Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 975 total)
  • Author
  • in reply to: Bacon banished again #32407

    For a variety of reasons I’ve relegated myself to literal lurking the last several weeks; and then only sporadically at best.

    This may be my final posting. If you’re interested in my underlining reasoning, by all means read on. If you could care less, that’s certainly fine as well. As you were.

    I welcome critical discourse. While I have opinions, at request I can always provide a framework of fact based supportive reasoning to help illustrate how I arrived at them. I believe in knowledge for knowledge’s sake. I have an appreciation for higher learning and academia. Facts matter. Logic matters. Critical thinking matters. Science matters. I can distinguish between fact and opinion. I welcome and can withstand informed challenge to my viewpoint. I’m interested in hearing, exactly and specifically, why someone may believe my conclusions are in error. I can personally admit a mistake as well as acknowledge when I’m not fully versed in a subject. In turn, I enjoy teaching others what they may not know or perhaps had simply never considered.

    Apparently these are not common skillsets or philosophical leanings. Or at least there’s little to none in regular evidence in this forum.

    To be clear for the final time. I don’t dislike Pope Bacon, or Dork, or Broadway because they’re “conservatives” or “Republicans” or “Christians” or whatever label they wish to affix to themselves or happen to ideologically self-identify as. All three of them have trotted out that particular strawman ad nauseam. It’s been refuted, with supportive reasoning provided, any number of times by myself and others. Yet, they continue to cling to that fiction like an adrift sailor clutching a piece of driftwood regardless of the level of fact based care and attention that has been directed towards them refuting such inanity. Provably, it’s mattered not in the least if the attempted communication is polite, impolite, grammatically proper, spoken in slang, replete with swear words and pejoratives utized in frustration entirely borne of their own obstinacy, or written with the care of a school teacher. It’s all received exactly the same way. Which is to say, utterly ignored.

    I dislike them because they’re relentlessly dishonest, ignorant, and hypocritical. Or in many cases, apparently simply abjectly stupid. They won’t answer direction questions, are unable or unwilling to provide any kind of substantive reasoning to support a proffered conclusion, and are guilty of basically every example of faulty reasoning one could imagine or offer in example thereof.

    To those points, Dork appears to be simply stupid and regularly engages in behavior that is both childish and trolling. He exists here simply to incite or taunt. Broadway appears to be some form of simple minded religious zealot; incapable of original or cogent thought and incapable (or unwilling) of addressing anything remotely nuanced or complex. He’s the dictionary definition of unreasonable. Pope Bacon is the worst of both worlds. While moderately intelligent and capable of typing out an original thought with proper spelling and grammar, he’s willfully dense, ideologically hidebound and often deliberately offensive. He’s entirely uninterested, or perhaps entirely incapable as well of, in defending his opinions using fact based reasoning and regularly ignores direct questions regardless of the manner they are posed. He’s also, provably, an inveterate liar and a colossal hypocrite. Those last two points, of course, being the main issue.

    All three of them post editorials that happen to agree with their viewpoints as “proof” of being correct, post nonsensical links to content that by any objective and fair minded assessment range from misguided to utterly delusional in lieu of writing an original thought, are alternately unwilling or incapable of logically defending a viewpoint with objectively fact based information, cannot withstand any degree of critical scrutiny, are routinely both dishonest and hypocritical, and without fail are entirely unwilling to ever concede they may be in error. If the facts of any particular issue don’t align with their belief, those facts are simply ignored. None of them have ever evidenced any desire whatsoever to actually engage in reasoned discourse. They’re uninterested in learning, uninterested in teaching, and uninterested in critical engagement. One wonders why they bother. They don’t care if you agree with them or not, they’re not interested in trying to convince you that you should, and they clearly aren’t interested in perhaps being persuaded they’re incorrect about anything they believe. Ever.

    I have no idea why Bacon was banned. Again. Nor do I even particularly care. While he was among the most egregious offender of the kind of studied idiocy I’ve outlined, he’s hardly alone. Being the intellectual ringleader of that collection of dimwits is a dubious distinction at best. So, finally, he’s gone. I mean, hurray? Why was it allowed to continue for as long as it had? He and the likeminded, and I’m using the word minded with both care and irony, are still here contributing basically nothing and creating an entirely unpleasant experience.

