Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Whistleblower identified

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    Well then, what exactly is your point?
    Levity, Jim. Relax.
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
      Do you really think a Russian Troll farm would be active on a relatively obscure theology debate forum since 2014? Doesn't seem likely.

      Jim
      Think about that really hard for a minute, Jim...

      Do you really think you're accomplishing anything at all by being here day in and day out, singularly laser focused on Trump, on a "relatively obscure theology debate forum"?

      It's an obsession - and you have pretty much ZERO chance of changing anybody's minds --- the anti-Trump crowd is going to amen you and kiss your butt, and the pro-Trump crowed is gonna butt heads with you, their minds already made up.

      What is it you think you're accomplishing?
      "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
        Al Capone was not the most evil person that ever lived. So me talking about the length of time it took to get Al Capone does not bolster you claim I think "Trump is the most evil person ever". I think he is dirty up one side and down the other. But that's not the same thing.
        Do you see what you are doing here? Al Capone was a brutal gangster that killed anyone that crossed him. In your imagery, you’re trying to pretend it’s already obvious Trump is guilty of some crime, we just need to keep digging till we prove it. What does that sound like to you Jim? That’s classic guilty till proven innocent and guess what? For every Al Capone, there’s dozens more where the power of the government was used to destroy lives, by digging and searching and throwing up any charge possible and hoping it sticks. You have no evidence that Trump is a gangster, you have a series of unfounded assumptions that you think are true. It is just as possible that power hungry democrats are angry about the 2016 election and are determined to overturn it. Shoot, their latest ‘whistleblower’ is a Democrat, that has been trying for years to bring down Trump and rather than face that truth you don’t like, you go on the attack about unproved assertions that his life is in danger.

        And the facts we have so far observed make it quite clear Trump was trying to force Ukraine into investigating the Bidens. And that is illegal.
        No he wasn’t, but you’ll believe it anyway because it confirms what you want to believe. You’re not objective or unbiased, you’re mind is made up, we just need to keep searching till the evidence is found.

        So you'll have to do better than just another rant pix. You need some actual substance.
        Irony at its finest. You need more than your assumptions, but just like Jorge, you assume your beliefs are true by default and that everyone else has to meet burdens you can’t meet.
        "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
        GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

        Comment


        • #49
          It is almost funny seeing how people are trusting different new sources in this thread.

          Is there a common news source that would make everyone happy?

          What can we do so we aren't so divided and that we aren't divided by different 'facts'?

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
            Well then, what exactly is your point? What are you trying to say with this post:



            in response to me telling MM his claim the whistleblower has been proven 'wrong' is nuts.

            ( It is nuts. Everthing the whistleblower was concerned about has been shown to have a solid basis in fact. )
            It's an ongoing joke with CP. He just jumps in when someone makes a jibe with, "this is about me, isn't it?" or some variation thereof. It's part of his sense of humor and somewhat (looking for an adjective and failing) charm. It's actually one of the reasons I kinda like him - even if his political views are seriously warped.

            ETA: Just saw his response. As usual - briefer than mine.
            The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

            I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
              It's an ongoing joke with CP. He just jumps in when someone makes a jibe with, "this is about me, isn't it?" or some variation thereof. It's part of his sense of humor and somewhat (looking for an adjective and failing) charm. It's actually one of the reasons I kinda like him - even if his political views are seriously warped.

              ETA: Just saw his response. As usual - briefer than mine.
              I think I intend it to kinda defuse a situation where things kinda devolve into a hopeless back-n-forth, but who knows?
              "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by mikewhitney View Post
                It is almost funny seeing how people are trusting different new sources in this thread.

                Is there a common news source that would make everyone happy?

                What can we do so we aren't so divided and that we aren't divided by different 'facts'?
                Hence, my criticism of "journalism" over which some people seem to absolutely freak out. It's a circus without a tent and no elephants.


                Well, elephants in the sense of Republicans, but no donkeys.


                OK, um...


                no clowns.



                Sheeeeesh - it IS a circus!!!
                "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by mikewhitney View Post
                  It is almost funny seeing how people are trusting different new sources in this thread.

                  Is there a common news source that would make everyone happy?
                  Unfortunately I cannot think of any particular source that everyone would likely agree are completely nonpartisan and aboveboard. Imagine, for instance, finding a news source that seer, MM and lilpix on the one hand, and tass, star and little jimmyL on the other, both agree was always fair and balanced.

                  Originally posted by mikewhitney View Post
                  What can we do so we aren't so divided and that we aren't divided by different 'facts'?
                  Different sides bringing different evidence to the table should not be a problem as long as folks are still willing to look dispassionately at what the "other side" is presenting.

