Obamagate Is Not a Conspiracy Theory

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

3 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Your Reductio ad absurdum arguments are duly noted. Fail. I'll not bother to rebut such. 

The most mouth breathing, 100% communist, eat the rich liberals I've ever met, and I've met plenty (including relatives I avoid whenever possible) all have one thing in common. None of them admit to being liberal. Like you, they claim they're "middle". It always leaves me wondering, who the hell could be left of them and how out of touch are they to imagine they're somehow in the middle of a Poisson distribution of political ideologies? I've never once read a "middle" comment from you but who the hell knows what goes on in your head? 

Nice, but of course hardly anyone else here will understand you.

Speak to the level of your audience.

Edited May 14, 2020 by Enthalpic

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

I think you will find that the "audience here" is a lot smarter than you seem to appreciate.

We understand the proposition advanced by Ward Smith just fine. 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

22 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

I don't believe he placed that sign for one nanosecond. Not as the FBI director. Field agents aren't even allowed to show partisanship publicly. 

Well now, considering he is (apparently) married, there is no possible way that the Department can or would inflict restrictions on his bride, an independent citizen voter, from expressing her opinions, now is there?   To do so would massively violate her First Amendment rights.  Besides, as the Director, he can do what he wants.  "Rank has its privileges"!

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

39 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

Well now, considering he is (apparently) married, there is no possible way that the Department can or would inflict restrictions on his bride, an independent citizen voter, from expressing her opinions, now is there?   To do so would massively violate her First Amendment rights.  Besides, as the Director, he can do what he wants.  "Rank has its privileges"!

Hoover didn't NEED a sign.  You knew who he favored by seeing who was still around!   

[Yoshiro Kamamura + 274]

After a busy, demanding day, nothing relaxes the human mind like a quiet round of the Blame Game with your favorite president...

 

[Yoshiro Kamamura + 274]

4 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

Nice, but of course hardly anyone else here will understand you.

Speak to the level of your audience.

Reduction ad absudrum? Easy. You start to throw the facts and arguments you don't like under the table (Trump lies constantly? We don't like to mention that...), until you end up with an absurd statmenent like "Heliocentrism is a Chinese hoax!", or "There is no smallpox!", or "cut the taxes for the rich, and their wealth will trickle down eventually to the poor", or some similar absurdity. Then you chant it without bothering with logical proofs, like Hare Krishna chant their favorite mantra. Silly costumes like big cowboy hats, Confederate flags or functional long firearms are a bonus. 

And that, my friend, is "reduction ad absudrum" in a modern political debate - you keep removing and subtracting, until a pure, distilled circus remains. 

Edited May 15, 2020 by Yoshiro Kamamura

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

6 hours ago, UNC12345 said:

Well, I had to look that one up as it's been a while since I took Philosophy 100.  I understand what it means but I don't personally think it applies here.  Maybe you with your grand intellect can enlighten me.  I feel like I've been making observations for the most part, but I think perhaps they are more accurate than you are willing to admit, hence the vile spewed my way.

Extreme, no?  C'mon man, bring it back from the edge.

I think lots of people admit to it, and it certainly means different things to many people.  The fact that no one admits to being liberal around you is quite understandable.  Are you kidding me?  Imagine the aggressive attack they'd face for having a different view?  Why bother?  This is where you go down the wrong road.  Someone who holds a different opinion than you is simply that.  They aren't an evil person, deserving of ridicule because they have a different view of the world.  I don't know why it has come to this.

Glad you learned something. No charge for the lesson

The example was intended to demonstrate an extreme position, and to demonstrate how said position holder could not admit to their extreme position, claiming as you, the "middle". It is decidedly not the middle, that is my point! Do try and keep up. 

