|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On August 18 2015 12:04 ticklishmusic wrote:
I find myself defending Trump to friends... I'm not gonna vote for him (I'll vote whoever ends up as the Democratic nominee) but it's weird.
Trump doesn't beat around the bush. And I wouldn't defend Trump but I have been called racist (or that my posts may be interpreted as racist) by people who toss the words "racism" and "racist" like candy (check Plansix's post history) for bringing up legitimate issues this country faces, and then someone says "there isn't an illegal immigration problem. In fact, the problem is illegal immigrants facing discrimination." Talk about losing sight of the forest for the trees.
|
On August 18 2015 10:22 RenSC2 wrote:
"Most religious people spend serious time on a daily basis thinking about religion." From my experience, serious religious people do put serious thought into it... while operating in an echo chamber. As soon as someone who can ask pointed questions comes along, the defense turns to nonsense and when that is pointed out, the defense turns to blind faith. Perhaps I just haven't met or seen competent defenders of religion yet. They may be out there.
From my experience, most religious people can't put together a logical defense of their religion. Instead, they believe in religion based on faith. And because they believe based on faith rather than reason, they are easy to manipulate. In the case of these televangelists, they go from what's in the bible "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God!" and somehow these religious authorities tell people that it's great to be wealthy and you're doing Gods work by being wealthy. So just send them 1000s of dollars (even on credit) as "seed money" and that wealth will be returned to you many times over in life through the work of God.
I wonder how many people would make that investment if the guy asking for it didn't invoke the name of Jesus and God. It sure seems like they're demanding blind faith... and the successful ones get millions of dollars for it.
I feel like it’s important to note that even if you disagree with the initial premise, the chain of reasoning that follows can be self-consistent and well-reasoned.
Usually people have faith in a small number of basic assumptions (eg. God is all-powerful/all-knowing etc, the bible is the word of God etc), and these – by their nature – are impossible to prove. The “pointed questions” tend to challenge one of these unprovable assumptions, and so the responses won’t be particularly complex because there is no satisfactory answer for someone working from a different starting point.
However, those assumptions do lead to an extremely complex web of doctrine, practice and theology which can be quite well-thought out indeed. Call it an echo chamber if you like, but in the context of a “serious” religious person who has put thought into that web, it’s pretty difficult to swing something which is genuinely contrary. A new idea is going to be tested against all the existing material and all the consideration they’ve already given other topics, and it’s not at all trivial to find a con that would hold up.
Of course, in reality the average televangelee is probably not “serious” by that definition, any more than the people buying pills in the health food aisle are “serious” about nutritional science.
|
On August 18 2015 12:28 Deathstar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2015 12:04 ticklishmusic wrote:
I find myself defending Trump to friends... I'm not gonna vote for him (I'll vote whoever ends up as the Democratic nominee) but it's weird. Trump doesn't beat around the bush. And I wouldn't defend Trump but I have been called racist (or that my posts may be interpreted as racist) by people who toss the words "racism" and "racist" like candy (check Plansix's post history) for bringing up legitimate issues this country faces, and then someone says "there isn't an illegal immigration problem. In fact, the problem is illegal immigrants facing discrimination." Talk about losing sight of the forest for the trees.
What do you think the problem with illegal immigration is? Most economists agree that immigrants have a positive (albeit small) effect on wages in general, and they definitely contribute to economic growth. Also, I'm not going to look up sources now because it's late, but a large portion (perhaps half?) of the illegal immigrants in this country just overstayed their visas because the process for getting a green card is hellish. These people tend to be highly skilled and educated. They are exactly the people we need to keep in America if we want to stay competitive, but instead of encouraging them stay we make it incredibly difficult for them, and subject them to mean-spirited rhetoric from assholes like Trump.
The only problem with the immigration system is that it is too difficult to immigrate legally. Ironically, the best way to "secure the border" is to make it so that the foreign workers upon whom our economy depends have a legal means to enter the country.
|
Bernie is a cardboard cutout display of a Alinskyian mannequin that nobody purchased. He has the best of intentions but is better off running for office in France.
|
On August 18 2015 13:04 whatisthisasheep wrote:
Bernie is a cardboard cutout display of a Alinskyian mannequin that nobody purchased. He has the best of intentions but is better off running for office in France.
