
- Status