Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[iam416]

Good lord, man, the bleaching stuff is nonsense and/or irrelevant. There is literally no way anyone is going to confuse him for being anything other than a muslim. So whether they actually did this or not, and I'm going to need to see something more than a internet photo, it matters not one lick.

Now, if his name was Gary Swenson, then perhaps there is a point.

Plus, that oversized picture is fucking up this thread.

[Dr. Strangelove]

I know what he is saying.

Still a bad comparison. Ability to own guns is a fundamental constitutional right. The left wants to ban guns. There is no fundamental constitutional right to come here.

I think that the decision to ban a fundamental constitutional right needs not to be a knee jerk reaction. I would say the same thing about encroachment on the 4th amendment after incidents like these.

I don't see why that's a distinction worth making. For people who employ the 'don't exploit a tragedy' argument, it's primarily a decency/morality argument. Not a constitutional one. Don't stand over the bodies of the dead or at a funeral lecturing people on how these deaths prove your policy view is the RIGHT one. For the most part, I agree with that. I DO think it's wrong to attend a funeral and tell the grieving family that if only more people agreed with your politics, their loved one might be alive today.

I don't think it's morally wrong to otherwise hold policy conversations in the immediate aftermath of a tragedy. I'm not disrespecting the dead in Vegas by saying I think background checks should be allowed 5 days instead of 3. Conservatives aren't disrespecting the dead in NYC by raising immigration (though it sounds like this guy was radicalized after he was here, not before). In my mind it's actual exploitation of the victims to say "well, we can have that conversation later, but right now it wouldn't be appropriate". Because in far more cases than not, that person has no intention of letting you know when the 'appropriate time' has come.

They are making an appeal to your emotions and guilt to disguise the fact that they just want the debate to go away.

Talent- Tragedies are certainly anecdotal and can be used by either side to exaggerate dangers. I think examples still have a place in a strong argument though.

[iam416]

Talent- Tragedies are certainly anecdotal and can be used by either side to exaggerate dangers. I think examples still have a place in a strong argument though

I think you need to replace "can" with "are." Not only are they anecdotal -- which means, IMO, they have zero policy value -- they're also rarely connected directly to the issue. In LV, the bump stock thing was but virtually all other policy points were not -- that is to say, the proposed solutions would have not stopped the anecdote.

I don't object to politicizing tragedies on moral grounds, but I do object on dumbass grounds

[Dr. Strangelove]

Good lord, man, the bleaching stuff is nonsense and/or irrelevant. There is literally no way anyone is going to confuse him for being anything other than a muslim. So whether they actually did this or not, and I'm going to need to see something more than a internet photo, it matters not one lick.

Now, if his name was Gary Swenson, then perhaps there is a point.

Plus, that oversized picture is fucking up this thread.

Kapture thinks that everyone watching CBS will ignore his Borat-like name and the big FROM UZBEKISTAN and think "oh that looks like that nice Irish boy I met in South Boston" because his skin tone looks one weekend in Miami Beach lighter.

[AlabamAlum]

From Plains of Tarashek to northern fence of Jewtown. Kazakhstan friend of all except Uzbekistan.

[Kapture1]

Kapture thinks that everyone watching CBS will ignore his Borat-like name and the big FROM UZBEKISTAN and think "oh that looks like that nice Irish boy I met in South Boston" because his skin tone looks one weekend in Miami Beach lighter.

Oh, right. I forgot there are many reasons for lightening up his skin color. I cant think of any, but im sure they had a good reason that had nothing to do with identity politics.

[Da Geezer]

In actual news, The Rs delayed the release of the details of their Tax Bill. It appears that they are keeping the 39.6% highest tax rate for the 1% in exchange for the 20% corporate tax rate to be instituted in full immediately. There had been some talk of phasing in the corporate tax cut, but that doesn't seem to be in the final bill. With the reduction in the deductibility of SALT, this means the top level taxpayers in high-tax states will probably pay more FIT under the plan.

All this is speculation until the bill is announced.

[The Oracle]

Well, the simple answer to that is the media is actually conveying a message (duh). I am not reading their minds, I am reading their thoughts and opinions that they actually put on paper. You on the other hand are pretending to know what people think, which isn't the same thing.

I will admit I am calling it propaganda (which it is) because the media has a bias. They have an agenda. For example, why did CBS make the terrorist look like a bearded white guy?





why did the deliberately do this? Bias. Agenda. Propaganda.


try again.

And they added the purple streaks across his face to make him look BLACK!!! Fuckers.

[Kapture1]

Just like CNNs "man yelled God is Great in arabic"

Lol

[Kapture1]

It's like they used Dove soap on him.

[hack]

Do you know for a fact that those within Breitbart calling for dismissal even knew Milo? I mean you do know that he worked for Breitbart London for a long while before coming here to the US, right? Then he did his college roadshow, I don't think he spent much time in the office.... so the folks here that wanted him fired, you know that they and Milo had a close relationship? Or by the phraseology that you used "THOSE CLOSE TO HIM" was more geographical proximity rather than personal closeness?

the assertion that you are making are those close to him (meaning friends and long time colleges that know him personally) when I don't think you even know the names of the people that were calling for his firing, let alone their level of relationship with him.

Do I have it right here? You are suggesting that I used the words "those close to him"? Anyone can scroll upthread or use the search function and see that I didn't use that phrase. If you're saying I implied it, well, I keep telling you that I am repeating facts, and we both agree that I am, and yet you're still doing whatever it is that you're doing.

Inquiry over, I guess. I'm genuinely interested in how people achieve rock-solid certainty using clearly shaky sources, but I don't think you're the guy that's going to provide any insight into that.

[CGVT]

Because...

[hack]

As for the rest of this nonsense, well, my suspicion is that kapture and our Borat du Jour here have a lot more in common than they think.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vb3IMTJjzfo"]Borat - Throw the Jew Down the Well!! - YouTube[/ame]

[Kapture1]

Do I have it right here? You are suggesting that I used the words "those close to him"? Anyone can scroll upthread or use the search function and see that I didn't use that phrase. If you're saying I implied it, well, I keep telling you that I am repeating facts, and we both agree that I am, and yet you're still doing whatever it is that you're doing.

Inquiry over, I guess. I'm genuinely interested in how people achieve rock-solid certainty using clearly shaky sources, but I don't think you're the guy that's going to provide any insight into that.

you are right, " Then you said it was just a joke, however people that actually know the guy didn't think so." was the phrase you used.

my bad

Back to the question earlier, can you be fired for a joke? He said a joke and was fired. I said it was a joke, he said it was a joke. You claimed that because he was fired that people that knew him didn't think it was... they could have known it was a joke and still had been forced into the position of the firing.

[hack]

Your bad, yes.