Politics and world news

[ComradeYellow]

8 minutes ago, Skazz said:

Pretty harsh, don't you think?

Nope.  I consider HRC and DT loyalists to be both dip****s.  If you're dumb enough to support the status quo, which is what these two represent, you're part of the problem.  Us progressives outside either party are trying to fix society.

[Skazz]

I just think it's good to show basic human respect to other people regardless of their views and station in life as we're all in this together

[Blarghagh]

Isn't it the politicians that usually do the attack smears and not the host? 

[ComradeYellow]

Yup those are very right wing positions that's for sure (well, besides the 1st).  CNN showing their true colors.

What's next, Fox News supporting the Green New Deal whole heartedly?

Edited January 15, 2020 by ComradeMaster

[Gromnir]

3 hours ago, TrueNeutral said:

You're literally doubling down on a wrong statement because you can't take being wrong.  You could make a death of the author argument about that *you* got a different intent from my post, but you're literally stating you know my intent was different than what I know my intent was. It's ridiculous. 

you are the guy doubling down on wrong.  is only one time where the mods asked warren to direct respond to a bernie response as in your example. once. sure, were not 'bout eating babies, but you are asking readers to pretend to be absolute idiots not to recognize the exchange you were referencing. 

were nothing unprofessional 'bout those specific cnn questions regarding the gender question. bernie coulda' responded any number o' ways, but he flat out denied, which btw, is an implied accusation o' warren being a liar. once bernie refutes warren claims: "I didn't say it." cnn purposeful avoided asking warren if bernie were being truthful and instead asked her how she felt when bernie made his observation.

wanna complain that cnn did a terrible job o' covering the issue in the week up to the debate and we would have a different question altogether, but that isn't what you were talking 'bout.

pretend everybody is stoopid. does the trump nonsense where you observe you didn't specific say "gender," as if doing so gets you a free pass. doesn't. 

claim bernie got a raw deal if you want. am not arguing such. point is you used one o' the few moments from the debate where cnn did nothing wrong to highlight bernie getting a bad deal, and we called you on it.

triple down if you want. won't help.

HA! Good Fun!

[213374U]

1 hour ago, ComradeMaster said:

Nope.  I consider HRC and DT loyalists to be both dip****s.  If you're dumb enough to support the status quo, which is what these two represent, you're part of the problem.  Us progressives outside either party are trying to fix society.

That's fine, but here, even "average Republicans" are afforded a modicum of respect. So let's try to steer clear of blanket invectives.

[Bartimaeus]

1 hour ago, Skazz said:

I just think it's good to show basic human respect to other people regardless of their views and station in life as we're all in this together

Yeah, I put ComradeMaster on my ignore list literally after the first post from him that I saw, especially after I read his username which just positively screams astroturfer. Those sorts of random word combinations are very commonly used by astroturfers in other places like reddit, and (I decided to just look up now) the fact that the name cannot be found anywhere else on the internet except two posts on a random Battlefield thread and a handful of posts on some Russian forums suggests it was probably made up specifically to be used here. Not to get all conspiracy theorist or anything, but I try to minimize my time being wasted by trolls going on joyrides here as much as possible. Alternatively, not a troll and still not a poster I want to read from. Either way, win/win for me.

Edited January 16, 2020 by Bartimaeus

[Blarghagh]

1 hour ago, Gromnir said:

you are the guy doubling down on wrong.  is only one time where the mods asked warren to direct respond to a bernie response as in your example. once. sure, were not 'bout eating babies, but you are asking readers to pretend to be absolute idiots not to recognize the exchange you were referencing. 

were nothing unprofessional 'bout those specific cnn questions regarding the gender question. bernie coulda' responded any number o' ways, but he flat out denied, which btw, is an implied accusation o' warren being a liar. once bernie refutes warren claims: "I didn't say it." cnn purposeful avoided asking warren if bernie were being truthful and instead asked her how she felt when bernie made his observation.

wanna complain that cnn did a terrible job o' covering the issue in the week up to the debate and we would have a different question altogether, but that isn't what you were talking 'bout.

pretend everybody is stoopid. does the trump nonsense where you observe you didn't specific say "gender," as if doing so gets you a free pass. doesn't. 

claim bernie got a raw deal if you want. am not arguing such. point is you used one o' the few moments from the debate where cnn did nothing wrong to highlight bernie getting a bad deal, and we called you on it.

triple down if you want. won't help.

HA! Good Fun!

