…your posts on politics dont really follow any kind of clear path. They meander hopelessly in disjointed roads of word salad. At best your most logical arguments consist of circular reasoning and non sequiturs. Maybe one day.
^ this
This is exactly it. As much as i like your input on the rest of the board your posts on politics dont really follow any kind of clear path.
Well - I’ll leave it up to other impartial commentators here, if they can be found, to decide whether my reasoning is at fault.
I merely wanted to illuminate the hypocrisy of our rulers, and to suggest that their decisions are guided by cold opportunism and geopolitical strategy even when they seem to be grounded in compassion. It’s a great irony that someone like Glenn Greenwald (who left the U.S. originally because of the former illegality of gay marriage) is unable to return to the U.S. and finally marry without being arrested for his reportage on the NSA PRISM program. And that kind of thing shows me that the gov’t priorities are still mass control and intimidation with the occasional overture towards social change.
If I had a “do-over,” I guess I would have avoided the “mission creep” and just stuck with my original observation that gays shouldn’t need to join a bourgeois “normal” society and to get some kind of government imprimatur to validate their culture.
[reply] As much as i like your input on the rest of the board your posts on politics dont really follow any kind of clear path. They meander hopelessly in disjointed roads of word salad. At best your most logical arguments consist of circular reasoning and non sequiturs. Maybe one day.
So, basically, he is an expert on politics.[/reply]
Perhaps if he were running for office word salad and circular reasoning works but thats kinda how you weed out the crap politicians. Doesnt really do much for honest discussion though.
[reply]
This is exactly it. As much as i like your input on the rest of the board your posts on politics dont really follow any kind of clear path.
Well - I’ll leave it up to other impartial commentators here, if they can be found, to decide whether my reasoning is at fault. [/reply][/reply]
With all due respect, I’m not sure there is any logic in your reasoning. “Let them continue to be shit upon to maintain their culture because anything else is making the government stronger and more fascist” That’s the best I can discern from what you post. A culture of oppression is no kind of position in society.
I merely wanted to illuminate the hypocrisy of our rulers, and to suggest that their decisions are guided by cold opportunism and geopolitical strategy even when they seem to be grounded in compassion.
Which you have not done. All you’ve done is allude to dark conspiracies rooted in nothing but paranoia that have nothing to do with the supreme court and their proper ruling.
It’s a great irony that someone like Glenn Greenwald (who left the U.S. originally because of the former illegality of gay marriage) is unable to return to the U.S. and finally marry without being arrested for his reportage on the NSA PRISM program.
You may want to check again. Greenwald is keeping himself out of the country. He has been back to the US to receive awards and such several times with no trouble or threat of arrest. As far as him leaving the US to protest the Governments opposition to gay rights… Never heard of it; just did a search for it too and can’t find anything either. Near as I can tell he left to take jobs with newspapers. US Government is upset with him for giving Snowden a voice on the leaks (While he was at the Guardian)but that’s a fucking million miles away from the supreme court saying gay people can get married.
And that kind of thing shows me that the gov’t priorities are still mass control and intimidation with the occasional overture towards social change.
Again, word salad that some how ends up at social change. You don’t get social change from a mass controlling intimidating government. If that was all they were about there would be no more land mark rulings in civil rights and such it would be what they want and nothing else.
If I had a “do-over,” I guess I would have avoided the “mission creep” and just stuck with my original observation that gays shouldn’t need to join a bourgeois “normal” society and to get some kind of government imprimatur to validate their culture.
Neither should black people or white people or mixed race couples but that is the society we live in and if we are going to entertain it for one we have to for all. So, again, your claims hold no merit. “Your gay culture is cooler without being able to be seen by society” is no kind of conciliation prize. It’s still discrimination.
either that system dramatically scales down its efforts to kill, imprison, and spy on / ‘survey’ everyone that dislikes its policies, or I am always going to view things like the SCOTUS ruling as a bone that is thrown to the populace as it continues with that ugly business as usual.
First off these two things have nothing to do with each other. “as long as my sister is in Jail I’m going to Hate Peggy down the street. Who, incidentally, doesn’t even know my sister or have anything to do with her being in Jail.” Is basically what you just wrote there. They have nothing to do with each other.
“Dramatically scales down its efforts…”, You write as if George W is still in office.
After monitoring this thread a bit I have come to he conclusions that Gumpy argues as though his opinions are facts and if he doesn’t agree with someone elses opinion he quotes it and creates some new opinion-based “gumpy fact” to make it sound like the other person doesn’t know what they are talking about. It is truly a work of art.
[rolleyes]
if only that were true you might be on to something.
[rolleyes]
[reply]After monitoring this thread a bit I have come to he conclusions that Gumpy argues as though his opinions are facts and if he doesn’t agree with someone elses opinion he quotes it and creates some new opinion-based “gumpy fact” to make it sound like the other person doesn’t know what they are talking about. It is truly a work of art.
[rolleyes]
if only that were true you might be on to something.
[rolleyes][/reply]
Smrfy, we can’t reason with Faux News watchers/believers.
[reply][reply]After monitoring this thread a bit I have come to he conclusions that Gumpy argues as though his opinions are facts and if he doesn’t agree with someone elses opinion he quotes it and creates some new opinion-based “gumpy fact” to make it sound like the other person doesn’t know what they are talking about. It is truly a work of art.
[rolleyes]
if only that were true you might be on to something.