Just by looking at the race I wouldn't even start with that. First ignoring everything 40% of the country will vote for either the blues or the reds if its even Hitler vs FDR. Second hes going against Hillary who somehow has managed to gain more baggage then the brother of George W bush. These things are the perfect conditions for something crazy like bernie making it to the national stage.
|
On August 18 2015 13:21 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2015 13:04 whatisthisasheep wrote:
Bernie is a cardboard cutout display of a Alinskyian mannequin that nobody purchased. He has the best of intentions but is better off running for office in France. Just by looking at the race I wouldn't even start with that. First ignoring everything 40% of the country will vote for either the blues or the reds if its even Hitler vs FDR. Second hes going against Hillary who somehow has managed to gain more baggage then the brother of George W bush. These things are the perfect conditions for something crazy like bernie making it to the national stage.
I just cant see him getting past Biden or Gore. If Bernie was more charismatic he could galvanize the media enough to get his message substantial attention. The media covers Biden and Gore (who arnt even in the race yet) more than Sanders. Bernie just needs to get less boring.
|
On August 18 2015 13:29 whatisthisasheep wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2015 13:21 Sermokala wrote:On August 18 2015 13:04 whatisthisasheep wrote:
Bernie is a cardboard cutout display of a Alinskyian mannequin that nobody purchased. He has the best of intentions but is better off running for office in France. Just by looking at the race I wouldn't even start with that. First ignoring everything 40% of the country will vote for either the blues or the reds if its even Hitler vs FDR. Second hes going against Hillary who somehow has managed to gain more baggage then the brother of George W bush. These things are the perfect conditions for something crazy like bernie making it to the national stage. I just cant see him getting past Biden or Gore. If Bernie was more charismatic he could galvanize the media enough to get his message substantial attention. The media covers Biden and Gore (who arnt even in the race yet) more than Sanders. Bernie just needs to get less boring.
Bernie isn't boring, and he strikes a nerve. But yeah, if Hillary doesn't step her game up or continues to fumble at some point the Democratic machine is gonna sit her down, have a talk that begins and ends with "Hillary, we gave ya two chances sorry", and then recruit Biden or Gore. Biden is a lovable old doofus (who is actually surprisingly effective behind the scenes considering he's the administration's main liason with the Senate) and Gore, who would be president if a couple Florida college students had drunk a little less the night before and made it to the polling station. Oh, and then he went and made global warming his raison d'etre and won a Nobel.
Still, I think Hillary will be fine. All these scandals are hitting her far too early , though Bernie running from the left makes it a perfect-ish storm and has the potential to knock her off before she becomes an unstoppable force. If she can get through the next bit, it's easy sailing though.
Thinking about it, the Democrats have a lot of pretty decent candidates in the wings for the next few years. Gonna be interesting to see how everything shapes up. Not sure who the Republicans will be fielding in the near future, based on the 2016 crop they're scraping the bottom of the barrel.
|
Will Chelsea be eligible to run in 2020?
|
On August 18 2015 11:48 Deathstar wrote:I love this article in the Atlantic Title: What do Donald Trump voters actually want? http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/08/donald-trump-voters/401408/Btw I have no intention of voting for Donald Trump. I am with Sanders thoroughly, and I'm in a Blue state anyway. But I do find Donald Trump very intriguing and desirable as a candidate for the presidency. There is a table of contents, but here is one: Show nested quote +A Liberal Who Wants America to Win
I have been a liberal practically all of my life (29 years). I am an atheist, and my first ever Presidential vote was cast for John Kerry. I more or less despised George Bush, and even though I leaned toward Hillary in 2008, I voted for Obama in 2012. I support gay marriage, legalization of marijuana, and many other liberal positions.
I do, however, believe that our country is in a terrible position and on a terrible track. Trump strikes many of my nerves, but one of the most accurate and dangerously true statements he has made is that "America doesn't win anymore." I agree. The world is rising while America falls. America and its leaders seem resigned to this fact. Rather than stiffening their spine and fighting to make America a prosperous nation for all, they simply talk, go through the motions, throw out a few "red meat" issues to keep their respective bases satisfied, and continue to concede American jobs and economic strength to the rest of the world.
To friends and family, I have long railed against the fact that America uses Presidential rejects and other back-bench political cronies as their chief negotiators. John Kerry (yes, the man I voted for) was out-negotiated time and time again by his Russian counterpart. And now, it appears that the same thing has happened once again with the Iran negotiators. This all ties back to the same fundamental thread: politicians have failed this country, leading to one loss after another.