Come now. His response was an implied accusation too, yes, but he wasn't a moderator. He's not the host. He's not the one who has to avoid bias, implicit or otherwise. CNN took a clear stance. As you say, they avoided asking Warren if Bernie was lying but they did so by phrasing her question in a way to make that conclusion for her. She didn't have to ask if Bernie was being truthful because the host settled that matter before she could even respond. CNN could have easily adressed the issue while avoiding bias by simply switching the questions around, or maybe adding such simple words as "you claim" to their question to Warren. "You said Sanders said this" instead of "when Sanders said this..." as if this was not in dispute. The question was framed, phrased, timed and juxtaposed to create a clear statement by the host that Bernie DID say those things. This is especially egregious because this was a news story that CNN themselves are the source of and that they have a vested interest in. You keep saying they had to address this and I've never once disputed that. It it is the manner they did that showed obvious, unprofessional bias. 

Also, side note, Bernie "coulda' responded any number o' ways"? Are you serious? Like how? Provide an alibi? Tiptoe around it? Plead the fifth? If I accused you of being sexist and you had to respond, would you not deny it? I am at a serious loss as to how Bernie could have handled that better.

Also yes, as you correctly surmise, I did use this specific situation because the difference in how the candidates were treated was immediately clear in this example as it is the only example where Warren was directly asked to follow-up on Bernie. Though I'm not sure how you think that supports your conclusion that I must have picked it because of the topic of gender and I'm trying to manipulate you or whatever, since it by itself is the reason other than gender to pick this example. The other examples I posted above were also attacks on Bernie, but didn't illustrate the favoring of Warren at the same time. If those would have been posed to Sanders as well, especially timed in such a way that the follow-up implied his answer was a lie ("how will your policies bankrupt the country"), I would have used those. This example was simply clearer in illustrating my point of bias and, much more importantly, I thought it was more amusing. Accuse me of playing dumb and project ill intent on me if you must, but you're wrong and to be perfectly honest I have no interest in continuing to debate my intentions with you since you've clearly made up your mind and base your arguments on preconceived notions of my character rather than my actual statements. 

Edited January 16, 2020 by TrueNeutral

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

To take away from quibbling over how bad CNN was in smearing Bernard, recently a group of moms occupying a vacant home in Oakland were evicted by police with militaty gear. Seems just a bit excessive, but I guess homeless moms are a big enough threat to need to bring out a tank.

[Zoraptor]

42 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

Those sorts of random word combinations are very commonly used by astroturfers in other places like reddit

They are, but they generate the names that way precisely because they blend in with the general populace- in the last page or so there are three other posters with similar style names.

about 95% sure CM's a codexer, so may be an astroturfer for Grimoire if CleveyB is splashing some cash around

[Bartimaeus]

9 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

They are, but they generate the names that way precisely because they blend in with the general populace- in the last page or so there are three other posters with similar style names.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

about 95% sure CM's a codexer, so may be an astroturfer for Grimoire if CleveyB is splashing some cash around

 

Yeah, that's where the first part comes in - what they actually post. I know TrueNeutral, Guard Dog, KaineParker, et al. aren't astroturfers since they write like actual people as opposed to...the constant ridiculous and character-like absurdity and nonsense that posters like SonicMage, Skarpen, ComradeMaster, et al. write like. Somebody is a little more convincing when their writing is clearly informed by the actual lives they're living, which these posters basically never seem to be - not counting useless fluff like "I've always been considered a tough guy and my wife thinks I'm very cool" like SonicMage used to embarrassingly write. Obvious playing-a-character is obvious.

[Skazz]

31 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

Yeah, that's where the first part comes in - what they actually post. I know TrueNeutral, Guard Dog, KaineParker, et al. aren't astroturfers since they write like actual people as opposed to...the constant ridiculous and character-like absurdity and nonsense that posters like SonicMage, Skarpen, ComradeMaster, et al. write like. Somebody is a little more convincing when their writing is clearly informed by the actual lives they're living, which these posters basically never seem to be - not counting useless fluff like "I've always been considered a tough guy and my wife thinks I'm very cool" like SonicMage used to embarrassingly write. Obvious playing-a-character is obvious.

What if... we've all been characters all along?

I demand a better character arc.

[Malcador]

14 minutes ago, Skazz said:

What if... we've all been characters all along?

I demand a better character arc.

