patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,260,075 comments by 15,047 users - AmericanKulak, Blue, RandalRay online now
invite response« First « Previous Comments 77 - 116 of 183 Next » Last » Search these comments
77
Patrick
2018 Jun 17, 11:45am
Patrick
2018 Jun 17, 11:45am
Which thread do you mean? You should be able to edit the title of any thread you created.
78
curious2
2018 Jun 20, 2:18pm
curious2
2018 Jun 20, 2:18pm
Patrick says
#MeToo. I remember even signaling virtue by approving of Red Ken's Muslim schools in London, mainly because Margaret Thatcher opposed them. I see now she was right about them.
Many years ago, there was a saying that the further a person is from events, the more likely he is to believe the press coverage; conversely, the nearer to events, the more likely he is to see the errors in the press coverage. I tried to find the exact quotation, but it is buried now under a haystack of recent articles about fake news. BTW, Scott Adams had a really good comment on fake news, balancing outright falsehoods that fool small audiences vs mainstream presentations that are cherry-picked and spun to mislead mass audiences.
In the USA, major parties function similarly to TV networks, aggregating audiences and selling them to corporate sponsors. If you watch the evening "news," you can see a series of misleading stories promoted by public relations firms, interspersed with advertisements for products that would probably make you worse off.
An interesting documentary on the global arms industry included an interview with an arms dealer who said politicians are mostly mid-level sales executives for arms manufacturers. During the Obama administration, a commerce department official proclaimed himself proud that America had 60% of the global arms export market.
Personally, I am either blessed or cursed with a sharp memory. I remember candidate Obama campaigning against "Hillary's Plan," now called Obamacare. I remember Democrats voting against that plan, and voting for him instead. Then, I remember seeing Democrats spin 180 degrees to embrace "Hillary's Plan," now called Obamacare, or Obamneycare, since even President Obama admitted it was the same thing as Romneycare. The Romneycare data disproved all the Democrats' promises about what Obamacare would do: Democrats promised insurance premiums would go down due to fewer emergency hospitalizations, but Romneycare showed both premiums and emergency hospitalizations went up. (Medicare data show most of Medicare's emergency hospitalizations result from Rx drugs, and a PatNet user recounted his own experience going to a hospital emergency room due to a prescribed SSRI.) As I saw Democrats spin 180 degrees, saying the opposite of what they had said just a year before, I saw partisan identity persuaded people much more than obective reality, no matter how thoroughly proved.
Scott Adams wrote about that too, predicting President Trump would change people's perceptions of reality itself. He wrote that people are not evolved to perceive objective reality; people are evolved to believe whatever illusions enable them to survive and reproduce, and those tend to involve agreeing with the tribe.
After seeing through the Democrats' suddenly changed position on health care, I started to see other problems too, e.g. Democrats' support for Islam. Hillary Clinton started the "tradition" of White House iftar dinners, around the same time the Clinton administration bombed America's Serbian allies on behalf of KSA and other Petrodollar states. Russians tried to point out that the Serbians had been allies of the USA during WWII, while the Bozniaks had joined the Nazi SS, but Petrodollars talk louder than history. The Serbs got bombed and prosecuted as war criminals, Islam retained its European territory, and the Clintons and their foundation received tens of million$ of Petrodollars from KSA. Spreading Islam is 180 degrees opposite to everything "liberal" Democrats claim to believe in, and yet it is the policy of the Democratic party.
But now even President Trump, possibly the first President to speak candidly about Islam since John Quincy Adams, celebrated an iftar dinner.
In 1968, at the height of the illegal war in Viet Nam, Gore Vidal said there was no difference between the two major parties because they both get their money from the same sources. At this point, Democrats are more likely to identify as "liberal", and Republicans are more likely to identify as "conservative", but both parties seem neither liberal nor conservative. Two Presidents in a row have doubled the national debt, and the current incumbent seems likely to do the same if he can. Republicans increased federal power with the "Patriot Act", and Democrats went even further with Obamacare. Both parties agree on what matters most to them: consolidate their own power, including especially in the form of revenue/spending.
My politics have already been hijacked by reality. I used to be a leftist true believer who just could not understand how the right was so easily manipulated. Then I started understanding the fundamental self-interest and fears which drive the surface rationalizations on both sides
#MeToo. I remember even signaling virtue by approving of Red Ken's Muslim schools in London, mainly because Margaret Thatcher opposed them. I see now she was right about them.
Many years ago, there was a saying that the further a person is from events, the more likely he is to believe the press coverage; conversely, the nearer to events, the more likely he is to see the errors in the press coverage. I tried to find the exact quotation, but it is buried now under a haystack of recent articles about fake news. BTW, Scott Adams had a really good comment on fake news, balancing outright falsehoods that fool small audiences vs mainstream presentations that are cherry-picked and spun to mislead mass audiences.
In the USA, major parties function similarly to TV networks, aggregating audiences and selling them to corporate sponsors. If you watch the evening "news," you can see a series of misleading stories promoted by public relations firms, interspersed with advertisements for products that would probably make you worse off.
An interesting documentary on the global arms industry included an interview with an arms dealer who said politicians are mostly mid-level sales executives for arms manufacturers. During the Obama administration, a commerce department official proclaimed himself proud that America had 60% of the global arms export market.
Personally, I am either blessed or cursed with a sharp memory. I remember candidate Obama campaigning against "Hillary's Plan," now called Obamacare. I remember Democrats voting against that plan, and voting for him instead. Then, I remember seeing Democrats spin 180 degrees to embrace "Hillary's Plan," now called Obamacare, or Obamneycare, since even President Obama admitted it was the same thing as Romneycare. The Romneycare data disproved all the Democrats' promises about what Obamacare would do: Democrats promised insurance premiums would go down due to fewer emergency hospitalizations, but Romneycare showed both premiums and emergency hospitalizations went up. (Medicare data show most of Medicare's emergency hospitalizations result from Rx drugs, and a PatNet user recounted his own experience going to a hospital emergency room due to a prescribed SSRI.) As I saw Democrats spin 180 degrees, saying the opposite of what they had said just a year before, I saw partisan identity persuaded people much more than obective reality, no matter how thoroughly proved.
