US Politics Thread

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
I also know someone with a Ph.D. from Yale who is fluent in German, French, and Italian and can read ancient Greek and Hebrew. He happens to support Trump.

But I guess he isn't as cultured as Broken with his M.A. in medieval studies. That guy is just an uncultured Trump supporter in the USA.

The quoted post, you moron, was a response to you saying I know nothing of history. It wasn't in any way an implication that I'm more qualified than every American. But keep taking things out of context, which is typical.
 

calitennis127

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
4,947
Reactions
459
Points
83
Actually it's pretty simple: I'm saying I'm better than every piece of shit Trump supporter who's completely fine with putting kids in cages.

They're not put in "cages" like animals you retard. They are temporarily put in detention facilities that were never meant to be hotels. Despite hundreds of thousands of them coming through such facilities, less than 20 have died and that was because of the long journey they took to get to the United States. A room is a "cage," an office is a "cage," a car is a "cage." Any enclosed space is in some sense a "cage."

Btw, if you want to use this stupid terminology, the Obama administration did the identical thing. And Obama's black DHS director Jeh Johnson defended the practice as recently as last year.

It's completely hilarious that you think I don't know who they are.

And completely true. You have no idea that people like Elder or MacDonald exist in America. That is because you are totally ignorant about it. Historians tend to have specialties. Why don't you focus on something closer to you that you can understand like Israeli-Palestinian tensions? You clearly know nothing about the USA so maybe you should take a break from trying to understand it.

Yes, Peter Schweizer is now the reference...the same pussy who wrote a book about political corruption but didn't bring up Trump once...

No, he only mentioned Jared Kushner and Mitch McConnell (two people closely aligned with the president) constantly. And he only wrote an entire book on Jeb Bush, who is a Republican. And he has to walk around with security all the time because of the Clinton camp having a hit on him. Yeah, what a pussy.

Why don't you just admit, Broken, that you are a total slave to the New York Times and you just repeat everything it says? Admit it. Just say "I am the NYT's slave."

Ah yes, in other words, "I fully stand by my ignorance based on a very small sample that I've seen in sports that aren't even the most popular in France while completely knowing shit about those they're very good at.

Enough French people play tennis and basketball to be able to make a significant cultural judgment. It may not be comprehensive but it can at least be true to a limited degree.

No, I absolutely refuse to consider myself better than someone just because I come from a more privileged background. But if you're implying American ignorance is strictly due to sociological factors then you're kidding yourself.

Three questions:

1) What evidence do you have that the average American (by which you obviously mean middle American whites who vote Republican as opposed to white Democrats and blacks who you make excuses for) is more ignorant of geography or world history than the average European or Middle Easterner? Please cite a statistic or study.

2) Assuming you can prove #1, what causal link is there between not knowing world geography and then launching imperial wars that result in war crimes? I don't see how the first inevitably leads to the second.

3) Are you aware that the middle American whites who you are clearly disparaging voted for Trump in 2016 when Trump made it very clear that he intended to be non-interventionist? In fact, here is Trump condemning the Iraq war to Jeb Bush's face in a debate. Do these views not reflect your own?

 

calitennis127

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
4,947
Reactions
459
Points
83
Also watching Cali meltdown, make threads/posts en masse and while using Trump language (sad!) explains so much. The OP of the thread which was merged could have just been easily been written by Trump. The opening lines are uncanny. It's honestly funny.

No substantive reply to the points about Schweizer, Elder, and MacDonald. All he can do is resort to attacks on the psychology behind someone he disagrees with.

Standard.
 

calitennis127

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
4,947
Reactions
459
Points
83
The quoted post, you moron, was a response to you saying I know nothing of history. It wasn't in any way an implication that I'm more qualified than every American. But keep taking things out of context, which is typical.


No, but you have clearly been insinuating that you are better educated than Trump voters, when there are hundreds of thousands among them who are in fact very well-educated and highly intelligent people. Is that something you ever acknowledge? Is that ever a caveat you throw out?

No. You simply say that someone who votes for Trump or supports Trump at all is ignorant. And that shows your total ignorance of the USA because many intelligent Trump supporters are on his side for FOREIGN POLICY reasons that you would agree with (such as opposition to the war in Iraq).
 

calitennis127

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
4,947
Reactions
459
Points
83
Here is another "bigoted, uncultured" Trump supporter named Michael Scheuer. He happened to get a Ph.D. from a university in Canada and ran the bin Laden unit in the CIA before writing multiple books on Bin Laden. He was a staunch Iraq war critic who resigned from the CIA over his dissent from the war.