I'm perfectly happy to engage with "the other side" only if they are honest. One of my best friends is an admitted liberal, and we argue and debate but he's a doctor, plenty smart and not prone to playing the kind of games I've called you out for. You're welcome to change tactics, and I'll be happy to engage

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,539]

2 hours ago, Yoshiro Kamamura said:

Reduction ad absudrum? Easy. You start to throw the facts and arguments you don't like under the table (Trump lies constantly? We don't like to mention that...), until you end up with an absurd statmenent like "Heliocentrism is a Chinese hoax!", or "There is no smallpox!", or "cut the taxes for the rich, and their wealth will trickle down eventually to the poor", or some similar absurdity. Then you chant it without bothering with logical proofs, like Hare Krishna chant their favorite mantra. Silly costumes like big cowboy hats, Confederate flags or functional long firearms are a bonus. 

And that, my friend, is "reduction ad absudrum" in a modern political debate - you keep removing and subtracting, until a pure, distilled circus remains. 

Merely to left leaning socialist/progressive crowd...Imagine that.

[UNC12345 + 171]

30 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

Glad you learned something. No charge for the lesson

The example was intended to demonstrate an extreme position, and to demonstrate how said position holder could not admit to their extreme position, claiming as you, the "middle". It is decidedly not the middle, that is my point! Do try and keep up. 

I'm perfectly happy to engage with "the other side" only if they are honest. One of my best friends is an admitted liberal, and we argue and debate but he's a doctor, plenty smart and not prone to playing the kind of games I've called you out for. You're welcome to change tactics, and I'll be happy to engage

I still think your argument is muddled at best, but whatever.  I still don't think you would know the middle if you bumped into it on the street.

However, all snarkiness aside, speaking of tactics, one of the main ones on here is to completely discredit and minimize various sources and claim they are fraudulent, have an agenda, misleading, etc., while making reference to and posting links and other sources which may be or seem to be equally dubious but in agreement with the writer's political leanings.  Since you can't post any links or sources on me, where exactly have I been dishonest in this discussion?  I'm curious.  The fact that I point out things you don't like, that you disagree with, and then don't address or ignore does not mean I am being dishonest.  

 

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

23 minutes ago, UNC12345 said:

I still think your argument is muddled at best, but whatever.  I still don't think you would know the middle if you bumped into it on the street.

However, all snarkiness aside, speaking of tactics, one of the main ones on here is to completely discredit and minimize various sources and claim they are fraudulent, have an agenda, misleading, etc., while making reference to and posting links and other sources which may be or seem to be equally dubious but in agreement with the writer's political leanings.  Since you can't post any links or sources on me, where exactly have I been dishonest in this discussion?  I'm curious.  The fact that I point out things you don't like, that you disagree with, and then don't address or ignore does not mean I am being dishonest.  

My argument is only muddled for your understanding. It makes perfect sense to the others reading it. What does this tell you about you, them? 

As for "This discussion", you've got plenty to choose from. Show me "middle". I've even made it easy for you. No fair editing an old post, there's ways to see when and what you changed. 

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,539]

Quite a bit is centering around the Flynn prosecution..

Note here: While the press had possesion of the transcrptis of the phone call....The Defense was denied...Just how does that happen in this country...And Obama decries the Rule Of Law..?

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/14/politics/flynn-kislyak-transcripts-secret/index.html

And then a US court goes shopping for a DA...What? ...How does a court overreach the DOJ?

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/14/politics/john-gleeson-profile/index.html

 

[MaxNix + 12]

After reading posts on this and the Coronavirus thread, I no longer wonder why the oil business is in deep do-do. 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

27 minutes ago, MaxNix said:

After reading posts on this and the Coronavirus thread, I no longer wonder why the oil business is in deep do-do. 

How’s that?

[UNC12345 + 171]

10 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

As for "This discussion", you've got plenty to choose from. Show me "middle". I've even made it easy for you. No fair editing an old post, there's ways to see when and what you changed. 

You again imply dishonesty, hmmm.  I think that says more about your character than mine.  But since I don't like this implication, I'll play along.  Went on a treasure hunt this morning through my profile, didn't edit anything, but I did go back and look through some of my posts for evidence of the middle in my comments (economic and political contexts).  Perhaps this is straying as it's beyond only this thread/discussion, but I think it illustrates my point, that I try to be reasonable, moderate and consider all sides, unlike so many on here.  See exhibits A through N below.  I have too much time these days.

A.I don't blame him for the virus and I don't think your average American does either.