Scott Adams wrote about that too, predicting President Trump would change people's perceptions of reality itself. He wrote that people are not evolved to perceive objective reality; people are evolved to believe whatever illusions enable them to survive and reproduce, and those tend to involve agreeing with the tribe.
After seeing through the Democrats' suddenly changed position on health care, I started to see other problems too, e.g. Democrats' support for Islam. Hillary Clinton started the "tradition" of White House iftar dinners, around the same time the Clinton administration bombed America's Serbian allies on behalf of KSA and other Petrodollar states. Russians tried to point out that the Serbians had been allies of the USA during WWII, while the Bozniaks had joined the Nazi SS, but Petrodollars talk louder than history. The Serbs got bombed and prosecuted as war criminals, Islam retained its European territory, and the Clintons and their foundation received tens of million$ of Petrodollars from KSA. Spreading Islam is 180 degrees opposite to everything "liberal" Democrats claim to believe in, and yet it is the policy of the Democratic party.
But now even President Trump, possibly the first President to speak candidly about Islam since John Quincy Adams, celebrated an iftar dinner.
In 1968, at the height of the illegal war in Viet Nam, Gore Vidal said there was no difference between the two major parties because they both get their money from the same sources. At this point, Democrats are more likely to identify as "liberal", and Republicans are more likely to identify as "conservative", but both parties seem neither liberal nor conservative. Two Presidents in a row have doubled the national debt, and the current incumbent seems likely to do the same if he can. Republicans increased federal power with the "Patriot Act", and Democrats went even further with Obamacare. Both parties agree on what matters most to them: consolidate their own power, including especially in the form of revenue/spending.
79
curious2
2018 Aug 27, 3:58pm
curious2
2018 Aug 27, 3:58pm
@marcus, I wondered whether even to reply to your comment below, but I will reply here rather than push your dishonest thread that you admit was another example of you trolling:
marcus says
I would really appreciate seeing even one example where you "politely corrected intellectual mistakes" that I supposedly made. To the contrary, your comments on PatNet including in this very thread show that you have repeatedly exploded emotionally with baseless insults, profanity, and lies, and demonstrated a failure to comprehend math and logic for example the rules governing ordinal numbers and significant figures. Nobody would bother stalking you, and I have not, but you have repeated that lie for years, even as you used a separate browser to follow my comments while pretending to ignore me. If you can find an example of what you claim, please re-post it.
marcus says
Actually, I have to admit that curius2 is right about one thing, that it was a troll. I thought I would try your technique (what you constantly with the word liberals) with Trump supporters. If I understand your response, is it to defend that the protesters aren't neo nazis ?
But yeah the connection to Trump supporters was a total troll. I don't remember the last time I posted a total troll post, it was probably years ago.. Hell, even my regular comments aren't that frequent anymore.
curious2 saysshow an emotional obsession with attention/ignorance
I see you can't miss a chance after all these years to spew your hate and inability to forgive me for the couple times I politely corrected intellectual mistakes you made. Sad. But thank you for at least not constantly stalking me like you used to. At least you've learned to control those impulses a little.
I would really appreciate seeing even one example where you "politely corrected intellectual mistakes" that I supposedly made. To the contrary, your comments on PatNet including in this very thread show that you have repeatedly exploded emotionally with baseless insults, profanity, and lies, and demonstrated a failure to comprehend math and logic for example the rules governing ordinal numbers and significant figures. Nobody would bother stalking you, and I have not, but you have repeated that lie for years, even as you used a separate browser to follow my comments while pretending to ignore me. If you can find an example of what you claim, please re-post it.
80
Patrick
2018 Aug 27, 5:29pm
Patrick
2018 Aug 27, 5:29pm
curious2 says
Great quote. Had not seen that one before, but it gets to the center of politics.
curious2 says
Another great insight. To a large degree, public opinion is created by PR firms, which themselves are very careful to hide in the background. Since there is so little independent journalism these days, it's pretty easy for them to hide.
And it's not just the evening news. Sadly, the NY Times, WaPo, and NPR are also full of stories that our owners want made into "truth", like the deliberately fabricated Russia story. And there is almost complete silence on stories that our owners don't want us to see, like Saudi and Qatari sponsorship of worldwide Islamic terrorism.
people are not evolved to perceive objective reality; people are evolved to believe whatever illusions enable them to survive and reproduce, and those tend to involve agreeing with the tribe.
Great quote. Had not seen that one before, but it gets to the center of politics.
curious2 says
In the USA, major parties function similarly to TV networks, aggregating audiences and selling them to corporate sponsors. If you watch the evening "news," you can see a series of misleading stories promoted by public relations firms, interspersed with advertisements for products that would probably make you worse off.
Another great insight. To a large degree, public opinion is created by PR firms, which themselves are very careful to hide in the background. Since there is so little independent journalism these days, it's pretty easy for them to hide.
And it's not just the evening news. Sadly, the NY Times, WaPo, and NPR are also full of stories that our owners want made into "truth", like the deliberately fabricated Russia story. And there is almost complete silence on stories that our owners don't want us to see, like Saudi and Qatari sponsorship of worldwide Islamic terrorism.
81
curious2
2018 Aug 27, 5:35pm
curious2
2018 Aug 27, 5:35pm
Patrick says
Scott Adams wrote it a few different ways in his Dilbert blog, before he switched to vlogging (which I don't watch).
"In a rational world it would be obvious that Trump supporters include lots of brilliant and well-informed people. That fact – as obvious as it would seem – is invisible to the folks who can’t even imagine a world in which their powers of perception could be so wrong. To reconcile their world, they have to imagine all Trump supporters as defective in some moral or cognitive way, or both.
As I often tell you, we all live in our own movies inside our heads. Humans did not evolve with the capability to understand their reality because it was not important to survival. Any illusion that keeps us alive long enough to procreate is good enough."