Ironically, Scheuer has been a major critic of Israel and has been banned by Fox News, CNN, and all the networks for his Israel criticism. His views on Israel are almost identical to Broken's, but Broken does not know who Scheuer is and assumes that he is "uncultured" because he supported Trump and voted for him.

Sure, Broken, sure.

Show me someone from the New York Times who understands foreign policy this well:

 

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
Here is another "bigoted, uncultured" Trump supporter named Michael Scheuer. He happened to get a Ph.D. from a university in Canada and ran the bin Laden unit in the CIA before writing multiple books on Bin Laden. He was a staunch Iraq war critic who resigned from the CIA over his dissent from the war.

Ironically, Scheuer has been a major critic of Israel and has been banned by Fox News, CNN, and all the networks for his Israel criticism. His views on Israel are almost identical to Broken's, but Broken does not know who Scheuer is and assumes that he is "uncultured" because he supported Trump and voted for him.

Sure, Broken, sure.

Show me someone from the New York Times who understands foreign policy this well:



My favorite Cali type of posts is when he throws accusations of ignorance. You can accuse me of a lot of things but lacking information about the topics I discuss is not one of them. You can disagree with my opinion and call me a retard all you want (God knows I believe you're an idiot), but assuming I've never heard of these people is quite amusing.

For the record, I actually liked Imperial Hubris. It was a balsy take that went against what was commonly perceived in the US at the time. But this is the same piece of shit who literally advocated killing Trump's opponents so both you and him, and his "culture" can fuck off.
 

calitennis127

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
4,947
Reactions
459
Points
83
Notice Broken did not have any direct response to the posts above because he had nothing to say and is a pseudo-intellectual. In particular, he had nothing to offer on the question of the neocons, war crimes, and Trump's non-interventionist stance. Instead, he was embarrassed that he ignorantly blamed "Trump supporters" for the longstanding military fetish of the United States and that he did not know that the war criminal neocons were all rabid #neverTrumpers. Out of total laziness he lumped them into one category even though the neocons generally hate Trump's voting base.

Broken also had nothing to say about Heather MacDonald or Larry Elder. Why is that? Well, we all know. He either barely knew who they were or wasn't willing to admit that he had unfairly omitted that there are a number of intelligent people on the American right.

My favorite Cali type of posts is when he throws accusations of ignorance. You can accuse me of a lot of things but lacking information about the topics I discuss is not one of them.

Lol.....yes I can. You clearly know much less than you think you know about the world generally and the USA in particular. You simply repeat the clichés of the New York Times and think that makes you knowledgeable. Like I have said many times on this thread, you are a New York Times slave. Anything they say you follow.

You actually made reference to nehmeth and I can tell you that in our numerous conversations he often said this about you (and I am not making that up just to get under your skin; he said it repeatedly).

You can disagree with my opinion and call me a retard all you want (God knows I believe you're an idiot), but assuming I've never heard of these people is quite amusing.

Okay, so 1 of 2 things has to be true. Either

1) You knew who these people were, and you smeared all right-leaning people with one broad brush, dishonestly ignoring how many well-educated and intelligent people are on the right such as the ones I just mentioned, or

2) You did not know who they were (or did not know much about them), and you are simply pretending to know of them after being embarrassed that you were so clueless.

For the record, I actually liked Imperial Hubris. It was a balsy take that went against what was commonly perceived in the US at the time. But this is the same piece of shit who literally advocated killing Trump's opponents so both you and him, and his "culture" can fuck off.

Well, you should not be so disturbed by that, given that political killings of one's enemies have been much more common in the Middle East than they have in American history.

Also, even if Scheuer's reaction was extreme, the behavior of Brennan & co. (who Scheuer made his remarks about) has been absolutely despicable since Trump was elected. Part of the reason that Scheuer said what he did is that he worked in the CIA with Brennan and could not stand him.
 
Last edited:

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,517
Reactions
14,658
Points
113
Lol.....(since Broken likes to go all personal about his life story I'll go that route) you are telling someone who scored in the 98 percentile on the GRE in Verbal and Writing that he didn't understand your point.

