[awm]

Here's a picture of what life is like when your freedom has really been taken away. All of these are policies are president-elect (and in many cases other republicans) have advocated for particular groups.

Every week or two, you get stopped by a policeman when walking around your neighborhood. Even though you haven't done anything particularly suspicious, the policeman performs a thorough body search in case you have drugs or a concealed weapon. You also better have your passport with you when this happens -- last time you forgot it, the cop arrested you and locked you in a detention center for six hours until your husband figured out what happened and showed up with your passport.

The FBI has installed hidden cameras in your church. The new minister is careful never to say anything negative about these cameras or the government or what's going on in your community -- the last minister was arrested for "fomenting terrorism" when his sermon talked about this stuff, and hasn't been seen since.

When you go to work, you're careful to dye your hair and never to talk about your husband. You know that your boss doesn't like to employ married women because they "might get pregnant and leave us in the lurch" so it's important that he thinks you're single. He also thinks that people of your natural hair color are lazy and litigious, and wouldn't have hired you if he knew! Of course, your boss's religious freedom guarantees he's allowed to fire you if he finds these things out so you need to be careful around coworkers even outside the office.

You're allowed to vote, but you have to wait four or five hours in line on election day to do so. The state government has shut down most of the polling places and there's no early voting any more. Of course, when you finally get to the head of the line at the polling place you find out that your name has been dropped from the registration rolls because the state thinks that you might be undocumented, so your provisional ballot won't be counted. You could've appealed this if you had filed paperwork a month ahead of election day, but you didn't do the right searches online, so your fault I guess.

You keep getting phone calls and emails threatening to kill you and your family. Recently someone spray-painted your house with the president's name and a statement that your family should be executed. You've reported this to the police, but they just remind you that we have freedom of speech in this country and say "boys will be boys" in response to the damage to your property.

Pretty terrible, isn't it? Welcome to life as a minority in Trump's America.

[Winstonm]

The more biology one knows, the less inclined to racism one can be. Science has long been viewed as an enemy of religion and for good reason: science reverses the basic tenets of faith by requiring evidence before belief.

Religions are hierarchical. Protecting the power structure has always been a primary aim of religion. This plays perfectly into the hands of the politician who can gain control over a large voting block by means of winning over a few at the top who will promote the politician as believing as the congregation does. It was no accident that the Republican Party and the Moral Majority of Jerry Falwell joined hands, as it is no accident that the white Christian right is still of the belief that it is the Republican Party that is morally superior.

This causes an unintended consequence, though. By legitimizing magical thinking, all magical thinking becomes legitimized. It matters not if the non-verifiable "magic" embraces a legitimate concern such as pro-life choices or an obviously illegitimate idea such as skin color or race by itself creating an inequality in humanness because, after all, it's all "only opinion".

This is the world view that has been created by the Republican Party, that facts are only opinions.
But we are all destined to live in a world of fact. That conflict between fact and fiction will have to be settled somehow,someday, and historically the winner has always been reality.

There is no reason to think we will have a different outcome, no matter what we want to believe.

[jogs]

Quote

When the world leaders joined hands against terrorism, Obama was sadly missing.

Winstonm, on 2016-December-24, 11:54, said:

Explain this, please. I don't know what in the world you are talking about.

Where's Barack Obama in this picture?

[hrothgar]

jogs, on 2016-December-25, 18:31, said:

Where's Barack Obama in this picture?

The same place as the Prime Minister of Japan, the Premiere of China, and the heads of state for other leading non-European powers...

This idiocy got debunked a year ago ***** for brains

[MrAce]

mikeh, on 2016-December-24, 12:08, said:

The problem with being a trump supporter is that one has to abandon all pretence at actually thinking, as opposed to repeated learned bullshit. Hence jogs can, in a single post, combine both of these sentences without seeming to realize the idiocy reflected therein.

[ldrews]

OK, I am impelled to jump in here. Winstonn, what is your factual evidence to the contrary?

[Winstonm]

ldrews, on 2016-December-25, 20:27, said:

OK, I am impelled to jump in here. Winstonn, what is your factual evidence to the contrary?

To the contrary of what?

[ldrews]

Quote

In other words, you have no evidence for your choice, only feelings produced by inhaling daily doses of Rush, Hannity, Breitbart, and other outlets in the same pack? This approach to decision making reminds me of a smoker who in the face of mountains of evidence invents rationals in support of his addiction.

You seem to dismiss another poster in a quite condescending tone, in my opinion. Could you enlighten me regarding how you form your opinions and what factual bases you use in the current political climate?

[andrei]

hrothgar, on 2016-December-25, 18:49, said:

The same place as the Prime Minister of Japan, the Premiere of China, and the heads of state for other leading non-European powers...

This idiocy got debunked a year ago ***** for brains

LOL at this.
Please enlighten us how many terorists attacks were in Japan and China lately.

[andrei]

ldrews, on 2016-December-25, 21:23, said:

You seem to dismiss another poster in a quite condescending tone, in my opinion.

We can tell you are new around here 😀

[mikeh]

andrei, on 2016-December-25, 22:12, said:

LOL at this.
Please enlighten us how many terorists attacks were in Japan and China lately.

Well, depending on how one defines terrorism, China actually has quite a few each year. But since China doesn't like to talk about its ethnic issues, especially with its muslim population, it doesn't surprise me that a trump supporter would be ignorant about this, as with so much else. Look up Xinjiang

[hrothgar]

andrei, on 2016-December-25, 22:12, said:

LOL at this.
Please enlighten us how many terorists attacks were in Japan and China lately.

Mike has already pointed out that the Chinese does experience terrorist attacks.

