patrick.net

mell says

Tim Aurora says

What you consider as hate is disdain for his childish and stupid behavior. and his policies ( or which we differ a lot)

OK, let's debate Trump's policies!

That would be fantastic, a huge step toward everyone benefiting from debate.

:
Patrick says

not about the other users personally.

But you're original point was addressed to me @marcus and referred to whacking off to Trump hate.

dude.

Anyway, I'm kind of proud of #109 above. I guess I'm easily amused.

Didn't say you do that.

Complaining about the Trump haters in general, and the media in particular.

Will remove the quote and @ sign. Thanks.

OK, https://patrick.net/post/1331299?80#comment-1665105 is edited now.

Not claiming to be a saint, but am making a serious effort to keep it about points and not the other users personally.

It is a difficult thing.

marcus says

Okay, deal. You're not talking about me here, and I'm not talking about you when I say Trump cultists above. Or am I ?

Right, let's not do that. Let's get far away from personal accusations and talk about Trump's policies.

How about Trump's opposition to illegals? That seems like an excellent thing for poor working Americans, especially black Americans, who will see their wages rise in exact proportion to the number of illegals deported and kept out.

House builders, slaughterhouse, and restaurants all hate the idea, because it would cause their cost of labor to rise. But it is the right and just thing to do, and in addition greatly benefits the economy overall simply because poor US citizens spend what they get and don't send it to Mexico or Guatemala.

:
I didn't mind. And I also thought you shouldn't have minded my interpretation of where you were coming from with your comment, even if I suggested that your pride or ego was involved in the opinion you had just expressed.

Which isn't that much different than what you said, about masturbatory hate.

Turns out that even when one thinks they are being patriotic, sometimes it's more ego and desire to be right than it is grounded in reality. And that can be said of both sides. Although it's going to be true of one side more than the other.

One problem is even simply the word "you" or "your".

That immediately makes things personal. Maybe it actually was a good idea to highlight "you" and "your" in red.

The Trump haters do indeed seem to get a weird almost sexual pleasure out of hating him. (No use of "you" or "your" there, not talking about you. Trying to be general.)

:
Truth is that "you" and "i" were going to be what we were talking about anyway in that exchange. Sometimes the avoiding it being personal goes to far, but then again, I know the rule is necessary, becasue otherwise things break down. I get that.

marcus says

sometimes it's more ego and desire to be right than it is grounded in reality

Totally agree. Who wants to be wrong? No one.

One useful technique: if you have to say "you" when addressing what someone actually said, it's psychologically less painful to say "perhaps you overlooked X" than to directly accuse them of being wrong. Everyone overlooks things now and then.

It's valid to say "you said" because that's central to debate. People say things and it's necessary to quote them. And "perhaps you overlooked" is very different from "you're wrong, fucker."

Patrick says

The Trump haters do indeed seem to get a weird almost sexual pleasure out of hating him. (No use of "you" or "your" there, not talking about you. Trying to be general.)

Either that, or he really is a terrible and dangerous President that is worse than any President in my lifetime, and they simply want him out of there. I know that in your view that's impossible.

Maybe what liberals really do hate is the "fuck you" aspect Trump supporters repeatedly admitted to having when electing a President becasue going to do a lot (even some really bad stuff - such as with the environment) but they like it specifically becasue it pisses off liberals. That alone is a bonus to a lot of Trump voters. So tell me who are the real haters ?

Patrick says

It's kinda basic psychology, but all the Trump haters overlook it because they are literally whacking off to hate every day. They are addicted to their daily masturbatory hate. And this is a huge benefit to Trump, who looks much better with this kind of nutty opposition than he would otherwise.

Leftists hate Genetics, owning up to the legacy of the New Society, and the effectiveness of 3-strikes Criminal Policy, the failure of closing down public mental health facilities, among other things.

Their answer is to always double down. If Welfare didn't work, the answer is better benefits and less restrictions. They forgot the 90s era Community Policing and 3-strikes was in response to the wave of Criminal Terror the Dems unleashed in the 60s-80s by weakening enforcement, doing away with the death penalty, and expanding parole and early release.

This is why they eventually lose, they moved from decriminalizing gay behavior which most supported, to allowing gay marriage which only a plurality supported, now they want to force all K-12 to have unisex bathrooms and accept all claims of 13-year old M2F Trans, and the teen girls and their parents will just have to "Suck It". Then they pressure companies and states to boycott other states that require official recorded sex use of bathrooms, rather than the person's perceived gender of that day.

They always cross a line.

marcus says

Democrats 1960-2008: Question Authority. The CIA, the Corporations, and Academics and especially the Media are all looking out for each other, and the Man, not you, man. Don't trust 'em, man.
Democrats 2008- : If you question the Authorities, you're a dangerous Populist. The CIA, the Corporations, and Academics and especially the Media are all looking out for your best interest, man. Trust them utterly, man.

Or in pithy meme form:



Again, Trump's most vital purpose is exposing the Anti-American Oikophobes for their end goals. When they were at odds with most of society, their goal was to question and undermine every part of society. Now that they dominate the Media, Academia, Large Corps, Silicon Valley, etc. - the Clerisy - they demand total obedience in the name of social cohesion, while their real goal is to "radically transform America" using those institutions they now control.

