War Room Lounge V48: Everybody's a little racist, except me

[kpt018]

He is saying that the centrist Dems will even support someone else who is very progressive, as long as it's not him. Pretty clear.

He didn't say centrist Dems, he called them corporate dems. And that's clearly a smear. It's also a bait and switch. Centrists democrat voters equal the establishment now?

He's also throwing fuel on the fire that the party is out to prevent him from winning. And that will go towards sabotaging any candidate that potentially beats Bernie.

Also, you said he was going to slime the winner of the primary. So I responded by saying, "Just like last time?".

You know, because he totally slimed Hillary by endorsing her.

Right, which is completely irrelevant to what I said.

 

[waiguoren]

Get some sleep, wai.

No, thanks. Feeling quite rested at the moment.

 

[waiguoren]

I guess you're with Spencer, then. BETA

 

[Anung Un Rama]

lol @ "fuck Bernie" gtfo

 

[unimackpass]

To be fair, the guy I'm living with is a Mormon.... though not a stereotypical one.

When not around his 9 year old and 3 year old he still swears like he's active duty infantry. His "look good to get ahead" mentality is cause he was 82nd and loved being in his dress uniform for shit.

Dude fucking ripped me a new one when I first moved in for my beard "you don't fucking use balm or a cream with a brush? Goddamn Greg, living around hippies in Washington has ruined your style"


I'll be honest this is what came to mind when I saw that word.

Serpentine
If you noticed the serpent at the beginning of this word, you’ve hit on a useful mnemonic. Serpents, after all, aren’t known for their open, honest ways. Likewise, the word serpentine is all about cunning. Somebody known for their serpentine ways is likely to deceive you — watch out!

https://magoosh.com/gre/2016/gre-vocab-wednesday-tricky-words/

 

[Fawlty]

It kills the narrative and the resulting cognitive dissidence is hilarious to behold.

I don't think so!

 

[Jesus H. Sherdog]

Dammit I missed Polish's serpatine collage of multi-posts

Lol at possibly the first correct use of “collage” in this thread.

 

[BarryDillon]

He didn't say centrist Dems, he called them corporate dems. And that's clearly a smear. It's also a bait and switch. Centrists democrat voters equal the establishment now?

He's also throwing fuel on the fire that the party is out to prevent him from winning. And that will go towards sabotaging any candidate that potentially beats Bernie.


Right, which is completely irrelevant to what I said.

You have no solid basis to believe that Bernie will smear the winner of the Dem primary if it isn't him. It's purely a reactionary stance. No data at all to back it up.

And I agree that he's smearing a part of the Democratic party, but I don't agree that he's smearing Warren.

 

[Trotsky]

- anonymous internet poster with no power states opinion based on facts = providing cover for Trump and subsequently blamed for any future full autocracy the US government may adopt. LOL!.

This is akin to dismissing accusations that you helped elect Trump by saying "one vote doesn't matter." No, you specifically making these posts doesn't provide cover for Trump. But people like you and with your level of intelligence repeating that argument does because it represents a marked lapse in reason.

Good point, and my issue has always been with the media propaganda anyhow, so 'touché'.

If Greenwald had kept his criticism to media tenor and the improper incentives of for-profit news, which really seems to be the crux of his/your position, then there wouldn't be an issue. But Greenwald hasn't so much as mentioned that. Instead he made a fallacious argument to the merits of the investigation rather than an opinion about the reporting priorities of the media.

 

[Fawlty]

This fuckin' guy thinks he's some kind of a languigist all of the sudden

 

[unimackpass]

Greenwald is still weaselly about even admitting that Russia was the source of the hacks. He's been totally humiliated on the issue. And, on top of that, he's pretty openly opposed to the U.S. having power so his angle is entirely different from other commentators (in that most commentators on American politics are Americans who want America to be better off).

Really dude?
It's cool though, whatever you need to tell yourself.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Good point, and my issue has always been with the media propaganda anyhow, so 'touché'.

The report actually confirmed most of the reporting on the issues. I think the MSM score for coverage has to be around A or A-.