I do not believe that I am a racist, sexist, homophobic, or any other negative label that has been affixed to Trump supports. Rather, I feel that political correctness has run amok in this country, and we now live in a society where every blogger and Twitter user is searching for the slightest offense so they can try to ruin another human (famous, or not). The average person is afraid of expressing any controversial opinion in a public forum for fear of being "exposed," made viral, and ruined, personally and/or professionally. It is heartening to see someone as confident and impervious to criticism as Trump standing up to this ever-present mob…and winning! People tend to support the underdog. Most media outlets have attacked Trump with so much vitriol that they have turned him into a sympathetic figure.
Yes, I really do feel that Donald Trump has the interests of America at heart. He has already made his money and lived a life of glamour and fame, and another few billion dollars won't have any real impact on his quality of life. Rather, I genuinely believe that Trump feels the need to fight for the country he loves. There once was a time when people could actually feel proud to be Americans, and Trump comes from a generation that experienced that feeling. Now, many are embarrassed to be associated with this country. Jobs are being outsourced with reckless abandon and this country is literally being hollowed out. Economic statistics do no justice to this reality, and the average American knows this to be true.
Trump supporters feel that a confident, strong-willed leader is needed to right the ship and to fight back against the perpetual decline this country has experienced for the last two-plus decades. And to be honest, I feel that Trump is our only hope in this next election. This is coming from someone who voted for Obama in the last election! Anyway, that's my story and the main reasons why I support Trump. I didn't plan out this response for days or try to make this all-inclusive, but this should give you a fair idea of why I, a liberal, support Donald Trump for president. Other interesting ones include: Trump Knows It’s All a Joke Bush Was a Disaster and Obama Felt Like One Show nested quote +2) Obama: I supported Obama the first time, and reluctantly the second time. I think he saved America. BUT. Obama failed big time in overcoming the partisan divide. He put his cronies in charge. Worst of all, he appears weak. Like an intellectual. Intellectuals make simple things complicated, and FAIL in real life. Because while real life may be complicated, you create progress by making it simple. By getting things done. Stop thinking, start doing. Stop considering, make a decision. Finally, Show nested quote +A Bernie Sanders Supporter Who’d Vote Trump Over Clinton
It is not that Trump supporters necessarily trust Trump to be their champion or that he can be relied upon to deliver better than other politicians. It is the confidence that he can't do worse (and just might do better). In the meantime, his supporters relish the contempt he shows toward the mainstream media and politicians (a contempt which is shared not just by Tea Party conservatives, but many educated liberals and independents). I am a Bernie Sanders supporter. But if I had to vote for any Republican, it would certainly be Trump. In a face off between Hillary Clinton and Trump, I again would vote Trump. While he might not deliver on his promises, he would certainly be a bull in the China shop of contemporary American politics, which has long needed destroying and rebuilding. First quoted section strikes the nail on the head. You might be some true-blue lib and STILL get the feeling that conventional politicians your friends are voting for are resigned to America losing, period. You identify with Trump's message and can't justify those charges of racism sexism and homophobia leveled against his supporters. Maybe that's the last straw for you going along with the media-narrative of benign political correctness. You're tired of the average politician talk and the established marketplace of political favor-trading. Even if the last rungs of the Trump policy ladder are a step too far, you respect the aims of the man going against the grain.
|
Isn’t this „America is losing because of "immigrants/weak foreign policy...“, „America should win (against China/Mexico/Russia…“ like textbook Fascist rethoric?
And that Trump supporters are called racist. Well, when you support a guy that openly stated Mexicans/Illegal immigrants are rapists/criminals you kinda deserve that one? Thats not a PC issue anymore, thats just clear cut racism.