With this said and done, can you please explain why countries need to be experiencing terrorist attacks in order to show sympathy and express solidarity with one another?

[Cyberyeti]

andrei, on 2016-December-25, 22:12, said:

LOL at this.
Please enlighten us how many terorists attacks were in Japan and China lately.

Japan still has its issues https://en.wikipedia...i/Aum_Shinrikyo are still under surveillance.

As pointed out China has its isses with the Uighur minority.

[Winstonm]

ldrews, on 2016-December-25, 21:23, said:

You seem to dismiss another poster in a quite condescending tone, in my opinion. Could you enlighten me regarding how you form your opinions and what factual bases you use in the current political climate?

Sure. I do my best to emulate John Maynard Keynes who once said, "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"

To this end I may find factual claims interesting but I do not take anything at face value unless it can be confirmed by at least one other neutral source. I also begin with a presumption of reasonableness. For example, in 1994, I was opposed to Bill Clinton but I never believed that he was engaged in murder or rape or vast real estate swindles - not only did these claims fly in the face of reasonableness but there was no objective evidence that any of it ever occurred. In other words, I had no reason to believe it to be accurate.

In this day and age, I accept that Hillary Clinton is a reasonable person, so the idea of her orchestrating some kind of Benghazi stand down or cover up is ludicrous on its surface, and a most thorough investigation by the opposition party found no wrongdoing. What is the point, then, in even listening to this claim or repeating it?

To sum up, it really isn't that hard. I try not to be gullible or vastly partisan; I demand proof - the more outrageous the claim, the higher the standard of proof needed; I try over time to eliminate partisan sources from my information sources.

[jogs]

Cyberyeti, on 2016-December-24, 11:29, said:

I happen to think that Hillary would accomplish more in 10 hours than Trump would in 20.

Please don't confuse Hillary with Bill. Bill Clinton was a lovable scoundrel. Bill understood the art of compromise. He didn't insult the opposition. Ross Perot voters were true deplorables.
In 2008 Hillary asked who would be there to answer the call at 3AM in the morning? During the Benghazi attack neither Hillary or Barack were awake to answer the call. The Donald would have been awake.
Trump saved jobs at Carrier. Trump made Boeing agree to watch those cost overruns. Obama and HRC said that's the way of the world. Those jobs can't be saved. Those costs can't be negotiated.
Mitch McConnell wants tax cuts to be revenue neutral. Trump is a businessman. He plans to do more with fewer tax dollars. Trump will run the country like an efficient multi-trillion dollar corporation.

[jogs]

Winstonm, on 2016-December-26, 09:17, said:

Sure. I do my best to emulate John Maynard Keynes who once said, "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"

Keynes is part of the swamp.

[Winstonm]

jogs, on 2016-December-26, 11:07, said:

Keynes is part of the swamp.

Thanks for that intellectually stimulating comment. Let me write that down lest I forget. How did it go? When facts change, I change my mind is wrong; whatever Breitbart claims is fact. OK. I think I got it. But do I really have to go to all that trouble?

Wouldn't it work just as well if I simply stuck my head into a garbage pile and inhaled deeply?

[PassedOut]

jogs, on 2016-December-26, 11:06, said:

Trump will run the country like an efficient multi-trillion dollar corporation.

If this is your way of predicting a US bankruptcy, I think you are jumping the gun. While it's true that Trump campaigned on going back to fiscal irresponsibility big-time, he can't do that alone. We can suppose that more responsible elements in congress will put the brakes on. Let's hope so anyway!

[hrothgar]

jogs, on 2016-December-26, 11:06, said:

Trump will run the country like an efficient multi-trillion dollar corporation.

I am terrified that Trump will try to run the country like one of his corporations.

First and foremost, a country is not the same as a corporation

1. Governments have a monopoly on the legitimate use of force. Corporations are not allowed the exercise this.
2. Currently, the average lifetime of a company is approximately 15 years. In theory, we want the US government to have a much longer time horizon
3. Nearly all companies are designed to try to make as much money as possible. Trust me when I say that you really don't want the US government to be operating as a revenue maximizing monopolist.
4. Companies have a narrow fiduciary responsibly to the owners (typically to their shareholders). In contrast, a the United State government is supposed to "promote the general welfare".
5. Governments have a wide variety of fiscal powers available to them that are not available to corporations
6. Then of course, there's the whole issue with tight ties between corporations and governments being a defining characteristic of fascism

Simply put, trying to draw and analogy between a government and a corporation or, worse yet, a government and a household is at best facetious and, more often, an exhibition of true stupidity

Next, even if you wanted the US government to be run like a corporation, is Trump really the one to do it?

1. Trump's business career has been mediocre at best. He inherited a lot of money from his dad, however, his rate of return with this money has been well below what he could have made parking the $$$ in the market
2. Trump has had a string of well publicized bankruptcies. He did a decent job preserving his own assets, but his shareholders got fleeced. No one in the US is willing to do business with the man which is why he had to abandon real estate and retreat into deals where he is licensing his name.
3. The man is a low grade grifter who repeated screws over both his creditors and his customers
4. Many of Trumps most noticeable failures resulted from a combination of ignornance about the basics of the markets that he was entering combined with poor impulse control

This is the genius who is supposed run the US government

Give me a break...

[jogs]

hrothgar, on 2016-December-25, 18:49, said:

The same place as the Prime Minister of Japan, the Premiere of China, and the heads of state for other leading non-European powers...

This idiocy got debunked a year ago ***** for brains

China and Japan don't accept Muslim refugees. Obama declined the invitation to join this march. Winstonm wasn't aware of this.