Total posts: 4,833
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
and yet you refuse to elect the first LGBTQIAMZ?! two spirit jedi president....Those weren't assassination attempts; they were days of love.That's what I was thinking also. I follow a lot of liberal thinkers on Twitter and the consensus is that these guys trying to murder Trump were all MAGA Republicans so my theory is that they weren't trying to kill him but send bullets of loveYes, and he had his right ear pierced, so I think he's telling us he's gay.
such homophobia...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
If you want to derail towards large peni be my guest. I have seen some very big ones.so per the 22nd Amendment of the Constitution, he can't actually serve another term.Did he say he served a second term?No, he said Arnold Palmer has a large penis.Pay attention.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Did you notice how nobody even questioned the idea that the national guard would be 'weaponized' to 'protect the capitol building'? That's the base level of honesty we need to overcome to beat the left-tribe and the deep state.
However low they go, follow them down. That's the way war works. Of course Trump needs to deploy the national guard and if necessary the military against the radical left-wing mobs, they're OBVIOUSLY attempting to overthrow the US government (I mean they admitted it several times in that summer of love but I digress). Trump has to do what he has to do to SAVE DEMOCRACY!
Anyone who questions that, well they're threats to democracy too. See how that works?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Only protect government buildings?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
I haven't responded to this thread or gotten involved with other more philosophical threads because I knew I didn't really have time for it, but I am on the verge of giving up on this site so may as well try to do something interesting.
To start off with there is a problem here:
Objective just means that something is u iversally true for the most part.
That's a contradiction.
There is no place for stupid shit like pointing out a single exception.
A rule with a single exception is not a rule, it's a generalization.
By single I mean a single person not a culture. We all share the same moral foundations. If I say that humans have 2 legs. We'll We know that some humans have one leg or 2, or even in some cases 3, but it is just a weakness of the human language and we know that nearly every human has 2 legs. So we say the statement that "humans have 2 legs" is objectively true.
"humans have two legs" is objectively true so long as you don't expand the implied meaning as "Every human being has two legs", but rather as something much more complicated like "It is the natural design dictated by DNA of the human species to have two legs, aberrations are due to developmental errors or amputation."
Now that I have dealt with the exception criticism of people pointing out that perhaps Jeffrey Dahmer has different morals than me, I think we need to handle another objection to objective morality.
Saying something is 'objective' vs 'subjective' is not a statement about how many people agree or disagree. That is a common misconception.
A subjective matter can be unanimously agreed upon, especially with small sample sizes or filtered samples. For example it is quite possible that at a given time everyone on a small pacific island likes pina colladas but that does not mean the taste of pina colladas is objectively good.
Objective subject matters can be the matters of controversy, or even lack controversy because only an extreme minority has the correct answer. Plenty of examples in the history of science.
The claim "morality is objective" is not identical to the claim "everyone agrees... except for Jeffrey Dahmer but he doesn't matter because he's a minority."
It is the claim that moral assertions can be right or wrong. It is the claim that Jeffrey Dahmer may believe X but he may also be objectively wrong in that belief.
Wrong in the same way that denying gravity or that a certain series converges is wrong. Wrong as in "this logic concludes he is wrong" not "it's unpopular and that's basically wrong."
Saying that there is a collection of morals that are VERY popular so Jeffrey Dahmer's morals can be ignored is nothing new or profound and it is distinct from claiming that Jeffrey Dahmer's morals are wrong and would be wrong even if the whole population was a bunch of Jeffrey Dahmers.
I want to talk about what I call prime morals. Humans share the same prime morals. We all think it is wrong to kill a child for fun. No society in the history of man would disagree.
Humans always seek meaning, so I would agree I can't find a society where they did it "for fun", but there are examples where they did it for some irrational reason or another. Almost always religious.
You will see some societies ask women to cover their head, others their ankles and some societies just ask that we don't expose our genitalia in public.
