Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - honk

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 91  Next >
1
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: Today at 04:13:45 PM »
Claiming acts of driving and tax payments are somehow analogous to acts of banging an intern at the office

That's not what I said, but look, whatever. Nothing I'm saying is getting through to you, so if you really want to believe that Clinton is a left-wing totalitarian because of his affair with Monica Lewinsky, then fine, go ahead. The rest of the world knows you're wrong.

On the other hand, there is a compelling argument to be made that the far left should be stripped of citizenship and deported.

No, there really isn't. It's blatantly unconstitutional on the face of it and horrific on an ethical level. That being said, if he wants to do it, then he'll do it. The courts won't stop him, Congress won't stop him, and his fans won't stop supporting him. They will never stop supporting him. That's why I'm not excited about the backlash Trump is getting over Epstein. His fans will fall in line within a week or so.

2
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: July 11, 2025, 12:42:59 PM »
Sadaam, you clearly stated Clinton was a centrist.

Yes.

Quote
Laws governing sexual conduct in the workplace are set by PLOTICIANS (spelling error purposeful).

Yes.

Quote
Therefore, the behavior has everything to do with political ideology.

No, that doesn't follow at all. You might as well say that laws governing taxes are set by politicians, and therefore filing my tax return indicates my political ideology. Or that laws governing traffic and the rules of the road are set by politicians, and therefore driving my car indicates my political ideology. Or any other number of absurd conclusions, really.

Quote
It was the act of a domineering totalitarian, certainly not a centrist.

I'm all for judging politicians based on their character and the lives they've lived, but you can't just take it for granted that their ethical flaws and misdeeds directly translate into their political ideology. Someone who constantly speeds can't therefore be assumed to be opposed to speed limits on an ideological level. Someone who cheats on their taxes can't therefore be assumed to be opposed to taxation on an ideological level. And someone who pursues an inappropriate relationship with an intern half their age who can't reasonably say no to them can't therefore be assumed to domineering or totalitarian on an ideological level. It's just not how these things work, and there are plenty of examples from history bearing this out. George W. Bush by all accounts is a loving husband and father, but his decision to launch a destructive war under false pretenses that cost countless lives so that he could advance his own political agenda and enrich his cronies in the private sector reeks of a deeply callous cruelty. Lyndon B. Johnson was an outspoken racist as a younger man, but he devoted his presidency to passing critical legislation protecting civil rights that probably wouldn't be able to be passed today. These things don't perfectly correlate into political ideology like that.

3
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: July 10, 2025, 01:52:21 PM »
BANGING INTERNS IS CENTRIST

Nobody said that it was centrist, just that it wasn't left-wing. Clinton's affair with an intern had nothing to do with his political ideology. It wasn't left-wing, it wasn't right-wing, and it wasn't centrist. This really isn't a hard concept to grasp.

4
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: July 09, 2025, 07:51:41 AM »
It's a matter of politics, certainly, but not of policy.
Yes, of course.

There are no government policies regarding sexual conduct in the workplace. ::)

Look, you're just being obstinate at this point. You know what I mean. Clinton's affairs didn't make him any less of a centrist.

5
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: July 09, 2025, 06:39:42 AM »
No, he's talking about the fact that Trump was found liable for sexual abuse rather than rape. We spent several pages discussing this back when the news first broke. According to Tom, the fact that the jury chose not to find Trump liable for rape is a clear repudiation of Carroll's entire story and proof that Trump is entirely innocent; however, the fact that the same jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation when he denied the whole thing even happened means nothing at all.

6
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: July 08, 2025, 07:18:24 PM »
Clinton a "centrist."

Explains the blow job (it is a perfectly acceptable policy to have sex relations with your intern) and Janet Reno (of Waco fame).

Again, what in the living fuck are you smoking?

