Forums > Off-Topic Discussion > Politics - News, Arguments & Suggested Solutions

Photographer

kickfight

Posts: 35024

Portland, Oregon, US

nwprophoto wrote:
how would you describe the behavior of people that have made hundreds (maybe even thousands)  of posts about Trump, The Proud Boys and QAnon for a comparison?

"Just getting started" is how I would describe it. smile

Because maybe an unhinged incompetent orange clown who can't stop lying about losing, and/or neo-fascist white supremacist scum, and/or terrorist thug mobs are, by comparison, just a tad more concerning than some random institutional elite's paper on Chile?

Sep 14 21 10:24 pm Link

Photographer

LightDreams

Posts: 2871

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

nwprophoto wrote:
[...]

Let's be very clear.  The immediate problem wasn't your constant posting suggesting it was "Biden's inflation", it was your brazen denial on something that we all know that you've REPEATEDLY harped on

Yes, anyone that isn't painfully aware of your history, might have been tempted to take what you say at face value.

NOW people have some more information WHEN THEY CONSIDER THE CREDIBILITY OF YOUR VARIOUS CLAIMS.  And that, I thought, might be worth a few minutes, because there are simply too many people out there who have been badly taken advantage of.  People who mistakenly believe (in many cases) deliberate falsehoods that result in tremendous damage (Covid vaccinations, for example).

Your pattern of trying to sidetrack discussions into wasted time on long semantic arguments, other long drawn out arguments which you conclude by suggesting you never actually believed it anyway, or trivial side issues like (for example) "The Cato Institute" and "the fall of Chile", is quite clear.

Are you making positive, or even useful, thought provoking contributions?   THAT'S another matter entirely.

What your motives are, or what you personally get out of this repeated pattern of behavior, I don't pretend to know.  But your actions are your actions.  And when people are more aware of your history (they will come to their own conclusions, whatever those conclusions may be), it may prove quite useful to them when considering your posts.

Sep 14 21 10:26 pm Link

Photographer

rfordphotos

Posts: 8396

Antioch, California, US

nwprophoto wrote:
[...]
Newsom going to get recalled tomorrow?
What's the latest?

It should be noted that these early results (the polls only closed a little more than two hours ago) reflect mostly mail in ballots (mostly democratic voters)--- in person ballots (mostly republican voters) are expected to lean more towards recalling Newsom.

early results.

"Shall Governor Newsom be recalled?"

Statewide Results
56.5% (10,274 of 18,185) precincts reporting as of September 14, 2021, 10:35 p.m.

         Votes                %
Yes    2,874,755    33.9%
No     5,592,942    66.1%

----  https://electionresults.sos.ca.gov/retu … nor-recall

Sep 14 21 10:52 pm Link

Photographer

rfordphotos

Posts: 8396

Antioch, California, US

nwprophoto wrote:
[...]
Newsom going to get recalled tomorrow?
What's the latest?

"Shall Governor Newsom be recalled?"

Statewide Results
100.0% (18,185 of 18,185) precincts reporting as of September 15, 2021, 2:55 a.m.

             Votes            %
Yes      3,297,145   36.1%
No       5,840,283   63.9%

----  https://electionresults.sos.ca.gov/retu … nor-recall

Sep 15 21 03:45 am Link

Clothing Designer

Baanthai

Posts: 1177

Bangkok, Bangkok, Thailand

rfordphotos wrote:
"Shall Governor Newsom be recalled?"

Statewide Results
100.0% (18,185 of 18,185) precincts reporting as of September 15, 2021, 2:55 a.m.

             Votes            %
Yes      3,297,145   36.1%
No       5,840,283   63.9%

----  https://electionresults.sos.ca.gov/retu … nor-recall

It was a crushing defeat for California Republicans, Trumpism and Larry “the Sage of South Central” Elder. Elder spouted a ridiculous fantasy this morning claiming “I have now become a political force here in CA….And I’m not going to leave the stage.” Promises Promises. Please do stick around Larry as you make a great Republican/Trump punching bag.

Sep 15 21 07:16 am Link

Photographer

63fotos

Posts: 469

Alhambra, California, US

Baanthai wrote:
It was a crushing defeat for California Republicans, Trumpism and Larry “the Sage of South Central” Elder. Elder spouted a ridiculous fantasy this morning claiming “I have now become a political force here in CA….And I’m not going to leave the stage.” Promises Promises. Please do stick around Larry as you make a great Republican/Trump punching bag.

Newsom received more votes in three Orange County congressional seats that flipped from red to blue, in 2018, and back to red, in 2020, than he did in 2018.
Republicans who hope to take back the house may want to stop counting their chickens.

Sep 15 21 07:53 am Link

Photographer

63fotos

Posts: 469

Alhambra, California, US

In his memoirs, Pinochet said that he was the leading plotter of the coup and had used his position as commander-in-chief of the Army to coordinate a far-reaching scheme with the other two branches of the military and the national police.[citation needed] In later years, however, high military officials from the time have said that Pinochet reluctantly became involved only a few days before the coup was scheduled to occur, and followed the lead of the other branches (especially the Navy, under Merino) as they executed the coup.[citation needed]

The new government rounded up thousands of people and held them in the national stadium, where many were killed. This was followed by brutal repression during Pinochet's rule, during which approximately 3,000 people were killed, while more than 1,000 are still missing

A coup backed by the CIA because, you know, Allende. . . .

Sep 15 21 08:00 am Link

Photographer

63fotos

Posts: 469

Alhambra, California, US

nwprophoto wrote:
how would you describe the behavior of people that have made hundreds (maybe even thousands)  of posts about Trump, The Proud Boys and QAnon for a comparison?