Oh, man, I so don't want to get into a dick-measuring contest with you, but this is a bit irresistible. Funnily, I scored in the 98th percentile in my GRE's, too. Now I'm starting to think the test isn't that hard, given you and I doing so well. Of course, I took mine in Rome, so maybe the test in the land of La Dolce Vita might have been easier. (#irony) But still, you said this, above:
"Oh and do you display a provenance, by any chance? I think you might. Just a sense I have, you know? ;-):"

This is an obvious misunderstanding of the word "provenance." As I said, probably that GRE is easier than folks make it out to be, given how well we both did, since you clearly think I'm an idiot and I'm absolutely certain that you are unqualified even to opine on the internet.
 

calitennis127

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
4,947
Reactions
459
Points
83
Oh, man, I so don't want to get into a dick-measuring contest with you, but this is a bit irresistible. Funnily, I scored in the 98th percentile in my GRE's, too. Now I'm starting to think the test isn't that hard, given you and I doing so well. Of course, I took mine in Rome, so maybe the test in the land of La Dolce Vita might have been easier. (#irony) But still, you said this, above:
"Oh and do you display a provenance, by any chance? I think you might. Just a sense I have, you know? ;-):"

This is an obvious misunderstanding of the word "provenance."


I made a mistake, in haste. And I'll own it. I don't really care. I have been in other contexts (usually conversing with white Democrats) where I used advanced vocabulary and people did not know what I was talking about. We all have things we know and things we don't. That includes me.

That said, I stand by my point that you did nothing to address the research displayed in that chart and predictably attacked the source as having a pro-gun bias without actually addressing any arguments. And you still haven't. You're no Heather MacDonald.
 
Last edited:

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,517
Reactions
14,658
Points
113
I made a mistake, in haste. And I'll own it. I don't really care. I have been in other contexts where I used advanced vocabulary and people did not know what I was talking about. We all have things we know and things we don't. That includes me.

That said, I stand by my point that you did nothing to address the research displayed in that chart and predictably attacked the source as having a pro-gun bias without actually addressing any arguments. And you still haven't. You're no Heather MacDonald.
Appreciate you owning the mistake. I didn't attack the person/entity behind your stats post. I merely pointed out where it came from, for the illumination of those participating in the conversation. I, myself, am not so much. I don't believe I have to address anything I don't care to.
 

calitennis127

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
4,947
Reactions
459
Points
83
Appreciate you owning the mistake. I didn't attack the person/entity behind your stats post. I merely pointed out where it came from, for the illumination of those participating in the conversation. I, myself, am not so much. I don't believe I have to address anything I don't care to.


Well the points I was raising were entirely relevant to the overall gun control debate. They are points that have to be addressed.
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,517
Reactions
14,658
Points
113
Well the points I was raising were entirely relevant to the overall gun control debate. They are points that have to be addressed.
Fair enough. As was my mentioning of where the data came from. All in service to good debate. But here I will mention that you came after me for no real reason at all, as I'm barely involved in this debate. You often do, as you do others, with elaborate notions of what you imagine my/their motives to be, stringing out rather fanciful variations on what is way beyond what, on face value, they said. You mentioned "haste" in your error above. Can I suggest that you take a step away from the computer and consider some rational analysis before you respond to everything on offer? That said, I promise to take my own advice.
 

calitennis127

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
4,947
Reactions
459
Points
83
Fair enough. As was my mentioning of where the data came from. All in service to good debate.

But you only mentioned where it came from without addressing its contents - in other words, you made it about appearances instead of logic or rationality. Don't get me wrong, I think optics and cosmetics are important, but substance is too. I don't care if Moxie or John Lott say something: if it's true, it's true.

But here I will mention that you came after me for no real reason at all, as I'm barely involved in this debate. You often do, as you do others, with elaborate notions of what you imagine my/their motives to be, stringing out rather fanciful variations on what is way beyond what, on face value, they said.

I disagree. I have always listened very carefully to what people say and regardless of their background or beliefs I take them seriously on their own terms. That is why my friendships have tended to be all over the place with a vast array of very different people.

You mentioned "haste" in your error above. Can I suggest that you take a step away from the computer and consider some rational analysis before you respond to everything on offer? That said, I promise to take my own advice.

