US Election 2020

Status
Not open for further replies.

rietrot

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
33,193
As much as you claim to hate socialism you would be right at home in Soviet Russia


I don't get the relevance?

Firing someone incompetent isn't the same as throwing people out of a window, as you are trying to imply with the fake news CNN article.
 
Last edited:

TysonRoux

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
11,456
John Oliver to Jared Kushner: 'If it's a success story for anyone, it’s for the coronavirus'


John Oliver returned to Last Week Tonight from a brief hiatus Sunday night for another examination of America’s botched response to coronavirus, which has now claimed over 65,000 lives in the US in three months, more than the Vietnam war – a “grim” milestone, said Oliver, which is why it was so “jarring to see Jared Kushner and his resting ‘Do you know who my father is?’ face basically declare victory over the virus.” Last Wednesday, Kushner told Fox & Friends that the federal government’s response to the virus was a “great success story” that would have the country “really rocking again” by July.

“Oh, it will be ‘really rocking again,’ will, it Jared?” Oliver scoffed. “It’s incredible to see someone with the skin of a newborn baby birthed in a tub of Neutrogena talk like a middle-age dad desperately trying to connect with his teenage son. But before we can celebrate Jared’s ‘great success story,’ and get back to our ‘rockin’ selves,’ we badly need to work out how we can reopen parts of society.”

Numerous experts say that means one thing: testing. “In managing a pandemic, there is almost nothing more important than widespread, effective testing,” Oliver explained. And yet tests have been scarce in the US since the beginning, the “original sin” of America’s pandemic failure, as it could’ve allowed containment of the virus through contact tracing and targeted quarantines had widespread testing been available earlier.

 

konfab

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
36,118
Costco might have issues in Trumptard redneck hick areas.


Updated May 4, 2020

Updated Guest Shopping Policy
Costco has temporarily updated our shopping policy. This change is for your safety and the safety of our employees and other members, and to further assist with our social distancing efforts. Thank you for your cooperation and understanding.

  • U.S. Costco warehouses will allow no more than two people to enter the warehouse with each membership card.
    • Exceptions:
    • Kentucky and Puerto Rico warehouses will allow no more than one person to enter per membership card.


Face Covering Requirements
To protect our members and employees, effective May 4, all Costco members and guests must wear a face covering that covers their mouth and nose at all times while at Costco. This requirement does not apply to children under the age of 2 or to individuals who are unable to wear a face covering due to a medical condition.

The use of a face covering should not be seen as a substitute for social distancing. Please continue to observe rules regarding appropriate distancing while on Costco premises. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.
[/QUOTE
My observation stands... My guy lies but all politicians lie is the original whatabout. Just ask your Russian pals.

Now, let me make sure I'm addressing the right "last bit" so we don't end up with days of wailing, "my quessstttiiiooooonnnn!"

This bit, right?



Politicians are, by nature, self-serving but *politics* is about choosing a side.

The side I've chosen chooses to help people, not corporations or lobbyists.
The side I've chosen thinks folks should get living wage and unemployment benefits, not be indentured serfs to send into infected packing plants in a pandemic.
The side I've chosen thinks staying home and wearing a mask is more than reasonable during a pandemic.
The side I've chosen thinks we should follow science in a pandemic, not teevee ratings and appearance.
The side I've chosen manage to protest without guns because we're not cowardly man-babies.
The side I've chosen thinks everyone has a right to healthcare and doesn't have lawyers in court trying to kick folk off the plans they have now.
The side I've chosen thinks education is critical and should be free, and not for the financial gain of an in-group family.
The side I've chosen values women and fights to ensure they have autonomy over their own bodies.
The side I've chosen thinks there should be accountability, not blocking folk from testifying and abusing the court system to delay that accountability.
The side I've chosen thinks diversity makes us better as a civilisation.
The side I've chosen thinks kids shouldn't be in cages.
The side I've chosen chooses a right to life over a right to guns.

I could go on, but you get the picture.

Is it perfect? No. It's a work-in-progress and it always will be.

So...

Politicians are, by nature, self-serving but... I choose the side that most reflects who I am, and I hope that when a lying, cheating, stealing and self-serving politician shows us they aren't really one of us, that we show them the door.

Both sides have numbers in the win and loss column here, but...

The strain on my group - group mind you - to head in the direction I prefer is greater than the tug of a single individual... while your side has traded principle for power and debased itself at the feet of a single, lying, cheating, stealing and self-serving god-emperor.