The historical example would be the Jesuits: When Princes became Protestant, sometimes ruling Catholic majorities, like Queen Elizabeth I, the Jesuits pushed the Unjust Ruler mentality, that a Catholic should seek to undermine Protestant rulers regardless of their secular legitimacy. When many Catholic Princes came to rule over Protestant Heavy areas, like James II of Great Britain or Phillip II, they did a complete 180 and demanded all Catholics obey their Monarchs, chosen by God, to the nth Degree without question.

marcus says

he really is a terrible and dangerous President

Let's talk about specific Trump policies. Which of his policies are you opposed to?

marcus says

Maybe what liberals really do hate is the "fuck you" aspect Trump supporters repeatedly admitted to having when electing a President becasue going to do a lot (even some really bad stuff - such as with the environment)

I, for one, Voted against Hillary. Sad that we had to choose between a sociopath and a reality show playboy.

Trump's message was, "Make America Great Again". Hillary's message was "You're are deplorable if you vote against ME and for that racist, sexist, womanizing, homopho...".

Many voted against Hillary or for Trump. More voted for Hillary or against Trump. Trump just had the smarter game plan.

Onvacation says

we had to choose between a sociopath and a reality show playboy

Yup. But a reality show playboy with a plan for America to escape dependency on China and to stem the flood of illegals.

Trump's policies are generally very good for the country.

This one should blow your mind.

UV Treatment of Blood was used fairly extensively in the past; a NY Writer got this companies Product Demo Video removed from Youtube for "Violating Community Guidelines", and he's proud of it.



That's right, the media is now targeting Biotech startups if their product seems to support an offhand Trump remark.

“So, supposing when we hit the body with a tremendous, whether it’s ultraviolet or just very powerful light, and I think you said that hasn’t been checked, but you’re going to test it. And then I said supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or in some other way. And I think you said you’re going to test that too. Sounds interesting. And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute, one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that by injection inside or almost a cleaning? Because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it’d be interesting to check that, so that you’re going to have to use medical doctors with, but it sounds interesting to me. So, we’ll see, but the whole concept of the light, the way it kills it in one minute. That’s pretty powerful.”

So watch that video, and then try to figure out how the press came up with these headlines:

NYC Poison Control Sees Uptick In Calls After Trump's Disinfectant Comments - NPR

No, Don't Inject Disinfectant: Outcry Over Trump's Musing - U.S. News & World Report

Trump's disinfectants for coronavirus remarks show the danger in his disdain for experts - NBC News

Trump wonders if injecting bleach kills coronavirus, but Cristina Cuomo bathes in it - Los Angeles Times

Injections of Bleach? Beams of Light? Trump Is Self-Destructing Before Our Eyes - New York Times

Proof that the press is not interested in the truth, only in fomenting hate.

FAKE NEWS

Again

https://www.dailywire.com/news/fact-check-no-trump-did-not-tell-people-to-inject-themselves-with-disinfectant-or-drink-bleach

See video above ^^^^

And tell your friends to see the video. They don't have to be logged in:

https://patrick.net/post/1331299/media-lying-outright-hear-what-trump-really-said?120#comment-1665251

https://therightscoop.com/the-media-is-lying-about-increased-emergency-calls-about-drinking-bleach-in-order-to-blame-trump/

Patrick says

Let's talk about specific Trump policies. Which of his policies are you opposed to?

Good luck on getting a cogent answer

The real heroes of this crisis are the Journalists.

hahahahahaha

Patrick says

But a reality show playboy with a plan for America to escape dependency on China and to stem the flood of illegals.

@Patrick,
I don't think he wants to stem flow of illegals. E-verify!!!

Pretty sure they had the US main stream media in mind when they wrote this song:

www.youtube.com/embed/YOqMZkb4Bgo

https://reason.com/2020/04/27/when-it-comes-to-covering-trump-the-new-york-times-has-abandoned-any-distinction-between-reporting-and-opinion/

There is a difference between reporting facts that make Trump uncomfortable, or reporting the opinions of Trump critics, and calling him stupid, uninformed, vain, petty, irresponsible, and self-obsessed. By crossing that line, the Times is erasing the distinction between reporting and advocacy.

Maybe that's for the best. There is nothing wrong with advocacy or opinion journalism (I do it all the time!), as long as it is intellectually honest and explicitly identified as such. The subtler forms of bias that were apparent in news coverage by the Times long before Trump was elected—manifested in decisions about which facts to include or omit, which sources to quote, and which angles to emphasize—are more insidious and therefore more misleading.

Readers may be better served by a newspaper that is open about its prejudices and does not pretend that it aspires to anything like objectivity, which was always an impossible standard to meet, or even balance. But if that is the route the Times chooses, it must abandon the notion that what it does is fundamentally different from what Fox News does, and its "reporters" can hardly object when Trump publicly describes them as political opponents.