... and some where hiding your genitals is weird and implies you're disfigured...
The same with murder. The prime moral would be no murdering without a good reason. Now different cultures will interpret what "good reason" means but it is none the less the prime morality at play.
If the only 'rule' of this universal 'prime morality' is that people need reasons, and irrational reasons will do, that's not saying much.
It excludes the joker but the holocaust is fine. Or maybe the joker is justified because he's teaching an important lesson about chaos.
Basically I agree with what Double R has posted so far.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
rofl, taking underdog seriously. That's desperate. You normally know better.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
[JoeBob] I can’t tell what parts are sarcasm and whar arent
How do you know that mocking people has achieved the highest form? When they don't understand what's wrong with your caricature of them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
Did he say he served a second term?so per the 22nd Amendment of the Constitution, he can't actually serve another term.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
We all knew it was only a matter of time before he would do more quid pro quos and undeclared campaign contributions.He committed multiple Election Fraud felonies as well by telling people he would pay for their food.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@n8nrgim
lots of objectively nonsensical claims that basically boil down to "Trump is evil/stupid but we can't convince anyone".
It doesn't ring of any kind of true understanding because it still appears to be incapable of understanding why. For example"
Trust in media continues to fall to abysmal levels. One can debate how to attribute blame for this between longstanding conservative efforts to discredit the media, a secular decline in trust in institutions, and various overreaching and hypocrisy in the press. But it’s hard for even legitimate Trump critiques to penetrate the mass public. Trump’s conviction on a series of felony charges hardly made any difference, for instance.
You can practically see the bewildered face behind the keystrokes.
He sees the clouds move but he does not know the source of the wind.
Created:
A senior advisor for Trump’s campaign told reporters before his rally in Latrobe, Pennsylvania, that the event would kick off his “closing argument” to voters as the election nears.Instead, Trump opened his remarks by talking about Latrobe-born Palmer’s penis: “When he took the showers with other pros, they came out of there. They said, ‘Oh my God. That’s unbelievable.’”
rofl, the bisexual vibe is strong.
What a cruel world. Trump has Melania but wants Palmer, meanwhile FLWR wants Melania and hates Trump.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Cenk goes of on his TYT show about how the party has collapsed in direction by being fixated on "not-Trump"He explains that this direction has turned the Democrat party into a party filled with Neocons like Bush and Cheney to the point that it's nowhere near what it was before Trump.
Cenk only looks enlightened compared to the unbelievable blinders on the rest of the tribe.
Seriously, I was alive in 2007 when Bush and Cheney and the warmongers were the absolute devil to the left tribe. The deep state see the tribes as tools, not allies. They were infesting the right-tribe at that time, now they infest the left-tribe.
That none of them remember or have the courage to speak up (with a few exceptions like Cenk, now, at the end of all things) speaks to just how poor their information integration always was. In other words they were sheep, they are sheep, and sheep + democracy = tyranny. They cant even apply enough critical thinking to be worried about losing democracy to the actual threat of having an unquantifiable number of illegal ballots included.
Created:
Posted in:
TL;DR: People fail to check a box "I am a US citizen" and are given 3 chances to change their claim. If they don't they are removed from the voter rolls. The deep state is trying to stop this using pseudojudges. Why? They want to cheat using the names of these people, there is no other explanation.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
Why?lol, does who you trust matter?Yes.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
lol, does who you trust matter?They don't represent meGovernment says it does represent you.So its your word vs theirs, and I trust government more than I trust you.
When are you going to pay back 34 trillion dollars you borrowed?As soon as you and the other slanderers pay me the 35 trillion you owe me.It was a trick question. You are already paying for it through inflation, and you are going to pay even more through inflation in the future.
Very good, then we agree I don't owe anything.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
Debts are entered into voluntarily or else it is extortion and not debtYes, US government entered voluntarily into debt. US government represents citizens.
They don't represent me.