I really have no idea what point you think you're making here. I'm discussing Clinton's political positions, not his ethics, and his affairs don't change the fact that he was a centrist any more than they change the fact that he was from Arkansas. If in your usual roundabout way you're trying to get my opinion of Clinton, then I'll give it to you - his affair with an intern half his age while he was in a position of power over her was deeply predatory and has never gotten the mainstream condemnation it truly deserves (as opposed to simply hand-wringing about adultery, which was in comparison a trivial concern), there's almost certainly some fire to the smoke of the numerous allegations of sexual misconduct he's accumulated over the years, and I'm sure he'd go down in flames just like Trump if the government released all the information it had on Epstein. Maybe that's why Biden never released it.

When the affair is taking place with an intern in the workplace, that most certainly is a matter of politics.

It's a matter of politics, certainly, but not of policy. Think about it this way - is having an affair an inherently left-wing or right-wing thing to do? Is someone who has an affair logically more or less likely to cut taxes? To pursue foreign intervention? To support gay marriage? It doesn't really make sense.

7
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: July 07, 2025, 07:02:59 PM »
Sadaam - "Clinton-era centrism..."

Getting blown by an intern while seated behind the desk in the Oval Office is a very "centrist" thing to do.

LMMFAO!

What does that have to do with his policies? Clinton ran as and governed as a centrist, and thirty years later, Democratic presidential candidates are doing the exact same thing.

Quote
I also don't believe that Elon was ever especially liked or admired by the left.
That explains all the Democrats in Chicago parading around in Teslas with bumper stickers declaring, "I bought this before Elon went crazy."

WTF you smoking, anyway!?!?

LMMFAO!!!

People once being willing to buy his cars without being judged hardly makes him some kind of hero or leader to the left. Think about it this way - if the head of, say, Ford, suddenly made the news for saying and doing a bunch of horrible things, you'd probably see a similar level of embarrassment among Ford owners and an eagerness to distance themselves from him. That wouldn't mean that the head of Ford was someone they had especially liked or admired before. As I've said, I've only ever heard that Elon used to be beloved by the left from conservatives. He's been heavily criticized by leftists for several years, long before he ever bought Twitter or publicly embraced Trump.

8
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: July 06, 2025, 08:43:01 PM »
I partly agree with Tom - Democrats are deeply dissatisfied with their party and eager for something new. It's ludicrous to suggest they want something more moderate or centrist when the leadership of the party is firmly in the camp of Clinton-era centrism, the more progressive voices within the party are always kept at arms length despite their popularity, and all three of its last presidential candidates ran as centrists. The idea that Democrats are just way too left-wing is a cynical strategy from conservatives to try and get them to move right, at which point they too move right and continue to insist that the Democrats need to move right, thereby moving the Overton window right as well. There isn't a single person in the world who would vote Democratic if only the party were slightly less leftist. Anyone like that is already voting Republican. I also don't believe that Elon was ever especially liked or admired by the left. I've only ever heard conservatives make that claim, not leftists, and there doesn't seem to be any good evidence backing it up beyond the fact that Elon sells electric vehicles. I don't know who you're claiming is trying to rehabilitate his reputation, but even if Elon were making an effort to backtrack from his right-wing politics and reinvent himself as a progressive (and a quick glance at his Twitter will show that he very much is not), I don't see any reason why progressive voters would suddenly forgive him for helping Trump get reelected and then butchering the federal government so that he could make more money.

We might learn some lessons from the recent victory of Zohran Mamdani over Andrew Cuomo in the Democratic mayoral primary of New York. Democratic voters made their priorities clear by supporting Mamdami's strongly progressive policies over Cuomo's business-as-usual centrism, and also by rejecting Cuomo, who, unlike Elon, had previously been well-liked by Democrats until he resigned as governor in the wake of a sexual scandal. That's two strikes against Elon - Democratic voters want progressive policies, not even more centrism, and they're not interested in giving multiple chances to people disgraced by scandal. Oh, but I will agree with you that Republican voters are content with what they have. Trump has shown us repeatedly what kind of person he is, and Republicans are unanimously okay with it. They wouldn't hire him, work for him, hang out with him, lend money to him, or leave their girlfriend alone with him for five minutes - but they will vote for him. In the face of that kind of solidarity, Elon trying to win over his voters is a ridiculous idea, but as I've said before, Elon is nowhere near as smart as he and his followers think he is.