    That kind of lack of moderation is hardly unique to this forum, the internet and sites beyond counting are swimming in ludicrous trolls and stupidity, which often leaves participants only one real choice. Choose to be a part of it, or not.

    If anyone who identifies as a “conservative”, a “Republican”, a “Christion” or whatever would like to actually in *engage* in intelligent, rational, fact based, honest, critical discourse that would be welcomed. I’d love that. I have yet to encounter any evidence of it. Such people cannot seemingly abide challenge. To wit, the people whom (fairly or no) represent those viewpoints on this board are, in my studied opinion, complete fucking idiots.

    Newsflash: I dislike fucking idiots. A lot. Anyone whom happens to identify as “liberal”, “Democrat”, or “Atheist” who behaves in the same utterly stupid manner would be greeted with an equal level of vitriol. It’s not about your being a “conservative” or a “Christian” or whatever. Dumb is the great equalizer. Allowing morons, of whatever ideological stripe, to metaphorically run into a room, pee in the corner, and then rush out again giggling without consequence is the real issue.

    The level of unmoderated, rampant, anti-intellectualism and abject ignorance and stupidity that’s allowed to flourish here is remarkable. For a discussion forum to function as intended, you need participants willing to have a discussion. That in turn requires a commonly held acceptance of fact in addition to possessing the ability to critically reason and engage in a constructive give and take. It requires engagement. This last bit of broader criticism is not directed solely at any one, three, or eve dozen individuals.

    So, yeah. I think it’s a problem.

    When I want to read what stupid people think, I can always scroll through my Facebook feed. This is becoming redundant. Shame on me for assuming, for too long, that actual rational discussion and engagement was welcome or wanted.

    Fare thee well, mostly all. Mayhap we shall speak again. Or, maybe not.

    in reply to: Harvey rescuers now face deportation #31719

    In the eyes of Trump, news coverage often matters more than almost anything else. That he was hailed for getting results while working with Democrats could spur similar decisions. But White House and congressional aides said it was unclear how many other issues there would be agreement on — and that Trump could soon change his mind. (LG edit: no shit)

    He’s a total and complete fucking boob.

    in reply to: Harvey rescuers now face deportation #31718

    By all reports, he accepted the Democrats budget compromise in large part (if not in total) solely to annoy and humiliate the GOP led congress.

    As you may have noted, it worked. Right wing world was aghast. Metaphorically speaking, Donald handed the Democrats a loaded gun for the next round of negotiations in ninety days.

    Related, what does it cost Trump to say any of that? He’s a troll, being a troll. His “truth” is whatever he happens to believe at that moment.


    That’s not a high bar.

    in reply to: Pence outshines his boss in Harvey disaster #31616

    I can find a way to criticize that, Bacon.

    He hasn’t donated a dime as of yet. He claims that he will. The White House is already backpedaling a bit on the specifics. Likely, as it’s either not going to happen and/or he’ll find some way for the “Trump campaign” or some other fund that’s not actually coming out of his pocket directly, to pay for it.

    Trump has a long history of donating nothing, or using other people’s money in his name, to appear charitable. That’s not spin; it’s a fact. It’s all documented.

    You’ll, of course, either lie about the matter or ignore it.

    in reply to: Pence outshines his boss in Harvey disaster #31602

    I agree.


    Demonstrably, Broadway is devoid of original thought.


    A. Believes something that’s completely, factually unsupportable. In this example, in point of incontestable fact, that church did not flood and could have engaged in any number of humanitarian actions long before public shaming forced them to. Osteen’s statements on the matter have changed several times.
    B. Looks up something on-line that “proves” his factually unsupportable belief is in fact accurate. Invariably written in the form of an editorial from a source that already agreed with him.
    C. Remains inconvincible, no matter the level nor depth of fact based information presented to the contrary.
    D. Makes no attempt what-so-ever to support his belief or address contrary data. Evidence on forum would suggest he’s incapable of doing so. He’s the link-troll.
    E. Vanishes back down the internet rat-hole until the next time.
    F. Rinse/repeat.

    in reply to: Trump bumbles first international crisis #31563

    You now also have the Sectary of State directly contradicting the President of the United States.