[rolleyes][/reply]
Smrfy, we can’t reason with Faux News watchers/believers.[/reply]
I’m optimistic. Although, I’m not convinced Tomasz watches Fox he seems to be well left of it. Pon3 on the other hand, based on prior discussions, yeah, reason and logic are lost the poor guy, Fox has certainly done a number on his common sense. So much so that when he has nothing combat an alternate opinion then he shows up with
Gumpy argues as though his opinions are facts and if he doesn’t agree with someone elses opinion he quotes it and creates some new opinion-based “gumpy fact” to make it sound like the other person doesn’t know what they are talking about. It is truly a work of art.
[reply][reply][reply]After monitoring this thread a bit I have come to he conclusions that Gumpy argues as though his opinions are facts and if he doesn’t agree with someone elses opinion he quotes it and creates some new opinion-based “gumpy fact” to make it sound like the other person doesn’t know what they are talking about. It is truly a work of art.
[rolleyes]
if only that were true you might be on to something.
[rolleyes][/reply]
Smrfy, we can’t reason with Faux News watchers/believers.[/reply]
I’m optimistic. Although, I’m not convinced Tomasz watches Fox he seems to be well left of it. Pon3 on the other hand, based on prior discussions, yeah, reason and logic are lost the poor guy, Fox has certainly done a number on his common sense. So much so that when he has nothing combat an alternate opinion then he shows up with
Gumpy argues as though his opinions are facts and if he doesn’t agree with someone elses opinion he quotes it and creates some new opinion-based “gumpy fact” to make it sound like the other person doesn’t know what they are talking about. It is truly a work of art.
[/reply]
Agreed. Tomasz is to the left to the point of being out on the fringe in most aspects. Other aspects, conspiracy theorist. And still others, idealist.
In the end, people believe what they want to believe.
Alternate realities and all.
Living in The Matrix, red pill or blue pill.
I don’t watch cable news of any sort. My view on life is based on experience through reality.
That’s what all the Fox watchers say.
[reply]I don’t watch cable news of any sort. My view on life is based on experience through reality.
That’s what all the Fox watchers say.[/reply]
Alternate reality
[reply][reply][reply]I don’t watch cable news of any sort. My view on life is based on experience through reality.
That’s what all the Fox watchers say.[/reply]
Alternate reality[/reply]
Maybe I am just smarter than you.[/reply]
Please keep telling yourself that.
[reply][reply][reply]I don’t watch cable news of any sort. My view on life is based on experience through reality.
That’s what all the Fox watchers say.[/reply]
Alternate reality[/reply]
Maybe I am just smarter than you.[/reply]
I suppose that could be, but then, why do you fall for/use the same logical fallacies that all the other brain washed fox morons use?
[reply][reply][reply][reply][reply]I don’t watch cable news of any sort. My view on life is based on experience through reality.
That’s what all the Fox watchers say.[/reply]
Alternate reality[/reply]
Maybe I am just smarter than you.[/reply]
I suppose that could be, but then, why do you fall for/use the same logical fallacies that all the other brain washed fox morons use?[/reply]
Which logical fallacies are those?[/reply]
tell ya’ what, you let me know which “grmpy Facts” I’ve made up and I’ll tell you which fallacies you fall for.
I’ll tell YOU what . . . . show me your wiener and . . . .
Ahhh, screw it. I don’t wanna see your wieners.
Have fun jerking each other off.
I have nothing else to add.
[reply][reply][reply][reply][reply][reply][reply]I don’t watch cable news of any sort. My view on life is based on experience through reality.
That’s what all the Fox watchers say.[/reply]
Alternate reality[/reply]
Maybe I am just smarter than you.[/reply]
I suppose that could be, but then, why do you fall for/use the same logical fallacies that all the other brain washed fox morons use?[/reply]
Which logical fallacies are those?[/reply]
tell ya’ what, you let me know which “grmpy Facts” I’ve made up and I’ll tell you which fallacies you fall for.[/reply]
Too boring.[/reply]
of course. it’s much easier for you to say this shit than to actually have to back it up. Par for your course
Agreed. Tomasz is to the left to the point of being out on the fringe in most aspects. Other aspects, conspiracy theorist. And still others, idealist.
I (surprise!) disagree.
I can’t identify myself as a ‘leftist’, if for no other reason because of leftism’s classic infatuation with ‘work’ and with the silly belief in an ideal “worker’s state” as the endpoint of human history.
These ideas are better explained in Bob Black’s short essay [url http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/bob-black-the-abolition-of-work]“The Abolition of Work,” or in the longer “Anarchy After Leftism.” I generally agree with his definition of labor as “compulsory production,” and agree that is behind much of the worst aspects of 21st century life.
Now, if by leftist you mean “egalitarian,” I’m closer in spirit to that, but, when making judgment calls, I never assume that someone’s status as either a privileged majority or oppressed minority should take precedence over their individual merit.
As to conspiracy theory - well…for the major ‘conspiracies’ like the ‘9-11 inside job’ theory, Hanlon’s Razor explains my stance on all that stuff pretty well (that is, “never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”)
And I’m not sure it’s just naked paranoia that I feel the government does apparently “nice”, ethical things as a means of ‘damage control’ to keep from being criticized for more unpopular actions.
Don’t you think that is a tad bit hypocritical since you dismissed my request by making your request knowing that I wouldn’t have the interest to pursue it?
No. I will if you will
This whole thread is boring.
I know this because I never read it.
I only open it every once in a while to call everyone fags.
Fags.
On the other hand, I do occasionally like [url http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-33518524]being proven wrong about my beliefs that the FedGov is on a permanent war footing.
That one surprised me more than a bit.