How would you describe people who blindly follow the musings of trump to their own detriment?

Sep 15 21 08:03 am Link

Photographer

LightDreams

Posts: 2871

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Yes, Newsom had a slightly bigger landslide than his last "landslide" election...

Republicans managed to steal "defeat" from "the jaws of victory".

As one political pundit described it, it outlines a clear problem for the current version of the Republican Party.   They have to grow their party base and, instead, they're shrinking it.

He suggested that approximately one third of the country is in an alternate reality news bubble.  Where they are convinced that Covid vaccines and masking is bad, the elections are being stolen from Republicans and, as a result, Democracy isn't really all that important under the "circumstances" (at least based on the info they're being fed).

The result of that is that the Republican base DEMAND ultra extreme "Trumpist" style candidates or the base won't support them.  Naturally, by definition, those same beliefs alienate the swing voters that you need to win.

Newsom WAS LOSING this campaign.  And then it became about comparing his pandemic policies to how it was being handled by "correct Republicans" (at least to the Republican base).  I.E.  Florida and Texas, etc.   Keep in mind that even 40% of Republicans disagree with how Florida and Texas are handling Covid along with the mask mandates.  And those Governors have even been losing support in their own states.

So reality started setting in for the voters.  It wasn't a referendum on Newsom, but they actually had to make a CHOICE.  And Republicans sabotaged themselves, going with the current "extreme" views of what you have to do and say to represent the "Trump Republican" base.  Naturally, that cost them the referendum.

Thus the mass moves to change the various state voting rules around the country, etc.  Anything to try and retain power.  The remaining Republican Party is smaller than ever, but much more militant than ever.   And you normally can't win power that way.

Quite a quandary for the Republican powers that be.

Sep 15 21 11:14 am Link

Photographer

LightDreams

Posts: 2871

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Some highlights from a new CNN / SRSS poll:

- 51% say it is likely that elected officials in the US will successfully overturn the results of a future election because their party did not win

- 93% total say that democracy is either under attack (56%) or being tested but not under attack (37%)

- 6% say that American democracy is in no danger


and on a side note (related to the "alternate news bubble" that I mentioned earlier)...

- 36% (a little more than one third) of Americans believe that President Joe Biden did not legitimately get enough votes to win the presidency

Sep 15 21 02:07 pm Link

Photographer

Ken Marcus Studios

Posts: 9305

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

LightDreams wrote:
36% (a little more than one third) of Americans believe that President Joe Biden did not legitimately get enough votes to win the presidency

That's good . . . the percentage of Republicans believing that crap has dropped from almost 50% nine months ago !

I wonder how many of them died from Covid ??

Sep 15 21 02:47 pm Link

Photographer

nwprophoto

Posts: 14933

Tonasket, Washington, US

LightDreams wrote:
Your pattern of trying to sidetrack discussions into wasted time on long semantic arguments, other long drawn out arguments which you conclude by suggesting you never actually believed it anyway, or trivial side issues like (for example) "The Cato Institute" and "the fall of Chile", is quite clear.

Are you making positive, or even useful, thought provoking contributions?   THAT'S another matter entirely.

I found Dr. Kaiser's paper interesting and relevant. If others did not that is fine.

Dr. Peter Boghossian resignation from Portland State University has been in the news since last week
so I thought it relevant to this conversation. I have followed Dr.Boghossian off and on since the Sokol Squared/
Grievance Studies came out several years back that were a major embarrassment to some.

I do not not know what your education was like but these two paragraphs from Dr. Boghossian's
resignation letter are a reflection of mine. I highly encourage people to read the entire resignation letter.

https://peterboghossian.com/my-resignation-letter

"I invited those speakers not because I agreed with their worldviews, but primarily because I didn’t. From those messy and difficult conversations, I’ve seen the best of what our students can achieve: questioning beliefs while respecting believers; staying even-tempered in challenging circumstances; and even changing their minds. "

"I never once believed —  nor do I now —  that the purpose of instruction was to lead my students to a particular conclusion. Rather, I sought to create the conditions for rigorous thought; to help them gain the tools to hunt and furrow for their own conclusions. This is why I became a teacher and why I love teaching."

Sep 15 21 07:31 pm Link

Photographer

nwprophoto

Posts: 14933

Tonasket, Washington, US

63fotos wrote:
How would you describe people who blindly follow the musings of trump to their own detriment?

It is described as 'Self Destructive Behavior".
From my reading there is some correlation with childhood trauma.

Sep 15 21 07:35 pm Link

Photographer

LightDreams

Posts: 2871

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

nwprophoto wrote:
I found Dr. Kaiser's paper interesting and relevant. If others did not that is fine.

If you believe something, it is relevant, important, and you can make a serious case for it, GREAT!!!

Please don't confuse that with long drawn out arguments about semantics, or long arguments that you wrap up by saying you never believed it anyway, or IMHO even trying to draw people into debates about "the fall of Chile" (will people really find it that relevant?).

Personally, I'm suggesting that there's a difference.  The first approach can be quite useful, while the latter approach, well...

If you're not sure about the difference, just consider that scourge of the Internet, Trolls.

They often don't believe what they say, they don't care if it's relevant or useful, the argument points aren't serious or on point, and they seem to be driven by a strange psychological need to just cause anger or havoc, and to get as much attention as possible.  Their purpose in posting something is fundamentally different.  So that's always a great checklist of things to avoid.

Looking forward (hopefully) to some of the former.  I.E.  You believe it, it's important, it's quite relevant and you can make a serious case for it.  As I said before, that would be GREAT!!!