Oh hell!

https://nypost.com/2020/04/29/homicide-cops-investigate-death-of-man-who-drank-chloroquine/

Gary Lenius died March 22 when his wife, Wanda, said she served him a mixture of soda and the chemical, typically used to clean fish tanks, after hearing President Trump tout it as a potential cure for the deadly global pandemic, the Washington Free Beacon reported Tuesday.

PATRICK.NET was RIGHT!!!!

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2020/04/29/the_ny_times_used_to_correct_its_whoppers_but_not_these_two_heres_why_123118.html

The 1619 Project is basically full on Black Power trash.

It completely ignores the widespread slavery in Africa - chattel slavery - that existed for thousands of years before European contact, that is was involved far longer with the Arab World over the Sahara via Timbuktu, or the huge profits African Empires made selling slaves by warring on neighbors. The Romans making money selling Gallic Slaves is uncontroversial, why is African Slavery in Africa a taboo Topic? Black Supremacy (aka Dindu Nuttin).

It also grossly exaggerates slavery in the North, turning a handful of Black household servants (scullery maids, housekeepers) to the very wealthy, as somehow crucial in the development of NY or Boston. If anything, the only thing they did was slightly retard wages for unmarried women, given their insignificant numbers and that slavery was ended right away in early 19th Century. Or that the Northern States were among the first governments to do so. Arabs and Africans only ended it at British Cannonpoint.

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2020/01/31/disputed_ny_times_1619_project_is_already_shaping_kids_minds_on_race_bias_122192.html

The amazing thing is that Noted experts on Colonial America protested the curriculum, and the NYT didn't even acknowledge their receipt of it.

It's almost as if they're pushing a narrative.

Interestingly, the most daring opponents of 1619 are orthodox Marxists.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/04/20/ahrr-a20.html

And CNN...

As I point out in my column today, there is no 'double standard' in the way Kavanaugh was treated vs. Biden. A few Dems called for immediate withdrawal of nomination, but the prevailing view was that the accusations should be heard and investigated. Same should be done w Reade.

— Kirsten Powers (@KirstenPowers) May 1, 2020

Amazing.

https://dailycaller.com/2020/05/10/nbc-news-admits-aired-deceptively-edited-clip-bill-barr-meet-the-press-chuck-todd/

NBC News admitted it aired a deceptively edited clip Sunday of Attorney General Bill Barr talking about former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn’s case.

The clip, aired on host Chuck Todd’s “Meet the Press” program, showed Barr being asked by CBS News’ Catherine Herridge how the decision to dismiss Flynn’s case will be viewed upon looking back.

Todd played a clip that showed Barr responding by saying that “history is written by the winners, so it largely depends on who’s writing the history.”

Todd chastised Barr for the comment, saying he was “struck by the cynicism of the answer – it’s a correct answer, but he’s the attorney general. He didn’t make the case that he was upholding the rule of law. He was almost admitting that, yeah, this was a political job.”

However, the clip that NBC News played did not show that Barr did, in fact, say that the decision “upheld the rule of law.” The network was immediately called out on the deceptively edited clip, and NBC’s “Meet the Press” Twitter eventually admitted wrongdoing in a reply tweet.

“You’re correct,” NBC News’ show tweeted after Department of Justice spokeswoman Kerri Kupec trashed the clip in a tweet. “Earlier today, we inadvertently and inaccurately cut short a video clip of an interview with AG Barr before offering commentary and analysis. The remaining clip included important remarks from the attorney general that we missed, and we regret the error.”

The network and show have not yet said if they will issue an on-air correction.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/05/fake-news-new-york-times-admits-report-26-yr-old-e-r-doctor-died-coronavirus-completely-made/

New York Times Admits Report on 26-Yr-Old E.R. Doctor Who Died from Coronavirus Was Completely Made Up

https://thefederalist.com/2020/06/02/source-says-only-smoke-canisters-not-tear-gas-used-on-protestors-before-trumps-arrival-at-burned-church/

Source Says Only Smoke Canisters, Not Tear Gas, Used On Protestors Before Trump’s Arrival At Burned Church
June 2, 2020 By Jordan Davidson

President Trump’s visit to St. John’s Episcopal Church last night was met with heavy social media backlash after reports by many news outlets were publicized suggesting that peaceful protestors were forced from the area using tear gas. According to reporting by Neil Augenstein for WTOPnews, however, there were only smoke canisters.

“A source says tear gas was never used — instead smoke cannisters were deployed, which don’t have an uncomfortable irritant in them,” tweeted Augenstein. “And, the source says Park Police didn’t know President Trump would be walking across the park several minutes later.”

A source says tear gas was never used — instead smoke cannisters were deployed, which don't have an uncomfortable irritant in them. And, the source says Park Police didn't know President Trump would be walking across the park several minutes later. Park Police say…

— Neal Augenstein (@AugensteinWTOP) June 2, 2020

Augenstein says the source also suggested that the crowd began to grow rowdy even before the president’s arrival, which is why police used force.

“…the reason the crowd was disbursed with smoke cannisters [sic] is that at that moment, officers were being pelted with water bottles. Another factor was that protesters had climbed on top of the structure at the north end of Lafayette Square that had been burned the day before,” he continued in the Twitter thread.