 

[BarryDillon]

This fuckin' guy thinks he's some kind of a languigist all of the sudden

 

[Jesus H. Sherdog]

I guess you're with Spencer, then. BETA

I honestly don’t think the issue is so binary as to be either with Spencer or Peterson there...

Will watch the beta thing later for laughs.

Serpentine
If you noticed the serpent at the beginning of this word, you’ve hit on a useful mnemonic. Serpents, after all, aren’t known for their open, honest ways. Likewise, the word serpentine is all about cunning. Somebody known for their serpentine ways is likely to deceive you — watch out!

https://magoosh.com/gre/2016/gre-vocab-wednesday-tricky-words/

people are just giving you gas about the misspelling, man.

 

[kpt018]

You have no solid basis to believe that Bernie will smear the winner of the Dem primary if it isn't him. It's purely a reactionary stance. No data at all to back it up.

And I agree that he's smearing a part of the Democratic party, but I don't agree that he's smearing Warren.

My evidence is that he just did that in the very tweet I quoted. He smeared the party for supporting Warren which makes her the preferred candidate of corporate Dems. She is smeared by association.

The alternative to Bernie's ridiculous theory is she is every bit as progressive but far more intelligent and with a wider range of detailed policies. And her message is to save capitalism from crony capitalism and not the political revolution stuff. Simply put she's just better. And for the record she's the best candidate in the field and by quite a lot imo so it's not a knock on Bernie. Shit tweets like this are a knock on Bernie.

Do you think for one second that if she is the winner that Trump will not use this against her? If you do you're naive.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Really dude?
It's cool though, whatever you need to tell yourself.

Is your view that Greenwald supports America being more influential in world politics or less influential in world politics?

 

[Higus]

This fuckin' guy thinks he's some kind of a languigist all of the sudden

Some folks just take spell check for granite.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

This is akin to dismissing accusations that you helped elect Trump by saying "one vote doesn't matter." No, you specifically making these posts doesn't provide cover for Trump. But people like you and with your level of intelligence repeating that argument does because it represents a marked lapse in reason.

On the contrary, I still think Trump is a piece of shit who is losing his mind, is unfit for office and should be impeached and probably criminally charged when he's out of office. Weird that that gets missed in my posting, but I say he didn't collude with Russia against the US and all of a sudden I'm covering for him and the reason for his reelection and our country's decent into full autocracy. You people are fucking weirdos.

And the truth is, its anti-Trump extremists who lose their fucking minds over everything he does, and oftentimes have to take a step back because they were wrong, or no steps back in teh case of people like Rachel Maddow, who will be responsible for a Trump reelection. Not he people who oppose him, but the people who oppose him because he's him or out of fear that Russia will turn off our heat in the winter or some other bullshit.

If Greenwald had kept his criticism to media tenor and the improper incentives of for-profit news, which really seems to be the crux of his/your position, then there wouldn't be an issue. But Greenwald hasn't so much as mentioned that. Instead he made a fallacious argument to the merits of the investigation rather than an opinion about the reporting priorities of the media.

I don't see it that way at all, so we're just going to have to disagree.

 

[Jack V Savage]

The second part is much shakier. To speak of a group of millions of people being "committed to enacting policies" is sloppy. Most voters are very uninformed on policy.

Referring to the organization as a whole. Note how Trump promised UHC and progressive changes in taxes but (predictably) abandoned those promises in office. As a Republican, he's drawing on the pool of Republican advisers, he's working with Republicans in Congress, relies on Republican propaganists, etc.

I think the premise that "True Conservatism" is well-defined is plainly wrong. More importantly, preferring a candidate based on ideological identification is usually an act of tribalism. Superiority/inferiority of a candidate is in the details.

I am skeptical of Weld because of his specific stances on issues. One of those stances leads me to the conclusion that he's not a careful thinker. I might prefer him to Trump though. I haven't done enough research to draw a conclusion on that. There are better uses of my time, as Weld has no chance of winning.

Not sure what this is about. Seems kooky.

You didn't get my joke, which is fine, but I actually agree that ideology isn't the most important factor in a candidate (for example, I tend to line up with Gabbard on a lot of ideological issues, but her lack of experience, intelligence, and ethics are a dealbreaker for me).

 

[BarryDillon]

Some folks just take spell check for granite.