Too bad, you were written by Bethesda.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

If I was playing a character I'd come up with something way better than being a tough guy whose wife thinks he's cool. Like I spent last summer on a bizarre adventure with an old man, his grandson, a fortune teller, a high school student, and a dog travelling to Egypt to fight a hundred year old vampire who could stop time. Go big or go home, much like current politics where milquetoast reforms are as unlikely (or even moreso) than massive overhauls or restructuring so you may as well play to your people instead of trying to convince two dozen galaxy brained centrists whose sole qualification is the baffling ability to fail upward by consistently being wrong.

[Malcador]

I'd be Peter Gibbons, rather than the Michael Bolton I am now.  Peter had a nicer wardrobe.

[Skazz]

29 minutes ago, Malcador said:

Too bad, you were written by Bethesda.

Can I at least get Dogmeat?

[Hurlshort]

3 hours ago, KaineParker said:

To take away from quibbling over how bad CNN was in smearing Bernard, recently a group of moms occupying a vacant home in Oakland were evicted by police with militaty gear. Seems just a bit excessive, but I guess homeless moms are a big enough threat to need to bring out a tank.

I don't know. I totally empathize with the difficulty of finding affordable housing in the Bay Area, but these ladies were squatting. I also don't like that you have companies buying up houses, then driving up the prices of the neighborhood, but the company that owned the house did offer to pay moving costs and 2 months rent for the ladies. So yeah, they should have probably taken the deal. As for the cops being in full gear, I'd imagine that is standard protocol for serving an eviction that has been ignored multiple times. Not great optics, but hard to expect anything else once law enforcement is involved. 

[Guard Dog]

LOL, Bernie's biggest enemies are his supporters: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/01/14/sanders_campaign_organizer_free_education_gulags_needed_to_re-educate_you_not_to_be_a_fcking_nazi.html

[Malcador]

"There's a reason Joseph Stalin had gulags, right?" Jurek said. "Actually, gulags were a lot better than what the CIA has told us that they were. Like, people were actually paid a living wage in gulags, they had conjugal visits in gulags, gulags were actually meant for like re-education."

Hah. 

 

[Skarpen]

1 hour ago, Guard Dog said:

LOL, Bernie's biggest enemies are his supporters: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/01/14/sanders_campaign_organizer_free_education_gulags_needed_to_re-educate_you_not_to_be_a_fcking_nazi.html

"people should "expect violent reaction" for speech"

It's funny how guys like that don't realize it works both ways.

Also why would I listed to what CIA say about gulags? There are tons of first hand experience reports.

[213374U]

9 hours ago, Hurlshot said:

As for the cops being in full gear, I'd imagine that is standard protocol for serving an eviction that has been ignored multiple times. Not great optics, but hard to expect anything else once law enforcement is involved. 

The clip I saw had "cops" rocking stuff that wouldn't be out of place in a Helmand FOB. Riot gear is one thing, given the size of the crowd. MRAPs and automatic weapons? I mean this isn't even about optics. Those just aren't the right tools for the job.

[Guard Dog]

5 minutes ago, 213374U said:

The clip I saw had "cops" rocking stuff that wouldn't be out of place in a Helmand FOB. Riot gear is one thing, given the size of the crowd. MRAPs and automatic weapons? I mean this isn't even about optics. Those just aren't the right tools for the job.

When the police become the army the people become the enemy. If I were in charge I'd give every law enforcement agency in this country a simple choice. Either you give up your firearms while on duty or you give up your qualified immunity. You cannot keep both. 

[Malcador]

7 minutes ago, 213374U said:

The clip I saw had "cops" rocking stuff that wouldn't be out of place in a Helmand FOB. Riot gear is one thing, given the size of the crowd. MRAPs and automatic weapons? I mean this isn't even about optics. Those just aren't the right tools for the job.

The camouflage is also odd,  was expecting solid blue or black.   But big boys, big toys, I guess. 

[Guard Dog]

45 minutes ago, Skarpen said:

"people should "expect violent reaction" for speech"

It's funny how guys like that don't realize it works both ways.

Also why would I listed to what CIA say about gulags? There are tons of first hand experience reports.

The thing people must realize is electing a candidate is like getting married. No you have to deal with your spouse's family. With a candidate you not only get them you get their supporters too since campaign staff often find themselves in administration jobs. It would be a little concerning to see a newspaper clip that Kyle Jurek accepted a job in the Sanders Justice Dept. That could easily happen if he actually wins. 

[Malcador]

7 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

It would be a little concerning to see a newspaper clip that Kyle Jurek accepted a job in the Sanders Justice Dept. That could easily happen if he actually wins. 

Probably would be as a security guard, to be honest, if that were to pass.