|
On August 18 2015 07:50 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2015 07:46 KwarK wrote:On August 18 2015 07:36 Wegandi wrote:On August 18 2015 06:23 ZasZ. wrote:On August 18 2015 03:29 Plansix wrote:On August 18 2015 03:25 ZasZ. wrote:On August 18 2015 03:07 zlefin wrote:
Stealth, please don't post things like that Jon Oliver clip in that fashion. A 20 minute video clip with no explanation/discussion/notes of its content is not helpful. Either don't post them, or say a little bit about what's in the video and your reaction to it. What's the difference between posting an embedded YouTube video with no additional commentary and posting a news article with no additional commentary? He does the latter all the time. If you don't have the time to watch why not just come back to it later. It's a good piece, by the way, and highlights the problems with flat-out exemption for religious institutions. Every man and woman he talks about in that video should be brought up on fraud and extortion charges but that can't happen in this batshit-insane country. Like how Sciencetology just filed lawsuit after lawsuit until the IRS gave them status as a religion? Yet no one thinks about it because no one sees them as anything other than a weird little thing Tom Cruise was into. Literally got what they wanted through legal attrition. The fact is that religion or tax free status isn’t bad, but it’s misused as much as the tax free status for non-profits. The difference is that non-profits have to stand on their own merits and can’t claim a war on religion every time someone points out their bullshit. And it has nothing to do with religion itself, but with people using religion to gain unearned credibility. Of course it has something to do with religion itself. What other institution could drum up a cult so successful that people will literally give thousands of dollars they don't have away so that TV personalities can live a life of luxury? To be clear, I am saying that despite all the good religion can do in this world, and it does a lot of good, it is still fundamentally an organization that asks its followers to believe no matter what other people, or the world around you, says. At that most basic level, religion is the perfect vehicle for con-artists like those Oliver discusses, because they hardly need to convince these people of anything, they just need to establish some form of perceived credibility that they speak for God. Once they are able to convince people that donations to them are donations to God, the rest is easy. What other institution? The State. They don't even ask either - don't pay, incarceration, death, or destitution. Propaganda isn't limited to religious institutions. The State isn't a cult, it's a social contract. We collectively form it, empower it and benefit from it. I'm sure you disagree but your starting assumptions are incomprehensible to me and I imagine mine are to you. And congregants don't collectively form their church? Please. None of what you said addresses the tautology of a cult. Patriotism is about the highest form of cultism there is.
sometimes, just sometimes, i just love Wegandi.
|
I think Trump is a moron, but at least quote him right... He said that some of them were. And that entire discussion has already been had in this thread.
|
On August 18 2015 12:28 Deathstar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2015 12:04 ticklishmusic wrote:
I find myself defending Trump to friends... I'm not gonna vote for him (I'll vote whoever ends up as the Democratic nominee) but it's weird. and then someone says "there isn't an illegal immigration problem. In fact, the problem is illegal immigrants facing discrimination." Talk about losing sight of the forest for the trees.
That was me, so I think you meant to say "talk about being actually knowledgeable on the impact of immigration instead of falling for the fear-mongering of right-wing politicians".
|
On August 18 2015 12:28 Deathstar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2015 12:04 ticklishmusic wrote:
I find myself defending Trump to friends... I'm not gonna vote for him (I'll vote whoever ends up as the Democratic nominee) but it's weird. Trump doesn't beat around the bush. And I wouldn't defend Trump but I have been called racist (or that my posts may be interpreted as racist) by people who toss the words "racism" and "racist" like candy (check Plansix's post history) for bringing up legitimate issues this country faces, and then someone says "there isn't an illegal immigration problem. In fact, the problem is illegal immigrants facing discrimination." Talk about losing sight of the forest for the trees.
When you say things that sound racist without the evidence to prove your point, that happens. Sorry if your feeling got hurt. Maybe include a link to the data your citing about and entire race next time to avoid it.
The power is yours.
|
Probably a bit late to the party, but i still wanted to talk a bit about the televangelists, i am really split on that issue.
On one hand, i think that "a fool and his money are easily parted". If someone is foolish enough to send their money to one of these con artists, it is really their own fault. Granted, i am not religious and thus have a problem understanding that mindset in general, but these guys look so obviously shady and are so obviously only focussed on getting your money i have trouble understanding how anyone can fall for them.
On the other hand, these televangelist guys look like absolute dickwads who seem to try to scam gullible people out of their money, which is pretty disgusting. I just don't understand how they are this efficient at it.
I just don't see a good way to seperate them from serious churches, as they all build on the same basic principles to a degree, and they all want the money of the believers, though some are less focussed on it than others. Maybe churches should need a warning label just like cigarette packages "There is no evidence that giving us money will improve your situation in any way."
|
On August 18 2015 14:07 whatisthisasheep wrote:
Will Chelsea be eligible to run in 2020?
She's already 35, which is the age requirement to run for U.S. President (or VP). As far as I'm aware, she's eligible to run now, let alone in 5 years.
|
Just think... in ~11+ years, it could be Chelsea Clinton vs. Bristol Palin.
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On August 18 2015 22:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Just think... in ~11+ years, it could be Chelsea Clinton vs. Bristol Palin.
Are you reduced to using British place names for your children?
|
Hopefully, the fact that Bristol Palin is dumber than her mother keeps her out of the equation 😉
|
On August 18 2015 22:05 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2015 22:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Just think... in ~11+ years, it could be Chelsea Clinton vs. Bristol Palin. Are you reduced to using British place names for your children?
We like to think of it more as paying homage; just ask Vice President Liverpool!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