Sep 15 21 08:20 pm Link

Artist/Painter

Hunter GWPB

Posts: 6481

King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, US

nwprophoto wrote:
... these two paragraphs from Dr. Boghossian's resignation letter are a reflection of mine. I highly encourage people to read the entire resignation letter.

https://peterboghossian.com/my-resignation-letter

"I invited those speakers not because I agreed with their worldviews, but primarily because I didn’t. From those messy and difficult conversations, I’ve seen the best of what our students can achieve: questioning beliefs while respecting believers; staying even-tempered in challenging circumstances; and even changing their minds. "

"I never once believed —  nor do I now —  that the purpose of instruction was to lead my students to a particular conclusion. Rather, I sought to create the conditions for rigorous thought; to help them gain the tools to hunt and furrow for their own conclusions. This is why I became a teacher and why I love teaching."

Do understand that your behavior is in conflict with this claim?  You do not have conversations here with people because their world view is different and important and should be heard.  You do not listen to those that have different views.  You have not given anyone a forum to have a discussion with you so that anyone can question "beliefs while respecting believers; staying even-tempered in challenging circumstances; and even changing their minds."  You have been given ample reasons to question your own beliefs, not only from the rational arguments and facts presented by those with different ideologies, but the very people driving the anger in the nation have shown you their hearts and you do not question the conflicts between their stated beliefs nd their real life actions.

This may be the first post you made in either of these threads that was not belittling, dismissive, trolling and argumentative.  Yet it is still condescending, and right up to this post, you have refused to engage in civil conversation, instead you chose to tout lies, and dismiss others with quips, rhetoric and hostility.  You have brought chaos, because that is what you thrive on.  These have been messy conservations, but not difficult.  The conversations have been messy not because of intellectual exchanges through discourse granting each other the opportunity to discuss views with reason and respect.  The conversation has been messy because you have filled your spaces with lies and quips to get a rise and an argument.  You set the tone in your posts and you turned away from changing the tone at every opportunity.

Prove you are capable of questioning your own beliefs while respecting other believers; staying even-tempered in challenging circumstances.   

If these two paragraphs reflect what you believe, you do NOT live a life that is true to your beliefs, at least not here.  Why then, would we believe you do elsewhere?

Sep 15 21 09:16 pm Link

Photographer

kickfight

Posts: 35024

Portland, Oregon, US

nwprophoto wrote:
Dr. Peter Boghossian resignation from Portland State University has been in the news since last week
so I thought it relevant to this conversation. I have followed Dr.Boghossian off and on since the Sokol Squared/
Grievance Studies came out several years back that were a major embarrassment to some.

Huge fan of Dr. Boghossian, especially his development of street epistemology. Had the pleasure of meeting him at a skeptics conference, and we spent some time in conversation. Brilliant mind, and with a wonderfully-mordant sense of humor. PSU has lost a great resource.

Sep 15 21 10:02 pm Link

Photographer

nwprophoto

Posts: 14933

Tonasket, Washington, US

LightDreams wrote:
Please don't confuse that with long drawn out arguments about semantics, or long arguments that you wrap up by saying you never believed it anyway, or IMHO even trying to draw people into debates about "the fall of Chile" (will people really find it that relevant?).

Your perception is different than mine and I will leave it at that.

Sep 15 21 10:14 pm Link

Photographer

nwprophoto

Posts: 14933

Tonasket, Washington, US

Hunter  GWPB wrote:
"beliefs while respecting believers; staying even-tempered in challenging circumstances; and even changing their minds."  n challenging circumstances.

I do have a hard time responding to red herring arguments, straw man arguments, ad hominem attacks,
gaslighting and binary thinking. Can't imagine why.
If you want to bring up the subject of respect how about someone who refers to rural Americans as cows voting?

Sep 15 21 10:14 pm Link

Photographer

nwprophoto

Posts: 14933

Tonasket, Washington, US

kickfight wrote:
Huge fan of Dr. Boghossian, especially his development of street epistemology. Had the pleasure of meeting him at a skeptics conference, and we spent some time in conversation. Brilliant mind, and with a wonderfully-mordant sense of humor. PSU has lost a great resource.

I agree.

Sep 15 21 10:15 pm Link

Photographer

kickfight

Posts: 35024

Portland, Oregon, US

nwprophoto wrote:
I do have a hard time responding to red herring arguments, straw man arguments, ad hominem attacks,
gaslighting and binary thinking. Can't imagine why

Imagine then what it's like to endure constant fallacious arguments, deliberate digression as cheap avoidance tactic, fake-victim posturing, condescending passive-aggressive snobbery, clumsy high-horse dressage, unary thinking, and yes, ad hominem attacks. People living in glass houses, etc.

nwprophoto wrote:
If you want to bring up the subject of respect how about someone who refers to rural Americans as cows voting?

Please tell me you're not talking about thisroll

Sep 15 21 10:35 pm Link

Artist/Painter

Hunter GWPB

Posts: 6481

King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, US

nwprophoto wrote:
I do have a hard time responding to red herring arguments, straw man arguments, ad hominem attacks,
gaslighting and binary thinking. Can't imagine why.
If you want to bring up the subject of respect how about someone who refers to rural Americans as cows voting?