Adams links to Donald Hoffman's theorem on why humans are not evolved to perceive reality:
"Given an arbitrary world and arbitrary fitness functions, an organism that sees reality as it is will never be more fit than an organism of equal complexity that sees none of reality but that is just tuned to fitness."
For example, Muslims tend to have more children than atheists. Muslims are neither more intelligent (statistics say they are on average less intelligent) nor better at perceiving reality, but Islam tunes them to evolutionary fitness (reproduction and killing rivals). The western welfare state is particularly vulnerable to getting taken over by such demographics, because the disadvantages of Islamic dysfunction become less relevant.
Great quote. Had not seen that one before, but it gets to the center of politics.
Scott Adams wrote it a few different ways in his Dilbert blog, before he switched to vlogging (which I don't watch).
"In a rational world it would be obvious that Trump supporters include lots of brilliant and well-informed people. That fact – as obvious as it would seem – is invisible to the folks who can’t even imagine a world in which their powers of perception could be so wrong. To reconcile their world, they have to imagine all Trump supporters as defective in some moral or cognitive way, or both.
As I often tell you, we all live in our own movies inside our heads. Humans did not evolve with the capability to understand their reality because it was not important to survival. Any illusion that keeps us alive long enough to procreate is good enough."
Adams links to Donald Hoffman's theorem on why humans are not evolved to perceive reality:
"Given an arbitrary world and arbitrary fitness functions, an organism that sees reality as it is will never be more fit than an organism of equal complexity that sees none of reality but that is just tuned to fitness."
For example, Muslims tend to have more children than atheists. Muslims are neither more intelligent (statistics say they are on average less intelligent) nor better at perceiving reality, but Islam tunes them to evolutionary fitness (reproduction and killing rivals). The western welfare state is particularly vulnerable to getting taken over by such demographics, because the disadvantages of Islamic dysfunction become less relevant.
82
Patrick
2018 Aug 27, 6:33pm
Patrick
2018 Aug 27, 6:33pm
curious2 says
Wow, the Scott Adams post is so excellent I'm going to create a thread quoting it.
Scott Adams wrote it a few different ways in his Dilbert blog, before he switched to vlogging (which I don't watch).
"In a rational world it would be obvious that Trump supporters include lots of brilliant and well-informed people. That fact – as obvious as it would seem – is invisible to the folks who can’t even imagine a world in which their powers of perception could be so wrong. To reconcile their world, they have to imagine all Trump supporters as defective in some moral or cognitive way, or both.
As I often tell you, we all live in our own movies inside our heads. Humans did not evolve with the capability to understand their reality because it was not important to survival. Any illusion that keeps us alive long enough to procreate is good enough."
Wow, the Scott Adams post is so excellent I'm going to create a thread quoting it.
83
curious2
2018 Oct 21, 2:34am
curious2
2018 Oct 21, 2:34am
tatupu70 says
@tatupu70 / LeonDurham / JoeyJoeJoeJr, where did you read that Jamal Khashoggi went to the KSA embassy to get a marriage license? He was not in the embassy, and KSA had not promised him a marriage license, so I am curious where you got your misinformation.
embassy after he came on the promise of getting a marriage license....
@tatupu70 / LeonDurham / JoeyJoeJoeJr, where did you read that Jamal Khashoggi went to the KSA embassy to get a marriage license? He was not in the embassy, and KSA had not promised him a marriage license, so I am curious where you got your misinformation.
84
tatupu70
2018 Oct 21, 6:45am
tatupu70
2018 Oct 21, 6:45am
curious2 says
lol--I went back and edited the post to say Consulate rather than Embassy and "papers so he could obtain a marriage license" instead of marriage license.
@tatupu70 / LeonDurham / JoeyJoeJoeJr, where did you read that Jamal Khashoggi went to the KSA embassy to get a marriage license? He was not in the embassy, and KSA had not promised him a marriage license, so I am curious where you got your misinformation.
lol--I went back and edited the post to say Consulate rather than Embassy and "papers so he could obtain a marriage license" instead of marriage license.
85
curious2
2018 Oct 21, 3:03pm
curious2
2018 Oct 21, 3:03pm
tatupu70 says
Khashoggi wanted papers confirming he had divorced his wife in KSA, where Islamic law allows men a unilateral right to divorce paying only 130 days of spousal support.
"papers so he could obtain a marriage license"
Khashoggi wanted papers confirming he had divorced his wife in KSA, where Islamic law allows men a unilateral right to divorce paying only 130 days of spousal support.
86
mell
2018 Oct 21, 3:05pm
curious2 says
Hey that's something worthwhile adopting from over there for once ;)
where Islamic law allows men a unilateral right to divorce paying only 130 days of spousal support.
Hey that's something worthwhile adopting from over there for once ;)
87
curious2
2018 Oct 21, 3:10pm
curious2
2018 Oct 21, 3:10pm
mell says
I have commented previously that we should really encourage certain people to praise Islam. The guy convicted of sexual assault at Stanford? He should convert to Islam, which would have required 4 witnesses to convict him. There were only 2 witnesses, so he should demand acquittal saying his conviction violates his right to religious freedom. Even the President could talk about how much $$$ he would have saved if he could have divorced his wives the Islamic way: 130 days of spousal support, then nothing. Let TDS do the rest: OrangeManBad praised Islam? Islam must be bad!
curious2 sayswhere Islamic law allows men a unilateral right to divorce paying only 130 days of spousal support.
Hey that's something worthwhile adopting from over there for once ;)
I have commented previously that we should really encourage certain people to praise Islam. The guy convicted of sexual assault at Stanford? He should convert to Islam, which would have required 4 witnesses to convict him. There were only 2 witnesses, so he should demand acquittal saying his conviction violates his right to religious freedom. Even the President could talk about how much $$$ he would have saved if he could have divorced his wives the Islamic way: 130 days of spousal support, then nothing. Let TDS do the rest: OrangeManBad praised Islam? Islam must be bad!
88
MisdemeanorRebel
2018 Oct 24, 8:31pm
MisdemeanorRebel
2018 Oct 24, 8:31pm
tatupu70 says
Speaking of the Chinese, I know who will really be donating to the Dems going forward!
lol--I went back and edited the post to say Consulate rather than Embassy and "papers so he could obtain a marriage license" instead of marriage license.