    We’re done talking, babbles Trump via Twitter.

    We’re never done pursuing diplomatic options, calmly retorts the SOS.

    Still declaring a victory by bluster, Bacon?


    Talk to a (really) good realtor that you trust, and in candor they’ll readily admit another bubble is about to pop.


    Broadway still thinks it’s cool. The 700 Club said this is all made up and that Osteen is terrific.


    Should one care to look for it, there’s video shot as recently as yesterday that shows there’s no flooding around that building. There’s some water damage in the garage and the adjacent halls. That’s it. The interior is fine.

    Oh, but they’re prepared to help out “once city and county shelters reach capacity”.

    In other words, until at such time you have literally no-where else go go, fuck off.


    I’ll help you out, here.

    The Trump campaign has been lying about contact with Russia throughout Donald’ campaign for the Presidency. Many of the lies are not even contested at this point; now they’re simply parsing (and continuing to lie) about what it all meant.

    Lying, in of itself, is not a crime. However, colluding with foreign governments or agents and proxies of that government to impact (no matter how obliquely) the results of a U.S. election, is. Lying about such contact to Federal investigators is a crime as well.

    Donald Trump Jr, Paul Manafort, and Jared Kushner met with known Russian agents at Trump Tower. The purpose of that meeting was to discuss the release of potentially politically damaging information about Hillary Clinton to help aid in the election of Donald Trump. You’ll recall they claimed such meeting never happened, until proven that they had. Then they lied about what the meetings were about, until The New York Times forced them to admit the actual subjects under discussion.

    Republican operative Peter W. Smith made a seeming attempt to obtain Hillary Clinton’s emails via Russian hackers. A part of the investigation being conducted by Robert Mueller is currently investing Michael Flynn’s connections to this operation. The same Michael Flynn who failed to disclose his foreign conflicts of interest, including those in the Russian backed government of Ukraine. Whom was then endlessly defended by Donald Trump in the face of overwhelming evidence of said conflict of interest?

    More recently Trump associate Felix Slater has been revealed as a source of a number of very strange emails, sent to Trump’s lawyers, bragging about he’s been working with Putin and the Russian’s to help get “our boy” elected President.

    Trump has innumerable financial interests with Russian oligarchs; many of them that look very shady. That’s one of the reasons he refuses to release his tax returns. It’s one thing for Donald Trump, private citizen, to be engaged in all kinds of unsavory chicanery with foreigners that could be charitably described as ethically flexible. It’s quite another for The President of the United States.

    Oh, and he fired the FBI director who was investigating these Russian connections. And actually bragged on TV, (and then in a meeting with the Russian ambassador in the Oval office, no less) that yes indeed that’s exactly he reason he fired him.

    Trump himself invited Russians to help him win the election by hacking Hillary’s email and releasing it.

    I could go on and on. It’s completely, fucking, insane.

    None of this lunacy is remotely normal. There were no Russians lurking about the campaigns of Obama, or Romney, or McCain, or Bush, or anyone. This is a full blown Trump phenomenon.

    People can, and no doubt will continue to, pretend this is all politically derived.

    It’s not. This is not now, nor has it ever been, about Republicans and Democrats. This is about America and the integrity of our system; which our own intelligence agencies insist was compromised by Russian interference. At the least, Donald Trump benefited from it and is simply a colossal boob. It’s possible. At worst, he and or people in his orbit and in the know worked in some manner, no matter how small or how ineptly, to facilitate such. If it’s the latter, it’s criminal.

    THAT, is what the investigations are about.

    I predict history is going to have a harsh, fucking, verdict for those whom continue to pretend otherwise.


    Yes, Broadway. It does depend on where you get your “news”.

    You chose a lunatic propaganda site.

    in reply to: Afghanistan #31454

    Never point never.

    Make a note of the date and time. We’ll check in a year from now and see how all of this is going.