Your arguments are Red Herrings, straw man arguments and gas lighting.  Constantly.  As you just demonstrated.  If I said, something akin to "rural Americans are like cows voting,' then please link it.  Since, I grew up on farms, (shoveled plenty of real manure as opposed to the shit you shovel) and would return to a farm in heart beat; my first degree was in agriculture sciences; I worked for a long time in agricultural support; my clients are often rural people-  I doubt that it was a statement I made.  For you to insulate that the statement is attributable to me or others falsely and then use it as a justification for your belligerent posting behavior (back years ago) to address everyone that has opposing points of view, says a lot about your Red Herring, straw man arguments and outright lying.

My comments to you are directly related to your posts.  You opened the door to an evaluation of your posting behavior when you hypocritically and self-aggrandized yourself as being described by those two paragraphs.  Once again, you improperly claim  the attributes of a victim of ad hominem attacks when your stated philosophy would demand that you do no such thing.

Why shouldn't your hypocritical attitudes and posting behavior be valid counter arguments?  Was your post a claim of taking the high road when you do anything but take the high road?  What difference does it make if someone tells you rural Americans are like cows voting?  According to the paragraphs you quoted, you said that it is important to you to "staying even-tempered in challenging circumstances."  Yet you just demonstrated and admitted that you do not.  If those paragraphs were your beliefs, then your posting behavior would not be the center of attention, rather than philosophies, ides or opinions.   If these two paragraphs reflect what you believe,, then you should overcome "a hard time responding"  and respond according to your life philosophies.   No.  I think your standard posting behavior is an example of your life philosophies.  If it isn't, then it is about time you demonstrated what your life philosophies are and apologize for what you have been doing.

Furthermore, you proved me right when I said, "you turned away from changing the tone at every opportunity."   You just had the opportunity to change the tone and you did not.  You immediately went back to the behavior that you have consistently displayed.

nwprophoto wrote:
Yes, I have posted it twice. If you consider that obsessive how would you describe the behavior of people
that have made hundreds (maybe even thousands)  of posts about Trump, The Proud Boys and QAnon
for a comparison?

^^^^ A demonstration of your Red Herrings and straw man arguments and that you dismiss rather than hear opposing views.  How many times have you posted the same sentiments as this?  How many times have you dismissed what other people say, as being irrelevant because they have brought up QAnon, trump, or the Proud Boys?  By your definition, wasn't the above comment of yours an ad hominem attack against everyone that disagrees with your ideologies?

Some people discuss news and legitimate stories- including past and present threats to the nation, i.e.: trump, right wing extremists like the Proud Boys and the delusional QAnon followers.  Do some of these same people need to use the most stupid defections like "BlueAnon" because they don't have any factual information to work with to counter legitimate arguments?  Is that why you quickly classify so much as Marxism and claim that legitimate topics in current news cycles are "obsessions?"   

The group of people that "have made hundreds (maybe even thousands)  of posts about" about vague threats of Marxist and liberal boogie men, posts that express nothing other than an irrational attempt to control through fear?  Or perhaps it is a reveal that they themselves are controlled by fear?  What does it say about people that fear ideologies?  What does it say about their own faith in the system they promote?

Exaggerations are another method of lying.  i.e..: "people that have made hundreds (maybe even thousands)  of posts Trump, The Proud Boys and QAnon "

Sep 16 21 02:18 am Link

Photographer

rfordphotos

Posts: 8396

Antioch, California, US

just for our fine friend, nwprophoto... I know he soooo looks forward to these articles... LOL
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Second alleged Oath Keeper in largest Capitol riot conspiracy case pleads guilty and will cooperate

By Spencer S. Hsu
Yesterday at 7:41 p.m. EDT
----  https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/le … story.html

A 20-year Marine veteran and former marksmanship instructor from Florida became the second defendant in the largest Jan. 6 Oath Keepers conspiracy case to plead guilty and agree to cooperate fully with prosecutors in hopes of reducing his prison term.

Jason Dolan, 45, of Wellington, Fla., admitted Wednesday to two federal counts of conspiracy and aiding and abetting the obstruction of Congress as it met to confirm President Biden’s 2020 election win, felonies punishable by up to 20 years in prison.

In a plea deal with prosecutors, both sides agreed that Dolan, who has no prior convictions, could face 63 to 78 months under advisory federal sentencing guidelines. However, the government agreed to request a lower term at sentencing in exchange for his “substantial assistance.”

Dolan, a former security guard at the Four Seasons resort in Palm Beach, was the second of 18 alleged associates of the extremist anti-government group charged in a single indictment in the assault on the U.S. Capitol to plead guilty, following Graydon Young, 55, of Englewood, Fla.

In plea papers, Dolan admitted being among a group that forced entry through the Capitol’s East Rotunda doors after marching single file in a stack up the steps wearing camouflage vests, helmets, goggles and Oath Keepers insignia. He acknowledged bringing a rifle to Washington with others in the group who were stashing weapons beforehand at a Ballston hotel in case a “Quick Reaction Force” was needed.

Dolan was charged on May 27 with five counts, including rioting and destruction of federal property. Prosecutors agreed under the deal to dismiss the three other charges.

[...]

Sep 16 21 05:49 am Link

Photographer

LightDreams

Posts: 2871

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Trump being interviewed by Sean Spicer on NewsMax...

The US “has gone really downhill in the last eight months like nobody has ever seen before”

“[If we] go to these elections coming up in ‘22 and ‘24, we are not going to have a country left,” he said, falsely claiming that the 2020 election “was rigged” and “we are not gonna have a country left in three years”.

Sean Spicer quickly but politely shut down the interview (NewsMax is facing a $1.6 Billion lawsuit over their claims of rigged elections supposedly involving Dominion Voting Systems).  That and it sounded suspiciously like Trump might be suggesting that something should be done BEFORE these 2022 and 2024 elections, when there will be "no more country left".  But Spicer wisely decided he'd better end the interview.