Speaking of the Chinese, I know who will really be donating to the Dems going forward!
89
MisdemeanorRebel
2018 Oct 28, 1:49pm
MisdemeanorRebel
2018 Oct 28, 1:49pm
I'm an avid newshound but totally missed this.
New York: Arab driver gets out of car to assault elderly Jew crossing street, screams Allah Akbar.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6276297/Livery-cab-driver-kept-shouting-Allah-beat-Brooklyn-Jewish-man-way-synagogue.html
New York: Arab driver gets out of car to assault elderly Jew crossing street, screams Allah Akbar.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6276297/Livery-cab-driver-kept-shouting-Allah-beat-Brooklyn-Jewish-man-way-synagogue.html
90
MisdemeanorRebel
2018 Oct 28, 1:54pm
MisdemeanorRebel
2018 Oct 28, 1:54pm
Still on Twitter and Paypal has not refused service to twitter, either.
91
MisdemeanorRebel
2018 Oct 28, 6:35pm
MisdemeanorRebel
2018 Oct 28, 6:35pm
This is the Judeo-Bolshevik that edits the Forward, the dirty Red Witch.
92
MisdemeanorRebel
2018 Oct 28, 6:47pm
MisdemeanorRebel
2018 Oct 28, 6:47pm
Did you miss this one? I sure did:
https://www.foxnews.com/us/photographer-dies-6-months-after-taking-beating-in-alleged-racial-attack-prosecutors
https://www.foxnews.com/us/photographer-dies-6-months-after-taking-beating-in-alleged-racial-attack-prosecutors
93
tatupu70
2018 Oct 28, 7:05pm
tatupu70
2018 Oct 28, 7:05pm
TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says
Amazing. MSM is quoted to prove that MSM doesn't cover a news story.
Did you miss this one? I sure did:
https://www.foxnews.com/us/photographer-dies-6-months-after-taking-beating-in-alleged-racial-attack-prosecutors
Amazing. MSM is quoted to prove that MSM doesn't cover a news story.
94
MisdemeanorRebel
2018 Oct 28, 7:51pm
MisdemeanorRebel
2018 Oct 28, 7:51pm
tatupu70 says
Funny, I don't remember CNN or MSNBC saying "Rabid Anti-Semitism in America: Hassidic Man Brutally Beaten by Middle Easterner" and making it top news.
Bad for the narrative.
Amazing. MSM is quoted to prove that MSM doesn't cover a news story.
Funny, I don't remember CNN or MSNBC saying "Rabid Anti-Semitism in America: Hassidic Man Brutally Beaten by Middle Easterner" and making it top news.
Bad for the narrative.
95
tatupu70
2018 Oct 28, 8:02pm
tatupu70
2018 Oct 28, 8:02pm
TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says
Have you watched every story on MSNBC and CNN? Do you remember every one?
I imagine there is a lot you don't remember....
Funny, I don't remember CNN or MSNBC saying "Rabid Anti-Semitism in America: Hassidic Man Brutally Beaten by Middle Easterner" and making it top news.
Bad for the narrative.
Have you watched every story on MSNBC and CNN? Do you remember every one?
I imagine there is a lot you don't remember....
96
MisdemeanorRebel
2018 Oct 28, 8:04pm
MisdemeanorRebel
2018 Oct 28, 8:04pm
tatupu70 says
So, there's a hate crime in broad daylight and it's barely reported? Pretty odd, eh?
We all know if it was a White Dude beating a Jew, it would be the story of the week at least. And blamed on Trump to boot.
Have you watched every story on MSNBC and CNN? Do you remember every one?
I imagine there is a lot you don't remember....
So, there's a hate crime in broad daylight and it's barely reported? Pretty odd, eh?
We all know if it was a White Dude beating a Jew, it would be the story of the week at least. And blamed on Trump to boot.
97
tatupu70
2018 Oct 28, 8:06pm
tatupu70
2018 Oct 28, 8:06pm
TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says
Was it barely reported?
So, there's a hate crime in broad daylight and it's barely reported? Pretty odd, eh?
Was it barely reported?
98
tatupu70
2018 Oct 28, 8:07pm
tatupu70
2018 Oct 28, 8:07pm
It was probably a false flag anyway. Did you check the guy's twitter account?
99
MisdemeanorRebel
2018 Oct 28, 8:19pm
MisdemeanorRebel
2018 Oct 28, 8:19pm
tatupu70 says
I wish Slate would. They read all Bowers tweets but ignored the ones where he damned Trump (and his supporters, as well as "Q") as a Jew Stooge.
But somehow they "Forgot" to mention that in their hit piece.
It was probably a false flag anyway. Did you check the guy's twitter account?
I wish Slate would. They read all Bowers tweets but ignored the ones where he damned Trump (and his supporters, as well as "Q") as a Jew Stooge.
But somehow they "Forgot" to mention that in their hit piece.
100
curious2
2018 Nov 21, 6:08am
curious2
2018 Nov 21, 6:08am
Tim Aurora says
@Tim Aurora, you posted this in a thread about a different topic, but I wanted to ask you about it, so I am replying here. IRL, a friend who can't stand being contradicted keeps calling the President an "idiot," and I can't understand why. Perhaps you could explain? What makes you believe the President of the United States, who earned a degree from Wharton and succeeded in almost everything he ever set out to do, including beating more than a dozen candidates for the Presidency who were mostly desperate to win, is (in your opinion) "stupid"?
I am a never Trumper for the simple reason that he is a uncivil, stupid and a liar . The main reason is that he is stupid.
@Tim Aurora, you posted this in a thread about a different topic, but I wanted to ask you about it, so I am replying here. IRL, a friend who can't stand being contradicted keeps calling the President an "idiot," and I can't understand why. Perhaps you could explain? What makes you believe the President of the United States, who earned a degree from Wharton and succeeded in almost everything he ever set out to do, including beating more than a dozen candidates for the Presidency who were mostly desperate to win, is (in your opinion) "stupid"?