B. I'm glad the industry as a whole has willingly cut production and I hope you understand that I was simply not proposing to changing the nature of a free market system entirely.  I'm talking about an intervention in highly unusual circumstances and in a key national industry.

 C. On CNN, they are falling over themselves trying to prove the DT is an inept, lying, buffoon.  They don't have to try that hard, the evidence is there.  On Fox, they portray almost everything he does as being right and for the good of the nation.  Both of these viewpoints are embarrassing.  What about some balanced reporting of perhaps, I don't know, the facts? 

D. I did not know this about Nancy Pelosi, but good  to know.  Thanks for informing me.  The fact that she did this is shameful as well, if she should have known different.

E. Yes, time to get back at it, time to figure that out, economic damage is unprecedented.  We need a plan and I think the biggest thing is...let's not take an all or nothing approach.  Open NOW what can be opened safely with restrictions.

F. Let's not get crazy (again) with the communist references to Ontario.  I live here and am very happy with the experience, quite proud of it actually.  Just because we have higher taxes does not mean it's communism.  And I am no fan of the current Federal government, being an oil patch investor for quite a while now.

G. Like other themes and discussions on here, it just seems that every concept needs to be taken to the extreme.  Sorry if you've been misled, but we are in the middle somewhere and that does not make us communist.

H. I've done some generalizing obviously, but tried not to be insulting.  I have tried to stray from categorizing the entire population in one way or another, just commented on some interesting observations (ranking, extremes, etc.) and specifically on Trump.  Your choice of terminology and extremely broad generalizations about the entire society lacking energy and ambition is definitely insulting and pretty unfair really, but you are obviously entitled to your views, extreme as they might be.

I. The US has control over their government?  You're kidding me right?  You have no more control than almost any other democracy.  Don't kid yourself.  Have you watched your these fools over the past 3 years?  They squabble so much, I don't even know how they govern anymore.

J. Just questions for you guys and don't read this in a sarcastic or sharp tone.  I am genuinely interested in the answers.  I try to understand all viewpoints.

Why is there such a huge level of mistrust of various sources (on the opposite end of the political spectrum, CNN, anything from the left, etc) and they are dishonest, etc., while we post links such as the ones above and trust these sources?  Is "the gateway pundit" a source beyond reproach and worthy great amounts of trust?  I'm sure I could list others.

K. Question: is this overreaction?

Driving down the street in my small town of about 18,000 people which has no deaths from COVID and only 15 cases ever announced, all now recovered.  Two people, no older than 20, walking in the fresh air nowhere near anybody, with full masks on.  I understand older people and the vulnerable segment are at risk. I understand crowds and confined spaces could be risky relatively speaking, but two young people walking in the fresh air of nature with  no one around them feel they have to wear masks to protect their safety?  TOO MUCH.

L. I think, when I wrote that I don't blame him for the virus, more accurately I meant that while many anti-Trump people trumpet the number of deaths, etc and blame that on Trump, I don't see it that way.  Obviously the virus itself is not his fault, so if that's what you are getting at, don't get your knickers in a knot.

 M. I have no doubt that CNN has an agenda and in fact, it's very hard to watch at times.  It's tiring just always hearing them be in the "Donald Trump is bad" mode (even though he seems like a buffoon many times without any help whatsoever).  But I just fail to see how redstate.com is any different - they are simply pushing a different agenda, far to the right.  

 N. I'm not even saying there's nothing to the latest scandal.  There likely is but these things have been around for 3 years plus.

[El Gato + 251]

On 5/13/2020 at 11:04 AM, UNC12345 said:

After awhile, you simply have to give Trump (and his team) the credit he's due.  He is a master manipulator, extremely skilled, moreso than he gets credit for.  In the midst of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, he has again gone back to his key steps.  

First, since the nation and the world is in a crisis and he doesn't want to be associated with causing it (he didn't), create a distraction.  SQUIRREL!  Look at something else people, look, look over here, look away from anything that might look bad on me.  I'm not even saying there's nothing to the latest scandal.  There likely is but these things have been around for 3 years plus.