                  I'm always still in trouble again

                  "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                  "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                    Unfortunately I cannot think of any particular source that everyone would likely agree are completely nonpartisan and aboveboard. Imagine, for instance, finding a news source that seer, MM and lilpix on the one hand, and tass, star and little jimmyL on the other, both agree was always fair and balanced.


                    Different sides bringing different evidence to the table should not be a problem as long as folks are still willing to look dispassionately at what the "other side" is presenting.
                    There used to be a fairly obvious line between "hard reporting" and "opinion or commentary".
                    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                      Unfortunately I cannot think of any particular source that everyone would likely agree are completely nonpartisan and aboveboard. Imagine, for instance, finding a news source that seer, MM and lilpix on the one hand, and tass, star and little jimmyL on the other, both agree was always fair and balanced.


                      Different sides bringing different evidence to the table should not be a problem as long as folks are still willing to look dispassionately at what the "other side" is presenting.
                      It would be sort of nice to get a 'debate' on the specific 'facts' to see which facts are better. But the effort to do this just results in people defending their view based on metanarratives rather than discussing the facts themselves.

                      The example that stands out is that the Mueller report didn't result in impeachment -- but the argument was that "the people wouldn't understand the intricacies of the law so as to accept the impeachment." This was a narrative that can lead people to view the Mueller investigation as if legal actions were warranted ... but these were disregarded by the Dems. This narrative lets people assume that they can still assume a crime existed.
                      Last edited by mikewhitney; 10-31-2019, 02:58 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                        Hence, my criticism of "journalism" over which some people seem to absolutely freak out. It's a circus without a tent and no elephants.


                        Well, elephants in the sense of Republicans, but no donkeys.


                        OK, um...


                        no clowns.



                        Sheeeeesh - it IS a circus!!!
                        Whaaa?!? No clowns in Congress. This, sir, is an outrage, and an affront to the cherished tradition dating back to our first elected Congress some 120 to 130 years ago of having at least a few clowns in Congress.

                        I'm always still in trouble again

                        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                          Think about that really hard for a minute, Jim...

                          Do you really think you're accomplishing anything at all by being here day in and day out, singularly laser focused on Trump, on a "relatively obscure theology debate forum"?

                          It's an obsession - and you have pretty much ZERO chance of changing anybody's minds --- the anti-Trump crowd is going to amen you and kiss your butt, and the pro-Trump crowed is gonna butt heads with you, their minds already made up.

                          What is it you think you're accomplishing?
                          What do you think you are accomplishing here?
                          He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

                          "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                            It's an ongoing joke with CP. He just jumps in when someone makes a jibe with, "this is about me, isn't it?" or some variation thereof. It's part of his sense of humor and somewhat (looking for an adjective and failing) charm. It's actually one of the reasons I kinda like him - even if his political views are seriously warped.

                            ETA: Just saw his response. As usual - briefer than mine.

                            It was the that threw me off, otherwise I would have know immediately it was just the joke you refer to. But with it I thought there might be some other inference he was trying to get at.

                            Jim
                            He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

                            "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                              What do you think you are accomplishing here?
                              Ah, deflection. OK, I'll play...

                              I'm multi-tasking. I'm responding to you and others, but I'm also praising God in the things He has done in and around me, in my daughter who was living in rebellion, but was gloriously brought back to the Lord and is serving Him...

                              So, your turn.
                              "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by mikewhitney View Post
                                It would be sort of nice to get a 'debate' on the specific 'facts' to see which facts are better. But the effort to do this just results in people defending their view based on metanarratives rather than discussing the facts themselves.

                                The example that stands out is that the Mueller report didn't result in impeachment -- but the argument was that "the people wouldn't understand the intricacies of the law so as to accept the impeachment." This was a narrative that can lead people to view the Mueller investigation as if legal actions were warranted ... but these were disregarded by the Dems. This narrative lets people assume that they can still assume a crime existed.
                                Because Mueller felt obliged to toss in the "does not exonerate" (not his job) and didn't have the guts to refer for prosecution or impeachment.... just fuels both sides! "See there, he's INNOCENT" - "see there, he's NOT EXONERATED, therefore he's GUILTY".
                                "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Christian3, Today, 02:14 PM
                                4 responses
                                40 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by seer, Today, 02:00 PM
                                0 responses
                                16 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post seer
                                by seer
                                 
                                Started by CivilDiscourse, 10-24-2020, 08:17 AM
                                10 responses
                                91 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post CivilDiscourse  
                                Started by LiconaFan97, 10-23-2020, 04:56 PM
                                32 responses
                                202 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post seer
                                by seer
                                 
                                Started by Juvenal, 10-23-2020, 11:08 AM
                                10 responses
                                103 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Juvenal
                                by Juvenal
                                 
                                Working...
                                X