Oh, and by the way.  According to Trump "Of course, Obama is probably running the government now according to many".   Maybe it's supposed to be Obama that secretly controls the mythical "mute button" they control Joe Biden with.  Hah!

Not quite sure what made Obama change his stance on Afghanistan though.  But yeah I know.  Those are nothing but annoying little details...

---

Yes, there are some that can't understand why Trump keeps coming up in this thread.   It's not like he ever, you know, says or does anything that people should ever be concerned about.   What was that poll number again?  6% of American's DON'T think their democracy is at risk??

Sep 16 21 10:32 pm Link

Photographer

LightDreams

Posts: 2871

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Re:  Saturday's scheduled Capitol Building protest.

Various news channels are reporting that the fringe online boards where these people communicate, are now spreading warnings NOT TO ATTEND because, they apparently now believe that it may be "a 'False Flag' operation to lure supporters out into the open", where it's easier for them to all be "rounded up".

I wish, but anyway...

Instead, they're apparently discussing using the date to vandalize / deface certain targets (as expressions of their hate), that may be located in their particular communities.

Who knows what tomorrow will actually bring (or not bring), but we'll find out soon enough.

Sep 17 21 12:35 pm Link

Photographer

nwprophoto

Posts: 14933

Tonasket, Washington, US

nwprophoto wrote:
Newsom going to get recalled tomorrow?

63fotos wrote:
I don’t think so.

Sounds like most Californians are happy with the status quo of regressive taxes
and a hostile business environment.

Next week should be interesting for Canada with their snap election.
Had a cruddy day for weather so I watched an interview with long time Canadian
journalist Rex Murphy. Don't know much about him but he seemed quite articulate, intelligent
and not a Trudeau fan. Learned a little bit about Canadian politics today. According to Mr. Murphy
the Trudeau government has things in common with our progressives such as a pure deontological
approach to most everything and spending taxpayer money like a drunken sailor with no accountability.

Opinion piece by Rex Murphy on Justin Trudeau and the snap election.
Interesting read for the non Canadian..

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/r … ar-AANEjki

"Trudeau hungry for applause and beset by intellectual idleness"

"When you waste your time with foolishness, irrational fads and pseudo-causes, when you continually diagnose your own country as a cauldron of racism and colonialism, tear down the statues of heroes and founders, virtue-signal at volume ten over your feminism, deride blue collar workers, hail your greatest industry as a “planet destroyer,” it comes as no surprise that you pile on just one more silly, vain pretense, i.e., that suddenly everyone in Canada wants an election called in mid-August. During the very period, no less, when every citizen in the country has a stockpile of mouth-and-nose guards and are standing six-feet apart every time they go out to buy a loaf of bread and toilet tissue. "

Sep 17 21 05:25 pm Link

Photographer

nwprophoto

Posts: 14933

Tonasket, Washington, US

LightDreams wrote:
6% of American's DON'T think their democracy is at risk??

Speaking of which Jonathon Turley came out with a new column titled

"The New Federalist Party: Biden Move Forward With the Greatest Federalization Push Since Adams"

He also discusses some of the Biden moves he sees as clearly unconstitutional.
If you want think in terms of pervasive threat to our democracy how about you openly
admit you are violating the constitution?

https://jonathanturley.org/2021/09/13/t … nce-adams/

"From abortions to elections to rents, Biden is seeking to federalize huge areas to displace state law. Not since John Adams and his Federalist Party has the country faced such a fundamental challenge to our system of federalism. "

"Some of the claims made by Biden recently would make even Adams blush. What is most striking about these claims is that Biden and his aides have indicated that they know they are operating outside of constitutional limits."

Sep 17 21 05:26 pm Link

Photographer

rfordphotos

Posts: 8396

Antioch, California, US

nwprophoto wrote:
Newsom going to get recalled tomorrow?

63fotos wrote:
I don’t think so.

nwprophoto wrote:
Sounds like most Californians are happy with the status quo of regressive taxes
and a hostile business environment.

Or, even more likely, they dont agree with your biased assessment of the conditions in California. By a LARGE voter margin.

Sep 17 21 05:49 pm Link

Photographer

rfordphotos

Posts: 8396

Antioch, California, US

Can someone help me understand why the French have their panties all in a twist?

It looks to me as though they are pissed that they lost a 66 Billion dollar paycheck. 

It is generally acknowledged that the French diesel submarines- good as they may have been- were simply not adequate in the face of the growing sophistication of the Chinese Navy threat in the Indo-Pacific.

They also seem angry that their influence in the Indo-Pacific has been shown to be less important than they felt it should be.

Recalling their ambassadors looks like a petulant--- and very political act. Macron is facing a difficult election challenge from the right and he needed to act like French honor had been besmirched to placate the ultra-right.

Or have I got it all wrong?

Sep 17 21 05:55 pm Link

Photographer

LightDreams

Posts: 2871

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

nwprophoto wrote:
(re:  Jonathon Turley, Rex Murphy (in Canada), etc)

Hilarious!  Your knowledge of Canadian politics is only matched by your understanding of what happened in the California landslide vote.

And, in terms that I think you will understand, Rex Murphy is about as independently credible as Jonathon Turley.  Really!

Yes we all know Jonathon Turley is one of those constant (over and over) themes of yours.  But in fairness, YOU take him seriously so please feel free to take Rex Murphy just as seriously.  That's your right.   Although I keep getting the feeling that your preparing to gloat about what you think will happen in Canada, in exactly the same way that you seemed to be preparing before the California vote.