Second, give the overall concept/distraction a nickname (Obamagate).  Be fairly vague about it and let the details, right or wrong, seep out, perhaps by insinuation.  Let it run....

Third, repeat it every chance you get and get the base and multiple media doing the same.  Make sure you use terms "greatest", "best ever", "by far" OR "in the history of the world" in whatever the message is.

BOOM.  Focus moves away from the real issues here, the important issues.  The discussion becomes about other things, in 3 easy steps.  

The heart of this issue is beyond left or right. It is the top intel and law enforcement communities, headed  by the POTUS and top white house level employees, conspired to spy on private American citizens in their own country, and entrap others (The FBI agent wrote this down as a side note in his report, it out there, look it up) for political purposes. It goes WAY beyond Watergate tape recordings. I understand as Canadian if you are ok with that, but as an American I am not.

[Yoshiro Kamamura + 274]

18 hours ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Merely to left leaning socialist/progressive crowd...Imagine that.

Your new nickname for the world minus America, you know, those countries that actually still bother respecting facts and scientific method?

Edited May 15, 2020 by Yoshiro Kamamura

[Yoshiro Kamamura + 274]

On 5/13/2020 at 5:04 PM, UNC12345 said:

After awhile, you simply have to give Trump (and his team) the credit he's due.  He is a master manipulator, extremely skilled, moreso than he gets credit for.  In the midst of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, he has again gone back to his key steps.  

That's not an accurate statement. To the rest of the world, where the general populace is still reasonably literate, and capable of critical thinking, Trump is a clown, a laughingstock, an unbelievably bizarre simpleton who stupidly lies and contradicts himself everyday, and it's very easy to prove that. No actual "master manipulator" can afford this level of stupidity. However, in the USA, where general education has become a privilege of the quickly diminishing middle class (and the upper class, of course), where more and more commone people struggle to understand high-school textbooks, or general scientific principles as to how statement and mathematical logic works, how do you proof and refute statements, how do you fact-check a document, etc., in the USA, where a growing portion of people actually seriously believe that the Earth is flat, and that it's just a few thousands years old, and other anti-scientific nonsense, such a tactics can be actually successful, because people do not apply critical thinking at all - they just divide to "teams" or "flocks", and blindly follow their chosen flags. 

I can assure that in any European state, a president seriously recommending to treat a viral disease by injecting disinfectant would have very hard time to survive in the office for but a single day. In America it's a-okay, he has become a national champion of the uneducated and the dumb, but at a steep cost in human lives, economic situation and diplomatic credit:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/15/donald-trump-coronavirus-response-world-leaders

[Jee + 27]

On 5/14/2020 at 2:03 AM, Douglas Buckland said:

Is a pandemic an ‘Act of God’ or not? 

As I said, it's part of the Judgement Day episodes.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,539]

3 hours ago, Yoshiro Kamamura said:

Your new nickname for the world minus America, you know, those countries that actually still bother respecting facts and scientific method?

Ohh i see your missing a few incidentals...1. Donald Trump i am not the world's president...is there a need to explain life to the worlds order?....No not until one speaks to the world...

 

[Yoshiro Kamamura + 274]

An example:

This person has the same number of votes as a professor of history from Yale. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 5/14/2020 at 2:43 PM, UNC12345 said:

Well, I had to look that one up as it's been a while since I took Philosophy 100.  I understand what it means but I don't personally think it applies here.  Maybe you with your grand intellect can enlighten me.  I feel like I've been making observations for the most part, but I think perhaps they are more accurate than you are willing to admit, hence the vile spewed my way.

Extreme, no?  C'mon man, bring it back from the edge.

I think lots of people admit to it, and it certainly means different things to many people.  The fact that no one admits to being liberal around you is quite understandable.  Are you kidding me?  Imagine the aggressive attack they'd face for having a different view?  Why bother?  This is where you go down the wrong road.  Someone who holds a different opinion than you is simply that.  They aren't an evil person, deserving of ridicule because they have a different view of the world.  I don't know why it has come to this.