When are you going to pay back 34 trillion dollars you borrowed?
As soon as you and the other slanderers pay me the 35 trillion you owe me.
Created:
We owe nothing slanderer.[FLRW] Why do you want to give tax breaks to rich people when each taxpayer owes $800,000 on the National Debt?
Debts are entered into voluntarily or else it is extortion and not debt.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Ah he's pushing the edge on youtube.Rejection Rates of signature verification allegedly dropped in 2020. That coupled with a late vote tally means what?
I wonder if the people at youtube have reached that eureka moment when they're like "Maybe telling people they aren't allowed to ask questions isn't the best way to maintain confidence?"
Obviously it means that people just got much better at handwriting, in fact they were practicing their signature so carefully that they almost missed the deadline and that's why a bunch of ballots showed up at 3:00 AM and left-tribe poll workers congratulated each other on doing "something" to save democracy in the darkest hours of the night.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
I've done a lot of calorie counting in my life and that sounds like roughly 400 calories per day, which will definitely lead to some weight loss.This is why you are fat.
No, I am fat because of the periods I stop calorie counting :)
The snickers bars are 250 calories each and the 2 bites of slim jim are probably less than 100 calories but let's round up to 100 for funsies. That's 600 calories a day. You underestimated by 33% or whatever math is correct
215 and the whole slim jim is 130 calories. A slim jim is around 6 big bites so 130/6 = 43 calories for two bites. That comes to 473 calories.
Also I said "roughly" and when I said "count calories" I didn't mean I guessed, I was simply alluding to the fact that I gained good intuition and being off by 73 calories is a confirmation in my book.
Like you could replace the snickers bar with a big container of strawberries and you'll feel a lot better after.Snickers has protein carbs and fat.
You say that like it's a good thing.
The diet restricts you to 5 bites and the strawberries are only carbs so as silly as this sounds the snickers is a more balanced meal.
Alternating through the three common berries gives you total amino acid coverage and almost every micronutrient. You eat nothing but snickers and cured meat you will get scurvy.
Of course it doesn't take much of a detour to stay alive but berries are definitely the more complete option.
I have a feeling you're going to dig into it so I'll preempt:
In a snickers bar there is Vitamin C, total ascorbic acid 0.5 mg.
As mentioned a snickers bar is 215 kCal and the equivalent amount of strawberries is 651g of strawberries. That's more than this container by 1/3: https://www.instacart.com/image-server/1864x1864/www.instacart.com/assets/domains/product-image/file/large_d60e0c89-74bf-446f-8092-9f5fb3644561.jpg
That amount of strawberries has 377 mg of vitamin C. 750X more than the snickers bar.
It is said that you need 90mg per day. Very easy to get to with strawberries, it would take 180 snickers bar per day.
What about protein? (and remember you said snickers had protein, we're not talking about the slim jim):
215 calories of strawberries has 4.5 grams of protein. A snickers bar (215 calories) has 3g.
Reviewing the ingredients you can confidently say most of the snicker's protein is found in the peanuts. Even in this area where berries are considered a poor source quantity matters.
Calorie for calorie candy is bad because adding all that sugar simply reduces the acceptable intake to small quantities. Psychologically and nutritionally it's far better to eat a lot of low calorie food especially fruits which (when eaten ripe while you're very hungry) are hardly a chore.
It's not easy to find the ratio of long chain to short chain carbohydrates in things so I'll leave that alone for now, but my money is that a strawberry has a healthier mix of sugar and starch.
Created:
-->
@JoeBob
Consistent with Google's original motto of "try not to be evil" I'll be voting for Trump, the less likely part of an evil conspiracy option.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
I've done a lot of calorie counting in my life and that sounds like roughly 400 calories per day, which will definitely lead to some weight loss.
One of the fundamental contradictions though is the economy of scale in cooking vs the fact that the most sustainable diets are composed of diverse but tiny portions.