9
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: July 04, 2025, 10:32:53 PM »
...you're the one who apparently needed to have it explained to you. ::)

10
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: July 03, 2025, 11:54:42 PM »
what lessons are there to learn?

That the politicians who championed and supported this bill can't be trusted to protect the interests of their constituents and therefore should be voted out would be an obvious one.

11
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: July 03, 2025, 09:59:42 PM »
It doesn't matter. Trump's voters won't learn any lessons from this. They'll just blame Biden or Obama for all the negative consequences

12
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: July 01, 2025, 08:52:35 PM »
Trump has never been a good businessman. He just played one on TV. It really can't be overstated how integral The Apprentice and its false portrayal of Trump as this universally-respected titan of commerce and icon of success was to the rehabilitation of Trump's public image. In the eighties and nineties, everyone knew that Trump was a joke. And nothing changed about him - they just made a TV show saying no, Trump is actually awesome, and inexplicably, tens of millions of Americans believed them.

13
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: June 26, 2025, 01:22:52 AM »
I don't agree with the people giving even grudging credit to Trump over this. Trump clearly said that there was a ceasefire, and Israel and Iran clearly disregarded him and continued their war. The fact that at a later time Israel and Iran really did agree on a ceasefire doesn't somehow ripple back through time and imbue Trump's impotent declaration with retroactive relevance. No, Trump was bullshitting, because he's a thoroughly stupid man and a habitual liar, and he almost certainly played a very limited role (at best) in the actual ceasefire.

14
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: June 24, 2025, 08:49:15 PM »
https://thehill.com/homenews/5365719-trump-israel-iran-ceasefire/

What a surprise! Trump was full of shit, and the war continues.

15
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: June 24, 2025, 05:37:52 AM »
Yes, if Trump says that everything is fine now, I for one certainly believe him. Trump wouldn't lie to us!

16
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: June 22, 2025, 01:14:41 AM »
The "no new wars" president has now begun a war with Iran. On the one hand, this is an enormously unpopular move among Americans, thousands of innocent people will be killed, getting involved in wars in the Middle East never ends well for us, and Netanyahu is a liar and a war criminal who's almost certainly just looking to expand his ongoing genocide to another country, so nothing he says can be trusted. On the other hand, Trump really likes and admires Netanyahu, as he does all strongmen, and he really, really wants to impress him. So who's to say if this really is a good or bad move?

17
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: June 20, 2025, 05:18:35 AM »
Not that it even really matters how popular Trump is - we're still stuck with him for the next three and a half years whether we like it or not - but as I noted three years ago, Rasmussen are a bunch of Trump-humpers whose job is to tell MAGA types what they want to hear. MAGA does not tolerate the bearers of bad news, and Trump always, always lashes out at and tries to punish those who tell him what he doesn't want to hear. Here he is doing just that with Fox News. Rasmussen have a very strong motive to deliver bullshit polls that soothe Trump's ego. And needless to say, their results are a pretty major outlier.

18
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: June 16, 2025, 12:20:13 AM »
And how do you think Tom would have interpreted it had Biden said it?