You may be young, I am 74. I can tell you that a Democrat of today is nothing like a J.F.K. or a Hubert Humphrey or an F.D.R. I realize that many Republicans thought F.D.R. was far left, and he was in that day. He did have a few socialists and communists in his administration though. 

Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden have totally caved to the far left. If they thought Bernie Sanders had any chance of winning they would have gone with him. They think they can hold the moderate Democratic voters by keeping Biden quiet and playing him like a puppet with a strong group of advisors and a Vice President like Susan Rice (She is an awesome liar). Obama can feed her directions. He was the Liar in Chief for two terms. 

Part Two of the Obama Administration Scandals

https://docs.google.com/document/d/11axnqv_b3L2k9CD6HWNMwrdIECJZSxowxjO4RIc-rbE/edit

 

Critical Information on the Trump, Obama, and Hillary Investigations

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1choW_wq0D5DfjRPjqLlAkfxCnnVJhRzrHeXppE6D4E8/edit
 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 5/14/2020 at 2:43 PM, UNC12345 said:

Well, I had to look that one up as it's been a while since I took Philosophy 100.  I understand what it means but I don't personally think it applies here.  Maybe you with your grand intellect can enlighten me.  I feel like I've been making observations for the most part, but I think perhaps they are more accurate than you are willing to admit, hence the vile spewed my way.

Extreme, no?  C'mon man, bring it back from the edge.

I think lots of people admit to it, and it certainly means different things to many people.  The fact that no one admits to being liberal around you is quite understandable.  Are you kidding me?  Imagine the aggressive attack they'd face for having a different view?  Why bother?  This is where you go down the wrong road.  Someone who holds a different opinion than you is simply that.  They aren't an evil person, deserving of ridicule because they have a different view of the world.  I don't know why it has come to this.

It is evil to support evil and it is evil to not oppose evil actively. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

11 hours ago, UNC12345 said:

You again imply dishonesty, hmmm.  I think that says more about your character than mine.  But since I don't like this implication, I'll play along.  Went on a treasure hunt this morning through my profile, didn't edit anything, but I did go back and look through some of my posts for evidence of the middle in my comments (economic and political contexts).  Perhaps this is straying as it's beyond only this thread/discussion, but I think it illustrates my point, that I try to be reasonable, moderate and consider all sides, unlike so many on here.  See exhibits A through N below.  I have too much time these days.

A.I don't blame him for the virus and I don't think your average American does either.

B. I'm glad the industry as a whole has willingly cut production and I hope you understand that I was simply not proposing to changing the nature of a free market system entirely.  I'm talking about an intervention in highly unusual circumstances and in a key national industry.

 C. On CNN, they are falling over themselves trying to prove the DT is an inept, lying, buffoon.  They don't have to try that hard, the evidence is there.  On Fox, they portray almost everything he does as being right and for the good of the nation.  Both of these viewpoints are embarrassing.  What about some balanced reporting of perhaps, I don't know, the facts? 

D. I did not know this about Nancy Pelosi, but good  to know.  Thanks for informing me.  The fact that she did this is shameful as well, if she should have known different.

E. Yes, time to get back at it, time to figure that out, economic damage is unprecedented.  We need a plan and I think the biggest thing is...let's not take an all or nothing approach.  Open NOW what can be opened safely with restrictions.

F. Let's not get crazy (again) with the communist references to Ontario.  I live here and am very happy with the experience, quite proud of it actually.  Just because we have higher taxes does not mean it's communism.  And I am no fan of the current Federal government, being an oil patch investor for quite a while now.

G. Like other themes and discussions on here, it just seems that every concept needs to be taken to the extreme.  Sorry if you've been misled, but we are in the middle somewhere and that does not make us communist.

H. I've done some generalizing obviously, but tried not to be insulting.  I have tried to stray from categorizing the entire population in one way or another, just commented on some interesting observations (ranking, extremes, etc.) and specifically on Trump.  Your choice of terminology and extremely broad generalizations about the entire society lacking energy and ambition is definitely insulting and pretty unfair really, but you are obviously entitled to your views, extreme as they might be.

I. The US has control over their government?  You're kidding me right?  You have no more control than almost any other democracy.  Don't kid yourself.  Have you watched your these fools over the past 3 years?  They squabble so much, I don't even know how they govern anymore.