101
curious2
2018 Nov 21, 7:17am
curious2
2018 Nov 21, 7:17am
APHAman says
Did he go bankrupt?
Did he intend to go bankrupt running casinos and investing in Manhattan Real Estate?
Did he go bankrupt?
102
curious2
2018 Nov 21, 4:40pm
curious2
2018 Nov 21, 4:40pm
HEYYOU says
@HEY YOU, I am trying to understand your use of this meme in the context of your recent comment history. Little help?
@HEY YOU, I am trying to understand your use of this meme in the context of your recent comment history. Little help?
103
Evan F.
2018 Nov 21, 6:14pm
curious2 says
Can verify. Trump is kinda dim. Genial, shrewd, and has a big personality, but not really intelligent. If you don't think Papa Fred got him into all those fancy pants schools then you're fooling yourself.
Look, he's certainly not stupid, and it's not like he has Downs Syndrome, but at some point his 'successes' have clearly transcended his level of intelligence. And that's actually fine: it's perfectly acceptable to not be terribly bright and still be in charge of a large institution or corporation, it happens all the time. I'd wager George W. was a good deal dumber than Trump. Reagan was not only an academic lightweight but was probably putting his daily briefing in the White House refrigerator for the last two years of his presidency. Obama is a pretty smart guy and I know how many of you feel about him, but he still ran the show for 8 years and look, we're still here. Clinton is actually brilliant- a Rhodes Scholar- and things seemed to generally be run the way any democratic president would run things. Meh.
Point being, your academic abilities, while helpful, really only mean so much. The presidency is a lot more than that, plus it's equally important who surrounds and supports you in the administration.
But yeah, Trump isn't the sharpest tool in the shed. Have lots of friends from Apprentice that could back that up.
a friend who can't stand being contradicted keeps calling the President an "idiot," and I can't understand why. Perhaps you could explain?
Can verify. Trump is kinda dim. Genial, shrewd, and has a big personality, but not really intelligent. If you don't think Papa Fred got him into all those fancy pants schools then you're fooling yourself.
Look, he's certainly not stupid, and it's not like he has Downs Syndrome, but at some point his 'successes' have clearly transcended his level of intelligence. And that's actually fine: it's perfectly acceptable to not be terribly bright and still be in charge of a large institution or corporation, it happens all the time. I'd wager George W. was a good deal dumber than Trump. Reagan was not only an academic lightweight but was probably putting his daily briefing in the White House refrigerator for the last two years of his presidency. Obama is a pretty smart guy and I know how many of you feel about him, but he still ran the show for 8 years and look, we're still here. Clinton is actually brilliant- a Rhodes Scholar- and things seemed to generally be run the way any democratic president would run things. Meh.
Point being, your academic abilities, while helpful, really only mean so much. The presidency is a lot more than that, plus it's equally important who surrounds and supports you in the administration.
But yeah, Trump isn't the sharpest tool in the shed. Have lots of friends from Apprentice that could back that up.
104
Patrick
2018 Nov 21, 6:36pm
Patrick
2018 Nov 21, 6:36pm
Evan F. says
Can you distinguish between "shrewd" and "intelligent" for me?
First definition I found says shrewd is "Characterized by keen awareness, sharp intelligence, and often a sense of the practical."
TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says
I did miss that one.
Let's see, Muslim black man murders Jewish white man. (Assuming Muslim from the name Jamil and the Mohammedesque beard.)
Muslim gets a point, black gets a point, man loses a point: net +1
Jewish gets a point, white loses a point, man loses a point: net -1
By the liberal math of victimhood, such a story must be relegated to a small article on the back pages if reported at all.
Trump is kinda dim. Genial, shrewd, and has a big personality, but not really intelligent.
Can you distinguish between "shrewd" and "intelligent" for me?
First definition I found says shrewd is "Characterized by keen awareness, sharp intelligence, and often a sense of the practical."
TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says
Did you miss this one? I sure did:
https://www.foxnews.com/us/photographer-dies-6-months-after-taking-beating-in-alleged-racial-attack-prosecutors
I did miss that one.
Let's see, Muslim black man murders Jewish white man. (Assuming Muslim from the name Jamil and the Mohammedesque beard.)
Muslim gets a point, black gets a point, man loses a point: net +1
Jewish gets a point, white loses a point, man loses a point: net -1
By the liberal math of victimhood, such a story must be relegated to a small article on the back pages if reported at all.
105
curious2
2018 Nov 21, 7:56pm
curious2
2018 Nov 21, 7:56pm
Evan F. says
BTW, W holds degrees from Yale and Harvard. You can say he got help getting in, but he had better grades at Yale than John Kerry. If you didn't graduate from Oxford, Cambridge, or MIT, then I don't see how you could call him dumb.
I don't understand why some people insist on calling other people "stupid," "idiots" (IQ below 26), "dimbulbs," or "retarded" when those labels are plainly false. Marcus calls almost everyone he disagrees with a dimbulb, including @CBOETrader, who succeeded in the exact profession where Marcus admitted having failed. (Full disclosure: Marcus has also called me "retarded", and deleted a whole thread where I had proved him wrong about a rule of math, which he claims to teach.) It seems to reflect a sort of willful ignorance, stubbornly refusing to consider the possibility that intelligent people can disagree and even be wrong.
I think it harms debate and public discourse, because people retreat into their echo chambers where the "other" side is always "stupid" instead of having anything worthwhile to say. It becomes an excuse for people to shout slogans at each other instead of trying to reason together.
Can verify. Trump [is] shrewd....
Look, he's certainly not stupid.... I'd wager George W. was a good deal dumber than Trump.
BTW, W holds degrees from Yale and Harvard. You can say he got help getting in, but he had better grades at Yale than John Kerry. If you didn't graduate from Oxford, Cambridge, or MIT, then I don't see how you could call him dumb.