Don't get carried away here.....I understood your fundamental point perfectly. I made a minor verbal mistake, and it was nowhere near the level of Bill de Blasio saying we should not "cast dispersions" [sic] on entire religions or Joe Biden's daily blooper videos.

That said, I will give you credit for one thing: I think your writing is very good, with a peculiarly poetic style. It's just that the substance of what you say is very often nonsense. In a way, it's kind of a reversal of how you think of Nalbandian: great aesthetics, but often lacking in substance.
 

Federberg

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
15,542
Reactions
5,607
Points
113
Can't help thinking about Eric Swalwell. His whole candidacy was based on gun violence. He must feel like a real muppet for bailing out so quickly. Talk about missing your moment!
 

britbox

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
27,402
Reactions
6,205
Points
113
Location
Gold Coast, Australia
See my response to Darth. Humans are guilty of everything you're saying and more. So how the fuck is religion in any way a good idea when it gives them all the more reasons to do it?

Religion is just another ideology... but one based on faith. Most religions actually promote tolerance. You're mistaking human corruption of religion with religion itself.

The ten commandments are:
  • “I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt not have any strange gods before Me.”
  • “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.”
  • “Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day.”
  • “Honor thy father and mother.”
  • “Thou shalt not kill.”
  • “Thou shalt not commit adultery.”
  • “Thou shalt not steal.”
  • “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.”
  • “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife.”
  • “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s goods.”
I might have missed it, but I don't recall reading about exterminating people of other faiths, or even suggestions that catholic priests shove their cocks into the arses of choirboys.

To dumb it down, the creed is not to kill people, not to sleep around with taken women, not to lie, not to steal, respect your elders, not to be envious and respect your maker.

But humans will find a way to corrupt every ideology. The most murderous being led by far-left atheist tyrants like Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot.

Religion isn't the problem. Humans are. As DarthFed rightly said - it's the intolerance of others with a different creed or view.
 
Last edited:

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
Religion is just another ideology... but one based on faith. Most religions actually promote tolerance. You're mistaking human corruption of religion with religion itself.

The ten commandments are:
  • “I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt not have any strange gods before Me.”
  • “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.”
  • “Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day.”
  • “Honor thy father and mother.”
  • “Thou shalt not kill.”
  • “Thou shalt not commit adultery.”
  • “Thou shalt not steal.”
  • “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.”
  • “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife.”
  • “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s goods.”
I might have missed it, but I don't recall reading about exterminating people of other faiths, or even suggestions that catholic priests shove their cocks into the arses of choirboys.

To dumb it down, the creed is not to kill people, not to sleep around with taken women, not to lie, not to steal, respect your elders, not to be envious and respect your maker.

But humans will find a way to corrupt every ideology. The most murderous being led by far-left atheist tyrants like Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot.

Religion isn't the problem. Humans are. As DarthFed rightly said - it's the intolerance of others with a different creed or view.

This is an extremely utopic outlook perspective that really ignores the ideological shortcomings of every religion. I agree humans are the problem. But you'd think an all-knowing God would know better in that case. Yeah, on the surface, every religion promotes peace, good-faith, etc...delve deeper though, even on an ideological level, and you see how much violence, hatred, intimidation and fear they promote. All of them.
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,517
Reactions
14,658
Points
113
Can't help thinking about Eric Swalwell. His whole candidacy was based on gun violence. He must feel like a real muppet for bailing out so quickly. Talk about missing your moment!
It's not like he didn't already have a lot of material to work with. And it's not like the other candidates have no idea how to debate the issue.
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,517
Reactions
14,658
Points
113
OK, show of hands: how many people think that Jeffrey Epstein offed himself?
 

GameSetAndMath

The GOAT
Joined
Jul 9, 2013
Messages
21,141
Reactions
3,398
Points
113
Mmmm. I think a lot of powerful people will be pleased that he's out of commission.

The US attorney from SDNY says that given that Epstein is dead, no one else has the right to move motions on the admissibility of evidence gathered by them in his NY Mansion. So, all the stuff found in that mansion can be used to build case against co-conspirators and mere participants as well (assuming the attorney does not commit suicide soon :p ).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Moxie
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
mrzz World Affairs 2449
T World Affairs 13
britbox World Affairs 82
britbox World Affairs 1004
britbox World Affairs 46