J. Just questions for you guys and don't read this in a sarcastic or sharp tone.  I am genuinely interested in the answers.  I try to understand all viewpoints.

Why is there such a huge level of mistrust of various sources (on the opposite end of the political spectrum, CNN, anything from the left, etc) and they are dishonest, etc., while we post links such as the ones above and trust these sources?  Is "the gateway pundit" a source beyond reproach and worthy great amounts of trust?  I'm sure I could list others.

K. Question: is this overreaction?

Driving down the street in my small town of about 18,000 people which has no deaths from COVID and only 15 cases ever announced, all now recovered.  Two people, no older than 20, walking in the fresh air nowhere near anybody, with full masks on.  I understand older people and the vulnerable segment are at risk. I understand crowds and confined spaces could be risky relatively speaking, but two young people walking in the fresh air of nature with  no one around them feel they have to wear masks to protect their safety?  TOO MUCH.

L. I think, when I wrote that I don't blame him for the virus, more accurately I meant that while many anti-Trump people trumpet the number of deaths, etc and blame that on Trump, I don't see it that way.  Obviously the virus itself is not his fault, so if that's what you are getting at, don't get your knickers in a knot.

 M. I have no doubt that CNN has an agenda and in fact, it's very hard to watch at times.  It's tiring just always hearing them be in the "Donald Trump is bad" mode (even though he seems like a buffoon many times without any help whatsoever).  But I just fail to see how redstate.com is any different - they are simply pushing a different agenda, far to the right.  

 N. I'm not even saying there's nothing to the latest scandal.  There likely is but these things have been around for 3 years plus.

"But these things have been around for three years plus---"). That is funny. It sounds like you think that one of the worst scandals (and a multitude of Obama administration scandals) should have just faded away by now. The only reason they have not yet been resolved is because of a massive effort by the Deep State together with the Demoncrat Party and the entire establishment of the United States! I don't think anyone on this site is ignorant enough or stupid enough to not understand that simple fact. That means they are lying to themselves and/or everyone they communicate with.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,539]

21 minutes ago, Yoshiro Kamamura said:

An example:

This person has the same number of votes as a professor of history from Yale. 

Perfect candidate for Bidens vice president...

[BradleyPNW + 282]

On 5/15/2020 at 6:53 PM, ronwagn said:

Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden have totally caved to the far left. If they thought Bernie Sanders had any chance of winning they would have gone with him. They think they can hold the moderate Democratic voters by keeping Biden quiet and playing him like a puppet with a strong group of advisors and a Vice President like Susan Rice (She is an awesome liar). Obama can feed her directions. He was the Liar in Chief for two terms. 
 

Do people forget Donald is a compulsive liar? Attempting to find a lie by Nancy Pelosi takes a lot of work. In fact, I'd make the challenge that no one can catch her in a legit lie even with the help of the Great Google. I mean. we got the crazy people who will twist facts to try to make it look like she has lied about something but those people are nonsense factories not straight shooters. 

I don't know about Biden because I never paid attention to him. I don't, however, recall Obama telling lies. I don't recall Susan Rice telling lies either. The only problem I had with Rice was I didn't 100% align with her feelings on climate change and national security. For example, she should have more aggressively fought Russian disinformaiton operations and Trump's complicit cooperation with Putin's election interference. And of course, Susan Rice did not lie to the FBI like Donald's boy Mike Flynn. 

Now that I'm thinking about this question, I'd say accusing Obama administration officials of lying is silly in the context of a Trump administration. Some of the things the Obama administration did bugged me a little bit but I never considered them liars. Donald and those around him, in contrast, lie so much that I expect lies to come out of their mouths before I ever expect the truth to pass over their lips. I haven't seen anything Trump has said today, but I have no doubt he has already repeated one or more easily identifiable lies. It would be foolish to ever presume any word out of his mouth, even words of little consequence, is essentially truthful; if Donald told us he went to a meeting and the drapes were blue we'd have to fact check him. Then we'd find out he never attended a meeting and the room where it supposedly happened has red drapes.