We good with your 'I edited my post, read that last bit' and 'yes of course only Reps do that' bit now?
You are wrong in quite a few ways.
1) The side I've chosen chooses to help people, not corporations or lobbyists.
2) The side I've chosen thinks folks should get living wage and unemployment benefits, not be indentured serfs to send into infected packing plants in a pandemic.
3) The side I've chosen thinks staying home and wearing a mask is more than reasonable during a pandemic.
4) The side I've chosen thinks we should follow science in a pandemic, not teevee ratings and appearance.
5) The side I've chosen manage to protest without guns because we're not cowardly man-babies.
6) The side I've chosen thinks everyone has a right to healthcare and doesn't have lawyers in court trying to kick folk off the plans they have now.
7) The side I've chosen thinks education is critical and should be free, and not for the financial gain of an in-group family.
8) The side I've chosen values women and fights to ensure they have autonomy over their own bodies.
9) The side I've chosen thinks there should be accountability, not blocking folk from testifying and abusing the court system to delay that accountability.
10) The side I've chosen thinks diversity makes us better as a civilisation.
11) The side I've chosen thinks kids shouldn't be in cages.
12) The side I've chosen chooses a right to life over a right to guns.

1) You are on the side that wants to help expand the role of government.
2) And to pay for that, you will steal the labour of other people and give it to them. Which is actually closer to indentured servitude than choosing to work.
3) Reasonable to someone who doesn't need to work I suppose. Your type of thinking is borderline causing an absolute humanitarian crisis in South Africa
6) Your right to healthcare comes at the cost of stealing money from other people.
7) Your right to free education comes at the cost of stealing money from other people.
8) You don't want to respect the autonomy of people who want to work though. If someone wants to go and get a haircut and you ban them from doing it, you are not respecting their body.
10) Diversity of what? Immutable characteristics like race and sex? If you mean race, then you are making the assumption that all people of a particular race are exactly the same. Ditto with sex.
12) False dichotomy. Those rights are not in conflict. And if you are now a worshipper of science, you can read here how there is no correlation between gun murders and gun ownership.


I am on the side that respects individual freedom and individual choices, as well as the consequences of that freedom and the consequences of those choices.
I am on the side that treats people like adults who can make decisions for themselves.
I am on the side that observes the fact that politicians are self serving, whose interests only lie with getting elected. Hence why I don't want them to be in control over the entire economy. Deciding who gets healthcare and who has to pay for it. Deciding who is allowed to work and who is not. Deciding
I am on the side that understands that individuals are not representatives of their race and sex.
 

surface

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 23, 2006
Messages
26,594

Gnarls

Expert Member
Joined
May 20, 2008
Messages
4,892
Actually in the US there are states where adultery is illegal and New York is one of those states


Which is a fair point but it doesn't make Don Jr's statement any less wrong hence my statement about a broken clock. Call him a hypocrite if you like but don't shoot the messenger if you don't like the message.
 

ISP cash cow

Executive Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2011
Messages
6,369
Which is a fair point but it doesn't make Don Jr's statement any less wrong hence my statement about a broken clock. Call him a hypocrite if you like but don't shoot the messenger if you don't like the message.

dude do you comprehend at all or do you have cats walking on your keyboard.

This was your comment

Lol, answers whataboutsim with whataboutism. Last time I checked cheating wasn't against the law.


I replied that it was illegal in some states and you go on about a broken clock. anywhere in my comment did I say anything about his comments.
 

TysonRoux

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
11,456
dude do you comprehend at all or do you have cats walking on your keyboard.

This was your comment



I replied that it was illegal in some states and you go on about a broken clock. anywhere in my comment did I say anything about his comments.
Its about two posts away from reverting to personal insults again, just can't help himself.
 

Gnarls

Expert Member
Joined
May 20, 2008
Messages
4,892
^Hello Mr. Pot.....

dude do you comprehend at all or do you have cats walking on your keyboard.

This was your comment



I replied that it was illegal in some states and you go on about a broken clock. anywhere in my comment did I say anything about his comments.

My first comment to you was, "Fair point."
 

greg0205

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
28,863
You are wrong in quite a few ways.


1) You are on the side that wants to help expand the role of government.
2) And to pay for that, you will steal the labour of other people and give it to them. Which is actually closer to indentured servitude than choosing to work.
3) Reasonable to someone who doesn't need to work I suppose. Your type of thinking is borderline causing an absolute humanitarian crisis in South Africa
6) Your right to healthcare comes at the cost of stealing money from other people.
7) Your right to free education comes at the cost of stealing money from other people.
8) You don't want to respect the autonomy of people who want to work though. If someone wants to go and get a haircut and you ban them from doing it, you are not respecting their body.
10) Diversity of what? Immutable characteristics like race and sex? If you mean race, then you are making the assumption that all people of a particular race are exactly the same. Ditto with sex.
12) False dichotomy. Those rights are not in conflict. And if you are now a worshipper of science, you can read here how there is no correlation between gun murders and gun ownership.