I don't understand why some people insist on calling other people "stupid," "idiots" (IQ below 26), "dimbulbs," or "retarded" when those labels are plainly false. Marcus calls almost everyone he disagrees with a dimbulb, including @CBOETrader, who succeeded in the exact profession where Marcus admitted having failed. (Full disclosure: Marcus has also called me "retarded", and deleted a whole thread where I had proved him wrong about a rule of math, which he claims to teach.) It seems to reflect a sort of willful ignorance, stubbornly refusing to consider the possibility that intelligent people can disagree and even be wrong.
I think it harms debate and public discourse, because people retreat into their echo chambers where the "other" side is always "stupid" instead of having anything worthwhile to say. It becomes an excuse for people to shout slogans at each other instead of trying to reason together.
106
Rin
2018 Nov 21, 7:57pm
Rin
2018 Nov 21, 7:57pm
curious2 says
Both John Kerry and Al Gore Jr are morons. Gore, after Harvard undergrad, flunked out of Vanderbilt Law.
Yale than John Kerry.
Both John Kerry and Al Gore Jr are morons. Gore, after Harvard undergrad, flunked out of Vanderbilt Law.
107
Patrick
2018 Nov 22, 10:24am
Patrick
2018 Nov 22, 10:24am
Calling Trump stupid is just another form of "orange man bad".
And what we should care about is results and Trump has been more effective at getting good results than any other president in our lifetimes.
The reduction in nuclear tension with N. Korea alone is a major accomplishment which has made us all safer. Every American should be grateful for that at the very least.
And what we should care about is results and Trump has been more effective at getting good results than any other president in our lifetimes.
The reduction in nuclear tension with N. Korea alone is a major accomplishment which has made us all safer. Every American should be grateful for that at the very least.
108
mell
2018 Nov 22, 9:02pm
So leftoids are advocating that stupid people and retards should never have any meaningful jobs but if you express your opinion supported by facts that men and women are different or illegal and unskilled immigration is bad, or oppose gay marriage or don't address xir by xeir preferred pronoun, then you should be fired for discrimination or even prosecuted. Can't make this shit up even if one wanted to.
109
curious2
2018 Nov 23, 1:20am
curious2
2018 Nov 23, 1:20am
jazz_music says
I had been wondering the same about your comment. I asked @Tim Aurora a simple question. I asked politely and reasonably. You are not even Tim Aurora, and yet you responded with an irrelevant rant assuming all sorts of things about me, e.g. this:
jazz_music says
You also acknowledged that W had deliberately spoken persuasively, and essentially outsmarted his audience including you, and yet you call him "stupid." As noted above, W got better grades at Yale than John Kerry. If W is "stupid", what does that make you? Did you go to Yale, and if so, how did you do there?
Are you sure you understand what was said?
I had been wondering the same about your comment. I asked @Tim Aurora a simple question. I asked politely and reasonably. You are not even Tim Aurora, and yet you responded with an irrelevant rant assuming all sorts of things about me, e.g. this:
jazz_music says
You were indoctrinated that there’s nothing better on earth and that greed is good and not one of the seven deadly sins that those assholes 4000 years ago claimed.
You also acknowledged that W had deliberately spoken persuasively, and essentially outsmarted his audience including you, and yet you call him "stupid." As noted above, W got better grades at Yale than John Kerry. If W is "stupid", what does that make you? Did you go to Yale, and if so, how did you do there?
110
MisdemeanorRebel
2018 Nov 23, 1:52am
MisdemeanorRebel
2018 Nov 23, 1:52am
Patrick says
In the NY Metro Area in the past few weeks:
Elderly Hassidic beaten by Muslim Cab Driver
Black Teens assault pre-pubescent Hassidic Boys, then vandalize the Temple
Black College Student and Orphan adopted by the City Council, and who stayed with a Jewish Couple, who was studying AA at Brandeis, free ride, also Vandalized a Temple.
I'm sure it had nothing to do with Islam or Farrakhan's latest rants.
The Good News is that the Women's March is being outed, while th eorganization issued an apology, Linda Sarsour issued a "Not-pology' on Facebook later.
Let's see, Muslim black man murders Jewish white man. (Assuming Muslim from the name Jamil and the Mohammedesque beard.)
Muslim gets a point, black gets a point, man loses a point: net +1
Jewish gets a point, white loses a point, man loses a point: net -1
By the liberal math of victimhood, such a story must be relegated to a small article on the back pages if reported at all.
In the NY Metro Area in the past few weeks:
Elderly Hassidic beaten by Muslim Cab Driver
Black Teens assault pre-pubescent Hassidic Boys, then vandalize the Temple
Black College Student and Orphan adopted by the City Council, and who stayed with a Jewish Couple, who was studying AA at Brandeis, free ride, also Vandalized a Temple.
I'm sure it had nothing to do with Islam or Farrakhan's latest rants.
The Good News is that the Women's March is being outed, while th eorganization issued an apology, Linda Sarsour issued a "Not-pology' on Facebook later.
111
curious2
2019 Feb 15, 8:31pm
curious2
2019 Feb 15, 8:31pm
Patrick says
Patrick says
Both of those statements are false, and you have been presented with plenty of evidence to know that. @Patrick, why do you litter your own site with outright lies?
"A genetic analysis of 409 pairs of gay brothers, including sets of twins, has provided the strongest evidence yet that gay people are born gay. The study clearly links sexual orientation in men with two regions of the human genome that have been implicated before, one on the X chromosome and one on chromosome 8... The latest study involves about three times as many people as the previous largest study, which means it is significantly more statistically robust."
Prior work involving more twins:
"We found 52 percent of identical twin brothers of gay men also were gay, compared with 22 percent of fraternal twins, compared with 11 percent of genetically unrelated brothers," said J. Michael Bailey, an assistant professor of psychology at Northwestern University in Evanston, "which is exactly the kind of pattern you would want to see if something genetic were going on." By "unrelated," Dr. Bailey was referring to brothers by adoption."
