|
Post by ChloeB42 (Alexcalibur42) on Feb 17, 2016 15:52:13 GMT -5
the organizations / people exercising control seem to be exercising it in a fashion which denotes military-level authority. It may seem like it was to you, but it objectively wasn't. The only one playing word games is you, because you're trying to redefine martial law so that anything the federal government does, if it involves force, is martial law. It's not, the FBI is a Law Enforcement agency, the Oregon State police are a law enforcement agency, the local police are a law enforcement agency. A group of people broke the law and were armed and dangerous, the appropriate law enforcement agencies responded to the threat and most of the people eventually surrendered, only one died, because he was reaching for a gun and you can see video evidence he was trying to reach for something. So, pretty much the exact opposite of martial law. But if you are inherently anti government to begin with, it may seem like a military "level authority" because to you the government is wrong by default.
|
|
|
Post by jaedrik on Feb 17, 2016 16:15:28 GMT -5
the organizations / people exercising control seem to be exercising it in a fashion which denotes military-level authority. It may seem like it was to you, but it objectively wasn't. The only one playing word games is you, because you're trying to redefine martial law so that anything the federal government does, if it involves force, is martial law. It's not, the FBI is a Law Enforcement agency, the Oregon State police are a law enforcement agency, the local police are a law enforcement agency. A group of people broke the law and were armed and dangerous, the appropriate law enforcement agencies responded to the threat and most of the people eventually surrendered, only one died, because he was reaching for a gun and you can see video evidence he was trying to reach for something. So, pretty much the exact opposite of martial law. But if you are inherently anti government to begin with, it may seem like a military "level authority" because to you the government is wrong by default. Not at all. My argument is one from degrees, the reductio ad absurdum doesn't work. The degree of paramilitary presence is sufficient to claim it as de facto as opposed to de jure martial law.
|
|
|
Post by ChloeB42 (Alexcalibur42) on Feb 17, 2016 17:48:04 GMT -5
What paramilitary presence? I've seen all of two websites linking to one video of one person. Also that's a terrible argument, because you're still trying to redefine martial law so that it has no real world meaning. Even though it doesn't meet any criteria of martial law...somehow it's still martial law.
|
|
|
Post by dunsparceflinch on Feb 17, 2016 20:06:21 GMT -5
Just checked all your sources and they are nothing but right wing trash. The first one repeatedly complains about the "mainstream media" like any other right wing trash does. The second one is an article whose only source is someone who led Glenn Beck's 9/12 rally. The third source pulls the same "oh man why isn't the LAMESTREAM MEDIA reporting this" bullshit that the first source did. I'm on my phone so I'm not watching the video of the fourth source but the fifth source is literally just a copy paste of the third source
And of course the second source is trying to claim that FBI edited the video they published because to them there is no way that a guy who had previously said he would rather die than get arrested attempted to shoot at the people trying to arrest him.
And the third source talked about how they think the government is afraid of its citizens "waking up".
So thanks for reinforcing my point that it's just right wing conspiratorial trash that is saying there is martial law going on.
|
|
|
Post by Aphoristic on Feb 18, 2016 0:31:53 GMT -5
Again, how about discussing a real issue. www.apple.com/customer-letter/This is by far the most outrageous thing in weeks, and I don't see anyone bringing it up.
|
|
|
Post by blackbarney on Feb 18, 2016 8:25:15 GMT -5
Again, how about discussing a real issue. www.apple.com/customer-letter/This is by far the most outrageous thing in weeks, and I don't see anyone bringing it up. Yeah, that's a huge thing for Apple to do. It'll be interesting to see how the RNC discusses that. You have a mega corporation that has millions of fans across party lines taking a Liberal stance while upholding the Constitution. It's Edward Snowden type stuff except done responsibly. I think Apple is right
|
|
|
Post by dunsparceflinch on Feb 18, 2016 12:34:51 GMT -5
Again, how about discussing a real issue. www.apple.com/customer-letter/This is by far the most outrageous thing in weeks, and I don't see anyone bringing it up. Apple knows that the government's request will put far too many people at risk for stuff like identity theft, especially because agreeing to such a request would set a precedent for other countries to make the same request and would put a big target on their heads for hackers to find the hole in their security. Haven't seen what the Democratic candidates have said about this, but Trump and Cruz have already sided against Apple. You can't claim to be for small government and then be okay with the government trying to undermine the ability of innocent people having data security.
|
|
|
Post by blackbarney on Feb 18, 2016 13:41:52 GMT -5
Bernie will 100% side with Apple, there's no question.
Hillary will very lightly side with gov't I think. If she makes a statement, it will be super safe.
It's not a landmine at all for the Dems. It's the GOP dudes that need to be careful cuz it can make them seem really inconsistent if they voice a strong opinion (either way).