I am on the side that respects individual freedom and individual choices, as well as the consequences of that freedom and the consequences of those choices.
I am on the side that treats people like adults who can make decisions for themselves.
I am on the side that observes the fact that politicians are self serving, whose interests only lie with getting elected. Hence why I don't want them to be in control over the entire economy. Deciding who gets healthcare and who has to pay for it. Deciding who is allowed to work and who is not. Deciding
I am on the side that understands that individuals are not representatives of their race and sex.

Aah, the fundamental Libertarian standpoint: Taxation is theft. As a bonus, you've added the usual pinch of personal responsibility.

Your participation in this thread invariably takes the side of a man who said: "I don't take responsibility at all."

Your participation in this thing we call life is benefits from using roads not dirt paths, from the devil electricity not fire, from running water from a tap not a stream a kilometre away, from an indoor flushing toilet not a pit in your garden... and even then, you resent folk who benefit by going to a hospital because you aren't currently in need of one.
 

konfab

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
36,118
The imbecilic redneck hicks will.


This idea that empathy and altruism are expressions of weakness and naivety is nothing new; it’s the foundation of novelist Ayn Rand’s Objectivism, and it received a major boost during the Reagan-Bush years, when “trickle-down” economics did little to stem the growing problem of homelessness. But it’s never seemed so virulent as it does today, perhaps because it has never been so openly advocated – so blatantly demonstrated – by our president. It’s hard to think of anything more corrupt or corrupting than to boast about one’s success when (as I write this) more than 60,000 Americans have died of Covid-19. It’s hard to imagine anything more grotesque than using the pandemic as an excuse to further the ongoing campaign to separate families and exclude asylum seekers and other immigrants.

Altruism and empathy are contradictory terms. Which is why Ayn Rand rejected altruism.

To give a brief definition of each term:
Altruism is when you act selflessly towards someone else with no benefit to you.

Empathy is perceiving the feeling of what someone else is feeling (putting yourself in their shoes).

So if you feel empathetic to someone in a bad situation, you feel bad as well. If you help that person because of that empathy, you are doing it for your own self interest because you don't want to feel bad by observing them feeling bad.

The altruistic version, is helping someone with no benefit to yourself. So if you see a beggar, you must give them money and feel nothing by doing so. If you feel the little bit of happiness by helping someone, you are not being altruistic.

Which is why the only way of truly being altruistic is to have someone else help other people without your consent. If I give R500 to the Karoo Donkey Sanctuary, I am doing it because it is important to me that those animals are being looked after. If Cyril Ramaphosa helps himself to that same R500 to go and pay for something I don't want, like a new power station, then I am being altruistic, because I am not benefiting from it in any way.


Do not confuse altruism with kindness, good will or respect for the rights of others. These are not primaries, but consequences, which, in fact, altruism makes impossible. The irreducible primary of altruism, the basic absolute is self-sacrifice – which means self-immolation, self-abnegation, self-denial self-destruction – which means the self as a standard of evil, the selfless as a standard of the good. Do not hide behind such superficialities as whether you should or should not give a dime to a beggar. This is not the issue. The issue is whether you do or do not have the right to exist without giving him that dime. The issue is whether you must keep buying your life, dime by dime, from any beggar who might choose to approach you. The issue is whether the need of others is the first mortgage on your life and the moral purpose of your existence. The issue is whether man is to be regarded as a sacrificial animal. Any man of self-esteem will answer: No. Altruism says: Yes.
 

TysonRoux

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
11,456

konfab

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
36,118
Aah, the fundamental Libertarian standpoint: Taxation is theft. As a bonus, you've added the usual pinch of personal responsibility.

Your participation in this thread invariably takes the side of a man who said: "I don't take responsibility at all."

Your participation in this thing we call life is benefits from using roads not dirt paths, from the devil electricity not fire, from running water from a tap not a stream a kilometre away, from an indoor flushing toilet not a pit in your garden... and even then, you resent folk who benefit by going to a hospital because you aren't currently in need of one.
You are cute. I can tell you don't live in South Africa.
 

NarrowBandFtw

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
27,725
The Orange Dotard must be seriously considering firing Dr. Fauci now.


They're all just saying "no current evidence", the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, try to indulge in a little less confirmation bias from time to time ...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top