But then again, I'm never quite sure if you even believe anything you say, or whether you just keep throwing anything out there that you hope will get a reaction.  Whatever makes you happy.

And please feel free to believe whatever you like about Canadian politics.  Like California, it won't make a damn bit of difference.

Sep 17 21 06:05 pm Link

Artist/Painter

Hunter GWPB

Posts: 6481

King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, US

nwprophoto wrote:
"The New Federalist Party: Biden Move Forward With the Greatest Federalization Push Since Adams"

It is easy to make claims when you don't support them.  That doesn't make them true.  But, good of you to play the hyperbole card.

What is federalism?  "Federalism is a mixed or compound mode of government that combines a general government with regional governments in a single political system. It can thus be defined as a form of government in which powers are divided between two levels of government of equal status?"    How is it that you and the racist wannabes you favor get to decide what the mix of the power of the government should be?  Is it because you favor the view that the Supreme Court that rules according to your ideological bent is ruling correctly and therefore constitutionally?  And when they don't rule in favor of your bent then it is unconstitutional?  You apply subjective criteria to the laws of the country, pick and chose which laws you will follow and whine incessantly about what you don't like?  Only rarely presenting logical arguments to support your beliefs?

nwprophoto wrote:
He also discusses some of the Biden moves he sees as clearly unconstitutional.
If you want think in terms of pervasive threat to our democracy how about you openly
admit you are violating the constitution?

It is easy to make claims when you don't support them.  That doesn't make them true.  However, you do seem to accept that politicians can make moves that are clearly unconstitutional when it is Republicans making the moves and and creating the pervasive threats  to our democracy.  How about you openly admit that your ideological side is violating the Constitution.

nwprophoto wrote:
"From abortions to elections to rents, Biden is seeking to federalize huge areas to displace state law. Not since John Adams and his Federalist Party has the country faced such a fundamental challenge to our system of federalism. "

And the Republicans aren't?  The statement, "Not since John Adams ..." is nothing but hyperbole.  If you don't think so, support it.  Which you didn't do and are unlikely to do.

nwprophoto wrote:
"Some of the claims made by Biden recently would make even Adams blush. What is most striking about these claims is that Biden and his aides have indicated that they know they are operating outside of constitutional limits."

Well, that is more hyperbole and I have to think that trump's and Republican's efforts to undermine democracy for the benefit of the rich and to disenfranchise the people, would enrage John Adams.  There.  Proved you wrong with more hyperbole. 

What don't you try to make credible posts?

Sep 17 21 06:35 pm Link

Photographer

LightDreams

Posts: 2871

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

rfordphotos wrote:
Can someone help me understand why the French have their panties all in a twist?

It looks to me as though they are pissed that they lost a 66 Billion dollar paycheck. 
[...]

Basically, you've got it.   A $66 Billion dollar French submarine sale is a LOT.

Though there is more to it.  It's a fundamental shift by the Biden administration that believes that China's expansionist moves in the region (including very aggressive tactics against countries in the region that dare to speak negatively about some of China's moves) now make it the world's next big "hotspot".  It's looking more and more like a new cold war is slowly developing.

In that new worldview, the European defense front against Putin becomes a lower priority.    Also keep in mind that the EU has made clear that they aren't comfortable with the anti-China partnerships that the U.S. has been trying to build.  They're trying to take a much softer line when it comes to China.   That softer line is something that Australia had previously been trying to do, but they still incurred China's wrath.

So this move says that China expansionist moves is now foreign policy issue number one, which means moving key resources and setting new priorities.  Australia's move was also a massively important change for them as it sounds like it may include future bases there for the Americans.  Plus the EU is also painfully aware that the U.S. is clearly shifting their "first priority" away from that front.

One analysis that I read suggested that, under the circumstances considering the U.S. priority shift, nothing was going to save the French submarine deal.  But for them to lose that big of a deal AND realize that the EU "front" was no longer the Americans first priority, must have been quite a double blow.

The U.K. has moved their new Aircraft Carrier into the region, and is playing to the U.S. by refusing to say that they won't get militarily involved in any Chinese Taiwan battle.  By the way, the U.S. also has a major summit coming up with Japan and India.  The U.S. has arranged it and the topic is also China.  Things are changing pretty quickly...

Sep 17 21 06:42 pm Link

Artist/Painter

Hunter GWPB

Posts: 6481

King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, US

nwprophoto wrote:
Sounds like most Californians are happy with the status quo of regressive taxes
and a hostile business environment.

You missed another opportunity to ascend to the lofty ideals of "questioning beliefs while respecting believers; staying even-tempered in challenging circumstances."  How does that belligerent statement that you made show any respect for the people that don't come to the same conclusions as you?  You automatically assume that they must like what you abhor?  There is no possibility that they abhor the unethical, fascist leanings of the right more than they are burdened by taxes and regulations?  You dismiss the possibility that other people understand that no one is free if individual freedoms outweigh the common good?   You dismiss the possibility that people are willing to pay for their freedom and protect their quality of life by recognizing that some people need regulations and enforcement of those regulations, less they harm their neighbors and future generations?

It is clear to me that the good people of California exercised their constitutional right to vote and overwhelmingly selected the scenario in which their pursuit of freedom and happiness would be best served, so that you are aghast that a minority of blind zealots didn't get their way.  Or, are you are just too petulant and anti-American to accept their choice? 

Your comments about repressive taxes and hostile business environments have been shown to be bunk.  You haven't supported the broad claim, you simply flail your arms and appeal to the fear reflex.  Besides, as you have said, if people don't like it in California, they can move their business to another state- even one where their employees don't want to live.