Of course he would have disingenuously insisted that no, Biden really thinks that Putin was alive and fighting in WWII, just like, as you pointed out, conservatives pounced on every verbal slip-up from Biden and claimed that he really did think any number of absurd things instead of more reasonably assuming that he just misspoke. It's a dishonest tactic, and one that I'm not going to indulge in myself. Also, I disagree with you on this point:

I’m not particularly defending Biden, he clearly was mentally unfit for office. But Trump is unfit for office too - in a different way

While Trump is unfit for office in many different ways to Biden, he's also mentally unfit for office in precisely the same way that Biden was. Trump is every bit as senile as Biden was, if not more. The proof of this can be seen in literally every interview and press conference that he gives. The exchange I just posted is a good example of this, but hardly a unique one. Trump is incapable of giving a straight answer to a question or communicating a thought clearly. All he can do now is gibber incoherently and ramble nonsensically as he talks in circles about whatever thought has just popped into his head. He's louder than Biden and more confident, but he's no more mentally sound. The idea that Trump was the sharp, lucid alternative to old, doddering Biden was dishonest framing from the right-wing propaganda machine that was willingly spread by a media desperate to normalize and sanewash Trump.

19
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: June 14, 2025, 04:06:50 PM »
The entire exchange:

Quote
REPORTER: Mr. President, for Americans going to Washington on Saturday —

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: It’s going to be a great day.

REPORTER: What would you like folks to take away from that day? What would hope that they would remember? And also, Mr. President, and —

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: How strong our military is, we have the strongest military in the world.

You know, it’s very interesting. Three weeks ago, it was the end of world — uh anniversary, end of World War II. And I called France and Macron — a good man.

I said, “What are you doing?”

He goes, “We’re celebrating World War II, our victory.”

I said “Your victory, your victory. Tell me about that.”

And then I called somebody else and I happened to speak to President Putin at the time. Now, in all fairness to him, he lost 51 million people, and he did fight.

Russia fought, sort of interesting, isn’t it? He fought with us at World War II and everybody hates him.

And Germany and Japan, they’re fine, you know. Someday somebody will explain that. But I like Germany and Japan, too.

But Putin is a little confused by that. You know, he said, we lost 51 million people, and we were your ally. And now everybody hates Russia, and they love Germany and Japan.”

I said, “Let’s explain that sometime, okay?”

But it’s a strange world.

But I will say this. Look, I want them to go away saying how great our country and how great our military is.

And I was making all these calls for some reason. I spoke to like four different places. “Sir, are you celebrating?”

And I said, you know, we won World War II and World War I, right? We won them. And yet we’re the only country that doesn’t celebrate. Everybody’s celebrating except us. And I said we should celebrate too.

I think Tom's interpretation is fair. It's easy to jumble up your pronouns a bit when you're talking a lot. Of course, during Biden's presidency, conservatives disingenuously insisted that every similar verbal slip-up from Biden was actually what Biden really believed (e.g. Biden saying he plans to build a railroad "across the Indian Ocean" must mean that Biden actually thought he could build an underwater railroad spanning the entire Indian Ocean, rather than the more reasonable interpretation that Biden simply had meant "across to the Indian Ocean"), but I won't stoop to such dishonest tactics. It's just a verbal slip-up.

The real problem with this exchange, and one that I hope won't be buried under a wave of "lol Trump thinks that Putin was alive and fighting during WWII!" is that this is yet another reminder of Trump's general ignorance and his malleability at Putin's hands. A few minutes on the relevant articles on Wikipedia would tell anybody who's willing to find out that the Soviet Union, especially under Stalin, was a brutal, oppressive regime that killed far more innocent people than Hitler. The ethics of aligning with such a country, far from being taken for granted, are hotly debated by historians to this day. This is not obscure, niche stuff. It's pretty mainstream. And this would be bad enough if it was Trump once again embarrassing the country by stumbling onto a basic historical controversy and thinking that he's the first person to pose an obvious, sophomoric question, but as Trump tells us, it was Putin who brought this up, meaning that this is once again Putin manipulating Trump. And it's so childish. There really is no better word for it than that. Only a child would think that "But if Russia was our ally in WWII, shouldn't it be our ally now?" is a good, pertinent point.

20
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: June 08, 2025, 01:29:52 AM »
That phrasing came from Elon, and it was clearly delivered in a hostile spirit, so presumably he meant that Trump was mentioned in the files in a bad way.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 91  Next >