Trump is the only one that can safely talk about it cuz he never talks actual policy. He's already said "it's security. people should use their heads" which is the ankle-depth he's comfortable wading in with issues. No thought down the road about what that means and what Edward Snowden has proven has happened already.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2016 12:32:16 GMT -5
I'm not entirely sure what to think about Donald Trump or his eligibility to run the country. However, the way he works the media is a phenomena unto its own. At this point there's no way his ratings are that high by chance- if this was lightning in a bottle he would have tripped up a long time ago.
Stefan Molyneux covers this topic in a 73-minute podcast, but if you don't do podcasts I'll give it a run-down.
In the first few minutes Molyneux discusses Trump's thoughts of the media in The Art of the Deal; a book written FORTY-THREE years ago. Trump in depth discusses how the media will latch onto any little hyperbole you throw out (keep that in mind). He's been sharpening his tools of the trade to prod the media and get them to not only discuss issues but eventually come up with the facts. Molyneux's video covers several of these incidents in thorough detail.
Trump has been caught saying several outrageous things in his campaign; so many things that it's almost like he's doing it on purpose. Looking at the context of the quote he would say something seemingly reasonable that any candidate might say, and then he throws a curve ball. He'll talk about the illegal immigrant problem, and then say "they're bringing rapists". He'll talk about keeping Muslims from entering the country and not say terrorists. However, looking at the facts a similar measure was enacted in WW2 against countries America fought against. Trump will see a reporter who's hellbent on throwing him loaded question after loaded question, and then say they're bleeding out of their... whatever. Every time he does this the media talks about him. Every time the media get caught talking about muh racism instead of real problems.
I don't know, I thought it was an interesting watch. I personally haven't verified everything mentioned, but there's enough solid backing on enough of the arguments to make everything seemingly feasible argument thusfar.
|
|
|
Post by dunsparceflinch on Feb 20, 2016 13:42:29 GMT -5
Beaver, the Japanese Internment Camps that you refer to is something that normal people look at as a shameful part of American history and something that retroactively has been called blatantly unconstitutional, so that being the easiest comparison for Trump's ideas for Muslim policy isn't good for Trump.
I agree though that Trump is saying a lot of the things he says to play the media game effectively. Media likes sensational stuff and Trump constantly acts as the source for sensational stuff.
I'm curious to see how the anti-bush stuff Trump said in the most recent debate will affect him. There was one poll showing Trump keeping his very strong lead and another showing Cruz start to overtake him.
|
|
|
Post by ChloeB42 (Alexcalibur42) on Feb 20, 2016 15:19:51 GMT -5
Yeah not gonna watch Stephen Molyneux, he's painful to watch, even if he's right, because he just drags it on and on. Absolutely Trump is manipulating the media into giving him a platform, because that's been most of his business career. Don't need 73 minutes to understand that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2016 19:13:19 GMT -5
Beaver, the Japanese Internment Camps that you refer to is something that normal people look at as a shameful part of American history and something that retroactively has been called blatantly unconstitutional, so that being the easiest comparison for Trump's ideas for Muslim policy isn't good for Trump. I know what Japan was like and what they believed in during WW2, and that there's a peaceful majority that would oppose that ideology. The argument Molyneux posted was that act of barring entry to a specific type of migrant was constitutional, but that some journalists said it wasn't. Now, if Trump did that inhumane act again for the Muslims... well.. he wouldn't. This is yet another one of his hyperboles. This is what I find really wrong with Trump as a presidential candidate. He'll offer that hyperbole, then scale back afterwards for a greater chance at getting the smaller thing he wanted all along. People will talk about the thing he wants them to talk about. He plays on everyone's fear, then swoops in with promises that he'll make everything better. His game is fear, and the worst part of this? He mentions these two tricks in The Art of the Deal. I noticed some slippage... and booing. It's almost like the other candidates have caught on to Trump's game.
|
|
|
Post by Aphoristic on Feb 20, 2016 22:09:37 GMT -5
Rest in guac, Jeb.
|
|
|
Post by blackbarney on Feb 21, 2016 10:32:07 GMT -5
Trump is saying taboo things to conservatives like questioning the Iraq war, it's what must be so frustrating to the GOp cuz everyone usually just tows the line.
The thing is that the people that aren't supporting Trump now will never support him. So once the field gets down, the people that drop will see their supporters go to other "real" candidates. Trump won't get any of those people.
|
|
|
Post by blackbarney on Feb 21, 2016 10:32:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Aphoristic on Feb 21, 2016 10:54:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by blackbarney on Feb 21, 2016 13:55:11 GMT -5
Oh wow, that's huge. I honestly believe the GOPs only shot at beating Hillary is Jeb. Now it's going to be a safe choice against something else. Unless maybe Kasich takes it? Rubio seems to be even more of a meat puppet than W was.
I thought Jeb still had a shot if he stuck with it. I was really surprised when that toothy girl endorsed Rubio. That was really unexpected.