Sep 17 21 06:56 pm Link

Photographer

LightDreams

Posts: 2871

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Hunter  GWPB wrote:
You missed another opportunity to ascend to the lofty ideals of "questioning beliefs while respecting believers; staying even-tempered in challenging circumstances."
[...]

He was given every opportunity to demonstrate that he wasn't trolling / deliberately trying to provoke people with his posts.  I.E.  That he didn't just feed off getting people to react / pay attention to him.   In his first major post after that specific discussion, he's made what he thinks of those suggestions, VERY clear.

Under the circumstances, I figure just treat him accordingly.  And don't get particularly concerned as it's hard to believe that anyone is still taking his posts seriously.

Sep 17 21 07:05 pm Link

Photographer

kickfight

Posts: 35024

Portland, Oregon, US

nwprophoto wrote:
Speaking of which Jonathon Turley came out with a new column

He's entitled to his opinion, of course (that's all it always is with Turley... mere opinion)... But it's not even his own opinion, is it? Not when every single one of the links in his "opinion" on his little blog post are Fox News. He serves his masters by churning out the politically correct dogma that will keep the faithful on their knees, which in turn directly serves the MAGA/QAnon agenda... the only ones who truly benefit from any and all right-wing propaganda.

And yet, nobody here is being fooled by any of his screeching and squealing about his "Federalist" neuroses and hallucinating the ghost of John Adams like it's the fucking Babadook or some such nonsense. Again, Turley clearly gets triggered by just about anything that he encounters, and it's that susceptibility to hysteria and alarmism that inevitably reduces him to the state of pitiable crank.

But by all means please do keep posting his screeds, because they are hilariously wacky, and a perfect illustration of the all the symptoms of conservative delusion.

Sep 17 21 07:19 pm Link

Photographer

nwprophoto

Posts: 14933

Tonasket, Washington, US

LightDreams wrote:
Your knowledge of Canadian politics is only matched by your understanding of what happened in the California landslide vote.

You may want to walk back the hautuer of your psychic mind reading abilities, its not working smile

LightDreams wrote:
Hilarious!

LightDreams wrote:
And, in terms that I think you will understand, Rex Murphy is about as independently credible as Jonathon Turley.  Really!

With your previous condescending remarks I thought you are were above the ad hominem attack.

Knowing very little about Canadian politics you might have given some rebuttal to Rex Murphy.
I realize editorial positions are controversial but he does seem to have a large following and had a
one hour TV interview about your election.

Then rather discuss or consider constitutionality or Federalism just turn that into an ad hominem attack too.
Sure you noticed Harvard Law and GWU don't share your opinion of Jonathon Turley.
Kind of interesting why you are so dismissive.

Anyway, your previous post seems to be at odds with what you just posted.
If you don't want to discuss Murphy or Turley why turn in into a personal attack?

Sep 17 21 10:13 pm Link

Photographer

LightDreams

Posts: 2871

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

nwprophoto wrote:
...If you don't want to discuss Murphy or Turley why turn in into a personal attack?

We've REPEATEDLY discussed Turley and his lack of credibility (completely reversing his senate testimony under oath depending on which party was looking at impeachment).  REMEMBER?   Even though you KEEP bringing him up, over and over and over.

No, it's not a matter of not wanting to discuss Murphy or anything else with various forum posters.  But in your case, you've made it perfectly clear how seriously we should all take your posts.

You brought up the the issue of "reasonable discussion". You had a perfect roadmap suggested to you by a number of people (considering your history) as to how to demonstrate that you really aren't just constantly trolling.  And yes, you could've started fresh if you actually did want to participate in serious reasonable debate.   You went remarkably out of your way to demonstrate a flat out rejection of that.  Remember? 

Sorry you don't like it, but why on earth would I keep "feeding you..."  Feel free to claim what you will when people just can't be bothered any more.

Sep 17 21 11:04 pm Link

Artist/Painter

Hunter GWPB

Posts: 6481

King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, US

nwprophoto wrote:
...If you don't want to discuss Murphy or Turley why turn in into a personal attack?

With your previous condescending remarks I thought you are were above the ad hominem attack.

Then rather discuss or consider constitutionality or Federalism

Rex Murphy ... but he does seem to have a large following and had a one hour TV interview about your election.

Sure you noticed Harvard Law and GWU don't share your opinion of Jonathon Turley.

You may want to walk back the hautuer of your psychic mind reading abilities, its not working

-
Prior to accusing me once again of making personal attacks, please reevaluate your previous post and observe that what you posted about is yourself.  Consequently, in addressing your post, one must address your favorite subject.  If you consider my posts to be condescending, I have no reason to offer an apology.

Once again, you demonstrate that you have no idea what a personal attack is.  Donning the victim's suit again?  How many times in your post did you play the victim card?   If you don't like the way you are being treated, then maybe you ought to consider making better posts.  Your empty, unthoughtful, condescending, trolling falsehoods, unsupported conclusions, lies, misrepresentations of your own words and deflections to save face, is tiresome.  A person seeking intellectual discussion can't be obtuse and be taken seriously.

By again using Turley as your source, and evoking his words, you have demonstrated two things AGAIN:  You are incapable or unwilling to present posts that are an evaluation of current events, philosophies, or historical events unless you have been spoon fed the material by biased sources which embrace your world views; and that you are incapable of critically evaluating the reliability of your sources.  It doesn't matter if Harvard and GWU have a relationship with Turley.  That doesn't make him credible.  Those relationships preexisted his flip flop testimony to congress and his fealty to the Republican agenda and the relationships can exist for reasons unrelated to his current myopic adherence to conservative dogma over reason. 