Another major factor is birth order:
Twenty years ago, Ray Blanchard and Anthony Bogaert demonstrated that the probability of a boy growing up to be gay increases for each older brother born to the same mother, the so-called fraternal birth order (FBO) effect. Their first investigation indicated that each older brother increased the probability of being gay by about 33%. This startling phenomenon was confirmed in multiple studies based on independent populations totaling over 10,000 subjects, and a meta-analysis indicated that between 15% and 29% of gay men owe their sexual orientation to this effect. Despite this compelling evidence, a mechanism to account for the effect remained elusive. In PNAS, Bogaert et al. present direct biochemical evidence indicating that the increased incidence of homosexuality in males with older brothers results from a progressive immunization of the mother against a male-specific cell-adhesion protein that plays a key role in cell–cell interactions, specifically in the process of synapse formation, during development called neuroligin 4 Y-linked, or NLGN4Y. This study provides the first data-based explanation for the FBO effect and adds a significant chapter to growing evidence indicating that sexual orientation is heavily influenced by prenatal biological mechanisms rather than by unidentified factors in socialization."
You and @FortWayne/@FortWayneIndiana seem to insist on certain falsehoods, AKA lies. I can see why he obsesses over it, spreading lies to atone for his own sinful thoughts and behavior, but you don't even believe.
Patrick says
Most gay children are born to opposite sex parents and grow up in those households. Where exactly do you want gay children to learn that they are not alone?
You have also claimed falsely that everyone has only two parents of opposite sex. In reality, intersex (XXY) and anatomical hermaphrodites can and do have children, and many children (e.g. those born to surrogates) have three biological parents. That still leaves a majority of gay children growing up in households without gay parents, so the question stands: where should they learn about their own lives?
It is very odd to see you posting the same outright lies over and over again, repeating them like a prayer.
identical twins are not more likely to both be gay if one of them is.
Patrick says
it is an outright lie that homosexuality is something innate and immutable
Both of those statements are false, and you have been presented with plenty of evidence to know that. @Patrick, why do you litter your own site with outright lies?
"A genetic analysis of 409 pairs of gay brothers, including sets of twins, has provided the strongest evidence yet that gay people are born gay. The study clearly links sexual orientation in men with two regions of the human genome that have been implicated before, one on the X chromosome and one on chromosome 8... The latest study involves about three times as many people as the previous largest study, which means it is significantly more statistically robust."
Prior work involving more twins:
"We found 52 percent of identical twin brothers of gay men also were gay, compared with 22 percent of fraternal twins, compared with 11 percent of genetically unrelated brothers," said J. Michael Bailey, an assistant professor of psychology at Northwestern University in Evanston, "which is exactly the kind of pattern you would want to see if something genetic were going on." By "unrelated," Dr. Bailey was referring to brothers by adoption."
Another major factor is birth order:
Twenty years ago, Ray Blanchard and Anthony Bogaert demonstrated that the probability of a boy growing up to be gay increases for each older brother born to the same mother, the so-called fraternal birth order (FBO) effect. Their first investigation indicated that each older brother increased the probability of being gay by about 33%. This startling phenomenon was confirmed in multiple studies based on independent populations totaling over 10,000 subjects, and a meta-analysis indicated that between 15% and 29% of gay men owe their sexual orientation to this effect. Despite this compelling evidence, a mechanism to account for the effect remained elusive. In PNAS, Bogaert et al. present direct biochemical evidence indicating that the increased incidence of homosexuality in males with older brothers results from a progressive immunization of the mother against a male-specific cell-adhesion protein that plays a key role in cell–cell interactions, specifically in the process of synapse formation, during development called neuroligin 4 Y-linked, or NLGN4Y. This study provides the first data-based explanation for the FBO effect and adds a significant chapter to growing evidence indicating that sexual orientation is heavily influenced by prenatal biological mechanisms rather than by unidentified factors in socialization."
You and @FortWayne/@FortWayneIndiana seem to insist on certain falsehoods, AKA lies. I can see why he obsesses over it, spreading lies to atone for his own sinful thoughts and behavior, but you don't even believe.
Patrick says
I just don't want them teaching it to children.
Most gay children are born to opposite sex parents and grow up in those households. Where exactly do you want gay children to learn that they are not alone?
You have also claimed falsely that everyone has only two parents of opposite sex. In reality, intersex (XXY) and anatomical hermaphrodites can and do have children, and many children (e.g. those born to surrogates) have three biological parents. That still leaves a majority of gay children growing up in households without gay parents, so the question stands: where should they learn about their own lives?
It is very odd to see you posting the same outright lies over and over again, repeating them like a prayer.
112
curious2
2019 Feb 15, 8:46pm
curious2
2019 Feb 15, 8:46pm
Patrick says
The comic shows two parents, a daughter, and a dog. It makes fun of the parents' ignorance. It says nothing about whether the parents are working, retired, unemployed, or lottery winners. They could be Walmart millionaires, for all you know. It says nothing about race, though the people happen to be white (as most Americans are) and one parent wears a confederate flag hat. You seem to be projecting a paranoid fantasy onto a comic, much the way marcus projects racism onto everyone everywhere.
the racism and hate for working people illustrated in the comic absolutely guarantees that nothing will be solved.
The comic shows two parents, a daughter, and a dog. It makes fun of the parents' ignorance. It says nothing about whether the parents are working, retired, unemployed, or lottery winners. They could be Walmart millionaires, for all you know. It says nothing about race, though the people happen to be white (as most Americans are) and one parent wears a confederate flag hat. You seem to be projecting a paranoid fantasy onto a comic, much the way marcus projects racism onto everyone everywhere.
113
curious2
2019 Feb 15, 9:12pm
curious2
2019 Feb 15, 9:12pm
FortWayneIndiana says
@FortWayne @FortWayneIndiana
The exchange does not involve funny pictures, so I am replying in the Reply Thread. I have linked the largest and most recent studies above. Your assertions are simply false, and disproved above. When you make deliberately false statements, those are lies.
curious2 saysThat's false. @Patrick, why do you litter your own site with outright lies?
You are quoting either false studies or studies that simply point that people who grow in the same household, under same conditions, more likely end up gay. Which has been proven. It's socially constructed to a high degree. Raise normal kids in a gay neighborhoods, and likelihood of them going looney is higher. Same with Trannies. Which is why this shit is child abuse. The lower the IQ of the child, the higher probability of children raised that way turning out homos. That was another study. And no study has found a genetic difference between gays and normal, which likely means that it's not genetic, but socially constructed (aka sexual confusion). There is no gay gene, just stupidity.