That poll about where jebs support would go is really interesting
|
|
|
Post by illram on Feb 21, 2016 19:29:01 GMT -5
Kasich is the last adult left in the room. That's scary.
|
|
|
Post by blackbarney on Feb 22, 2016 14:14:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jaedrik on Feb 25, 2016 23:57:30 GMT -5
I'm guessing lots of Sanders supporters don't really care about 'socialism'. I'm guessing lots of Trump supporters don't really care about Trump's ad-hoc-ness. I'm guessing a lot of their fans just really, really want to shake up the establishment and throw a wrench in the political machine. In the event that one of them gets a primary nomination, they'll get a significant portion of the votes from the other's failed campaign. In the event that they both get the primary nomination, well, it'll be one of the more interesting elections. People are mad, and the common person recognizes the economy is in the toilet right now (recession-level service-sector CPI, horrible manufacturing / CPI, the continuing death of the petrodollar, the weakening against foreign currencies, extremely low labour force participation, full time jobs down, part time jobs up, constant inflation, started the year at .7 'growth', junk bond markets way down, stocks still way down, lots of stocks obliterated, lots of stocks down 50% or more. Literally all the data says "WE ARE IN A RECESSION" and now the Fed makes claims of "data dependency," trying to bide time, doing nothing. Don't give me that self-fulfilling prophecy animal spirits crap, because all that's been coming out of the Fed and the talking heads on Fox Business / CNBC / any major news publication is that the consumer is really confident (inflation makes consumers inherently unconfident, uh?) and that the economy sure looks great with that recent rate hike (which immediately went away)). Hillary represents 'more of the same' riding on the back of Obama's 'I inherited a bad economy and fixed it.' If these bubbles fully pop during this political season, I guarantee you there's an incredibly, incredibly small chance that she'll get elected in the face of the perceived anti-establishment Trump.
|
|
|
Post by blackbarney on Feb 26, 2016 8:46:09 GMT -5
I think Trump only gets elected if you guys get attacked again before the election. Otherwise it's Hillary all the way. I don't think Trump gets the supporters of the others failed campaigns. They won't show up to vote.
|
|
|
Post by blackbarney on Feb 26, 2016 11:40:01 GMT -5
yeah, he was sounding presidential for the first time ever. Totally dialed back the rhetoric. Said that thing about health care, specifically this:
That kind of stuff will really not appeal to your average conservative but it does make him electable. If he keeps talking like that, it's a dramatic shift and i agree that it makes it look like he has a master plan.
|
|
|
Post by Aphoristic on Feb 26, 2016 11:46:37 GMT -5
Well, Trump is almost inevitable for the nomination now. He's going to take everything on Tuesday except Texas.
Hillary and Sanders will be drawn out much longer. There's even a chance it could go all the way to California.
|
|
pachiderm
True Bro
Chewing some serious leaves
Posts: 647
|
Post by pachiderm on Feb 26, 2016 12:08:34 GMT -5
yeah, he was sounding presidential for the first time ever. Totally dialed back the rhetoric. Said that thing about health care, specifically this: That kind of stuff will really not appeal to your average conservative but it does make him electable. If he keeps talking like that, it's a dramatic shift and i agree that it makes it look like he has a master plan. This is literally the most brilliant bait I've ever seen, and Rubio and Cruz just ate it up. Just look at this sh it Cruz just looks so happy to have found something to call Trump out on that he forgot what he was actually saying. Liberalism doesn't have a monopoly on humanitarian causes. Liberalism doesn't have a monopoly on preventing needless deaths through public policies. But you wouldn't think that if you heard Ted Cruz talking last night.
|
|
|
Post by ChloeB42 (Alexcalibur42) on Feb 26, 2016 12:43:34 GMT -5
I'm guessing lots of Sanders supporters don't really care about 'socialism'. When certain groups of people spent the last 8 years calling Obama a socialist it's hard to care when they continue to throw it around. Also he's not a socialist so...there's that.
|
|
|
Post by blackbarney on Feb 26, 2016 14:03:41 GMT -5
I'm guessing lots of Sanders supporters don't really care about 'socialism'. When certain groups of people spent the last 8 years calling Obama a socialist it's hard to care when they continue to throw it around. Also he's not a socialist so...there's that. GREAT point. I hadn't considered that. The GOP has ruined the negative side of calling someone a socialist cuz Obama now clearly isn't one so no one is going to listen to them. Boy crying wolf and all that. And like you said, Bernie's not even a socialist, lol The trolling of Cruz last night was brilliant. It's all over twitter.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2016 16:16:10 GMT -5
The trolling of Cruz last night was brilliant. It's all over twitter. You mean this? (1:00-1:14) EDIT: Never mind; I watched the last GOP debate. It wasn't that.
|
|
pachiderm
True Bro
Chewing some serious leaves
Posts: 647
|
Post by pachiderm on Feb 29, 2016 19:45:56 GMT -5
The hero we need
|
|
Slick
True Bro
Taking the piss
Posts: 1,015
|
Post by Slick on Mar 1, 2016 16:10:25 GMT -5
Oops. LUL
|
|
|
Post by jaedrik on Mar 1, 2016 18:51:17 GMT -5
Old media is dyinggggggggggggg TV is dyinggggggggggggg YAY
|
|