It doesn't matter if Rex Murphy has a large following and a got a one hour TV interview.  Getting interviews is often about ratings, not about being credible.  Clown shows attack attention and advertising dollars.  Lots of pigs, charlatans and crooked people have large followings.  Your assessments of what makes a person credible means that Hillary is far more credible then your guys.  Biden received something around 6 million more votes than trump and at 80 million votes, the highest vote count ever.  Per your logic, that makes him damn credible. 

You don't discuss much regarding federalism or constitutionality.  You make quips; unsupported comments; depend entirely on the words of other people; and trolling, self centered, self serving spurious posts.  That is not participating in a discussion.

Finally, it is hysterical that you want to criticize someone for evaluating your words, in yours posts, as psychic mind reading abilities, after you invoked premonitions of the reactions of John Adams to today's current events!  Those statements and the fact that Turkey stooped to such a low and outlandish level of intellectualism to create a point, should  give you pause enough to reevaluate his credibility.  Is such a charlatan's trick required for a preeminent thinker?

=============

Other Perspectives on Turley:

Source:  "Harvard Civil Rights- Civil Liberties Law Review:
https://harvardcrcl.org/what-can-jonath … istration/
"Turley’s misfire should call our attention to a new conservative tactic – using a crisis that they have thus-far mismanaged to undermine the American people’s confidence in the federal government."

"In conclusion, Turley’s lens – claiming that we should consider which government is best to solve each problem – may be empirically wrong about the response to the pandemic. Beyond that, though, even using his perhaps partisan and misguided lens, we should be able to recognize that this is the worst time for the Trump administration to suspend the long-term administrative actions that must come from the federal government."
=============

https://washingtonmonthly.com/2019/12/0 … an-turley/

"Turley still teaches at GW Law School; he’s the J.B. and Maurice C. Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law. Yesterday, he testified before the House Judiciary Committee as the lone Republican-chosen impeachment expert. Alongside him were three legal scholars picked by the Democrats: Professors Pamela Karlan of Stanford Law School, Michael Gerhardt of the University of North Carolina Law School, and Noah Feldman of Harvard Law School."  [Note the credentials of those he opposed, including a member of Harvard. Why was Turley the only eminent law professor representing Republican talking points?]

"Fast forward to the Trump Administration—and Turley makes himself relevant again. He is now a regular on Fox & Friends, Trump’s favorite morning show. Sure enough, he’s acted often like a cheerleader for the president."

Turley was on "TV as a regular commentator excoriating Bill Clinton over the Monica Lewinsky scandal—when he testified before Congress in support of impeachment."

"“Crime is contagious,” he [Turley] said in his 1998 testimony. “If the Government becomes a lawbreaker; it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.”"  [An opinion reversed for trump.]

"Then, in August 2014, as Republican contemplated impeaching Barack Obama, Turley put his impeachment expert hat on once again. “While there’s a high bar for what constitutes grounds for impeachment,” he wrote in the Washington Post “an offense does not have to be indictable.”"

"Why would Turley dust off failed arguments and put himself in the position of being a Trump defender when he claims he doesn’t agree with or support him? Is it his love of the Constitution? Is it his concern about the overreach of Congressional investigations? Marcus’s 1998 Post piece had an answer. Some of his law school colleagues, she reported, “sniff at his celebrity, saying he has forsaken scholarship for self-aggrandizement.” Indeed, according to Marcus, one faculty member quipped at the time: “If there were the deanship for self-promotion, he’d get it.”

=============

https://theweek.com/speedreads/882276/h … waste-time

"While four constitutional experts spoke to the House Judiciary Committee in its impeachment inquiry on Wednesday, Laurence Tribe, a Harvard Law professor focused on constitutional studies, wasn't happy with what he saw. Specifically, Tribe called out the anti-impeachment witness Republicans had called to the floor for being "an utter waste of time.""

"Jonathan Turley, the George Washington University Professor who argued against impeaching President Trump, "gave no reason at all" that listeners should disregard Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff's (D-Calif.) investigation, Tribe said in a tweet. He then went on to praise Stanford University Law professor Pamela Karlan, who gave a vigorous case for Trump's impeachment."

=============

Edit:
While surely not all eminent lawyers or all of Turley's colleagues would diss Turley, it is apparent that many do.  Yet you question why we would, and you, without hesitation, idolize the man and/or his opinions, without true consideration of the validity of his comments, interpretations and conclusions.

Sep 18 21 02:19 am Link

Photographer

63fotos

Posts: 469

Alhambra, California, US

Sounds like most Californians are happy with the status quo of regressive taxes
and a hostile business environment

I don’t agree with everything Newsom, but I sure as hell wasn’t voting for a radio talk show host.

Note: I find it ironic that conservatives only choice was a black guy who dates a white woman. I thought they didn’t like that sort of thing.

Sep 18 21 08:24 am Link

Photographer

Paolo D Photography

Posts: 11425

San Francisco, California, US

63fotos wrote:
Note: I find it ironic that conservatives only choice was a black guy who dates a white woman. I thought they didn’t like that sort of thing.

perhaps youre perception is inaccurate then.
is your source for that information the comments section of an interracial porn video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3kGVty0dyg

Sep 18 21 10:03 am Link

Artist/Painter

Hunter GWPB

Posts: 6481

King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, US

After today's J6 protest, does anyone here think that the DOJ was swayed to be more lenient with the hoodlums, vandals, rioters, insurrectionists and terrorists of January 6th?

Sep 18 21 03:57 pm Link