    Afghanistan is not even a “country” in the way you’ve outlined.The “President” of Afghanistan is in actuality, in terms of ability to get anything accomplished” the mayor of Kabul. A more accurate historical parallel of this mess would be Somalia.

    Holding out hope that western style democracy, or even a stable and secular (the latter being the key word) society, is an utter impossibility for too many reasons to list. Suggesting otherwise is the worst kind of wishful thinking.

    I’m not nitpicking anecdotes. I’ve written actual papers on this subject.

    Feel free to believe otherwise. It’s utterly remarkable to me how in the face of overwhelming, objectively factual information to the contrary how utterly unwilling people are to even concede the possibility a conception might be erroneous.

    I mean, we only have hundreds of years of modern history to look at, in addition to sixteen years and counting of complete futility and humiliation, to underscore how foolish this entire endeavor is from top to bottom.

    in reply to: Afghanistan #31427

    Andrew stated: “I like to play devil’s advocate in situations like this and ask: what happens if we pull out? Then Afghanistan implodes back into chaos, back to a failed state, back to a terrorist haven”.

    I’ve read pretty extensively about this conflict, including first person accounts from American and allied military forces that have served in the theatre, and am also well versed in both the history of Afghanistan as well as the current political situation on the ground today. Not to be flippant, but it’s already in chaos, Andrew. It’s been that way for decades. It will be that way for decades more.

    With respect, the idea of Afghanistan as a functional “country” is largely a creation of western media and propagandists. In actuality it meets the literal definition of a failed state. Put succinctly, it’s a hot mess.

    The fallacy long perpetuated by our political leaders of both parties, to wit that without our intervention Afghanistan will revert to a terrorist haven, is utter nonsense. Provably, the enemy in question are entirely capable of planning and executing complex terror operations from virtually anywhere in the world. There’s no amount of military force that can in of itself solve that particular problem. Afghanistan is no more a safe, or by contrast, an unsafe “haven” for terrorist activity more so than any one of three dozen or more countries you could name. We’re more likely to be the victims of terrorist plotting that originated in Saudi Arabia, or Iran, or for that matter Germany or England, than we are Afghanistan.

    Do you know what happens if The United States pulls out of Afghanistan entirely? The answer is: largely nothing.

    -Civilians would stop dying in our vain attempts to quash an insurgency which is by definition unstoppable; and in doing so we actually take away the most effective recruiting tool of said insurgency.

    -By removing our military we remove both the very reason they’re fighting in the first place, i.e. we’ve invaded and occupied land that does not belong to us, and also remove the prime rationale by which religious extremists recruit fighters to their cause.

    -We stop wasting billions of U.S. tax dollars, we stop killing innocent people, and we stop sending our own citizens to die for no good reason.

    The average, uneducated, impoverished, ignorant, religious-born fanatic that wishes death upon the infidel is a complete idiot who’s primarily motivated by our very presence in their country. The vast majority are of greater threat to each other, meaning different tribes and religious affiliations within Afghanistan itself, than they are to you or your family.

    The oft perpetuated rhetoric of, “We fight them there, so we don’t have to fight them here” is to put it kindly, a thin and factually unsupportable tropism utilized to create a rationale for endless war and thoughtless nationalism. Which as is almost always the case, more about an extension of political and economic will than it is a consideration of such vague and empty speechifying about freedom or defeating evil.

    I have news and predictions for the supporters of Trump’s “new” policy.

    It will fail. Like all of the others, before. To anyone remotely honest and educated about the matter, this sixteen year conflict meets the definition of pure lunacy and is a real world example of our Empire falling into ruin. Riven by greed, dishonesty, and utter immorality.

    Our intelligence agencies and the U.S. military are more than capable of addressing threats to our National Security as they present themselves. The money we waste on this stupidity could 100% fund a Medi-care for all type of universal care and coverage, it could rebuild bridges, it could pave roads, it could pay for firefighters and police offers, it could fun community college for free for anyone who wished to attend, and innumerable other things.

    Reminder: Trump loudly campaigned on that very idea.

    Instead we fund warfare that enriches the already wealthy.

    We should GTFO. Period. This is a national disgrace. I said so under Obama, and claim so again under the laughable in almost every way, Trump.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 975 total)