See, your problem is that you ignore half the damn evidence curious2.
@FortWayne @FortWayneIndiana
The exchange does not involve funny pictures, so I am replying in the Reply Thread. I have linked the largest and most recent studies above. Your assertions are simply false, and disproved above. When you make deliberately false statements, those are lies.
114
FortWayneAsNancyPelosiHaircut
2019 Feb 15, 9:28pm
FortWayneAsNancyPelosiHaircut
2019 Feb 15, 9:28pm
curious2 says
Nope, your stuff is false. What I'm posting was real science, even quoted by Jordan Peterson, who is a renowned psychologist, not some bullshit left winger ignoring evidence such as "place where people are raised".
It's still the case that if you take normal people and raise them in a homosexual neighborhood they are way more likely to turn out gay. It's shocking how huge of a correlation there is. That's right, socially constructed mental disorder right there proven scientifically. And when scientists went to try to find "gay" gene, there wasn't one simply. Case closed.
@FortWayne @FortWayneIndiana
The exchange does not involve funny pictures, so I am replying in the Reply Thread. I have linked the largest and most recent studies above. Your assertions are simply false, and disproved above. When you make deliberately false statements, those are lies.
Nope, your stuff is false. What I'm posting was real science, even quoted by Jordan Peterson, who is a renowned psychologist, not some bullshit left winger ignoring evidence such as "place where people are raised".
It's still the case that if you take normal people and raise them in a homosexual neighborhood they are way more likely to turn out gay. It's shocking how huge of a correlation there is. That's right, socially constructed mental disorder right there proven scientifically. And when scientists went to try to find "gay" gene, there wasn't one simply. Case closed.
115
curious2
2019 Feb 15, 9:53pm
curious2
2019 Feb 15, 9:53pm
FortWayneIndiana says
You have posted nothing but your own lies, with no links to anything, while I reply with linked facts. You choose to bear false witness against your fellow Americans.
This is an area where even conservatives learn with age. Barry Goldwater, Dick Cheney, and Rob Portman all endorsed gay rights after learning that they had gay children and grandchildren. Someday, the same may happen to you. In that moment, you will feel the pain of regret for having born false witness against your own family. I would spare you that pain, but you insist on it.
As for what you claim Jordan Peterson said, you have not even quoted him, let alone linked, and actual examples show the opposite of what you claim. For example, even after pleading guilty to homosexual solicitation in a public toilet, "rest room enthusiast" Larry Craig insisted he was straight, and remains married to a woman. (She has kids from a prior marriage, he has none of his own.) Ted Haggard, George Rekers, and countless other Republican closet cases demonstrate that closet cases can claim to be "straight" if raised in environments where they are pressured to do so. It doesn't change what they are inside.
@Patrick has also commented about two people in his own family who were gay and unfortunately Catholic, so they chose lives of celibacy to avoid sin. I hope he might apologize to them for having born false witness against his own family. His only gain is more page views on his website, which doesn't even make money. Perhaps he can at least confess to them what he said, including the time when he said people choose to be gay in order to get easy sex.
Positing false dichotomies is also a form of lying, and I do not intend to imply that every occurrence of characteristic X results from cause Y. That would be projecting false binaries onto a nonbinary world, as Patrick tends to do. Sexual orientation is influenced by genetics, maternal hormones during gestation, etc. The fact remains, many are born gay, even if Larry Craig and other examples claim to be straight.
What I'm posting
You have posted nothing but your own lies, with no links to anything, while I reply with linked facts. You choose to bear false witness against your fellow Americans.
This is an area where even conservatives learn with age. Barry Goldwater, Dick Cheney, and Rob Portman all endorsed gay rights after learning that they had gay children and grandchildren. Someday, the same may happen to you. In that moment, you will feel the pain of regret for having born false witness against your own family. I would spare you that pain, but you insist on it.
As for what you claim Jordan Peterson said, you have not even quoted him, let alone linked, and actual examples show the opposite of what you claim. For example, even after pleading guilty to homosexual solicitation in a public toilet, "rest room enthusiast" Larry Craig insisted he was straight, and remains married to a woman. (She has kids from a prior marriage, he has none of his own.) Ted Haggard, George Rekers, and countless other Republican closet cases demonstrate that closet cases can claim to be "straight" if raised in environments where they are pressured to do so. It doesn't change what they are inside.
@Patrick has also commented about two people in his own family who were gay and unfortunately Catholic, so they chose lives of celibacy to avoid sin. I hope he might apologize to them for having born false witness against his own family. His only gain is more page views on his website, which doesn't even make money. Perhaps he can at least confess to them what he said, including the time when he said people choose to be gay in order to get easy sex.
Positing false dichotomies is also a form of lying, and I do not intend to imply that every occurrence of characteristic X results from cause Y. That would be projecting false binaries onto a nonbinary world, as Patrick tends to do. Sexual orientation is influenced by genetics, maternal hormones during gestation, etc. The fact remains, many are born gay, even if Larry Craig and other examples claim to be straight.
116
anonymous
2019 Feb 25, 11:03am
Funny thing - all the commenters who are supposed to giving their employers a full 40 hour work week who have time to fritter and waste the hours in an offhand way by posting and commenting here during work hours.
Let someone who really needs some form of government assistance get it - travesty and then some. These people are cheating and wasting the taxpayers money but a-ok to waste the employers time and money but that part about showing up and actually doing a full 40 hours or so of work was probably not stated in all seriousness
Let someone who really needs some form of government assistance get it - travesty and then some. These people are cheating and wasting the taxpayers money but a-ok to waste the employers time and money but that part about showing up and actually doing a full 40 hours or so of work was probably not stated in all seriousness
« First « Previous Comments 77 - 116 of 183 Next » Last » Search these comments
This thread exists to reply to comments made in other threads that the commenter cannot (or chooses not to) post comments in.