I've always found fasts to be the most realistic diets because real people (i.e. myself) don't have 1.5 hours per day to use thinking about how much calories the food I'm making has and spending 5x time cooking because I can't cook anything in bulk.
Now you seem to be happy with snickers and a dried sausage and I would rather starve (literally).
Now you seem to be happy with snickers and a dried sausage and I would rather starve (literally).
Another option is a classic, when you are fasting a lot; especially if you cut out added sugar products... then things like ripe fruit taste really really good (and sweet) but they still have very little calories. Like you could replace the snickers bar with a big container of strawberries and you'll feel a lot better after.
The big advantage of fruit is that you can eat it raw which means no cooking and for the most part it comes in units with very well known calories. If I had robot servants sure I would have a bunch of tiny servings of well prepared vegetables but alas vegetables are hard to cook and it takes just as long to prepare a small amount as a large amount.
Trying to eat a carrot or a bunch of spinach might be useful in convincing your brain that eating really isn't worth it and to give up on life.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
To Mr. Patel's credit he said predeep was a racist to say Americans eat cows. He defended us Americans by saying that it would be silly to think actual American would eat cows when they have access to Indian food.
A fair argument.
I will say my friend Joe was the only one out of the 500 to gain weight there. The rest of us lost 10 pounds due to being on vegetarian diets. I guess all of our bodies respond to vegetarianism differently.
Did Joe get moody and stay up late around the full moon?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Were it so easy.
Next Entry:
TL;DR: North Carolina election cheaters violate federal election law requiring either driver's license or last four of social security number to register to vote. Psuedojudge tells them they don't have to follow the law because "too close to the election" or some such inane and irrelevant bullshit.
I'll also be starting a running list of the enemies of democracy that reveal themselves this 'election' cycle:
1. Richard E Myers II, Chief US district 'judge' in North Carolina. See 5.24-cv-00547-M-RJ Doc 58
Created:
-->
@WyIted
If it's as simple as that I think you can pretty much prove that ignorance predicts being liberal because if someone knows that some cultures encourage murdering fellow humans and then making clothing out of their skin, eating their hearts, burning them alive, etc... etc... and still thinks all cultures are equal....If somebody believes all cultures are equal they tend to be liberal if somebody thinks some cultures are disgusting as fuck they tend to be conservative
Created:
-->
@TwoMan
What resources are there to drain? Do you imagine we'll be sifting for fissile isotopes for our entire existence?
Created:
-->
@Savant
This is why America needs to break upBest chance of that was the Civil War. Good luck motivating people now when physical region correlates much less with political views.
Civil war does not require a majority to be agitators or even participants.
The last civil war was essentially caused by a small minority of slaver owners/traders vs a small minority of abolitionists who successfully invoked the pride and vengeance of enough of the general population to turn it into an avalanche.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
2024 Trump is angry, bitter, and out for revenge. 2016 Trump campaigned as a man who clearly understood that he had to win over voters with ideas to solve their problems. 2024 Trump isn't even pretending to care about that. 2024 Trump talks openly about using the DOJ and military as a weapon against his political opponents and anyone he considers disloyal to him.2024 Trump understands what went wrong and knows how to ensure that doesn't happen again. 2016 Trump felt the pressure to respect political norms, like appointing people who were qualified. 2024 Trump will appoint only people who are sycophants, in fact that will be the only qualification he cares about.2024 Trump will not turn to outside lawyers to commit his crimes, this Trump knows now thanks to the supreme court that any conversations he has with his own agencies like the DOJ or the military are "not subject to judicial review" regardless of how brazenly he tells them to do something illegal. So he can easily tell them to commit crimes and then pardon them afterward. There's literally no legal recourse according to the new rule book which he is well aware of.2024 is not 2016. Any claim that it is only demonstrates ignorance or willful blindness.
You're pumping me up! Thanks for the whitepill.
Created:
Posted in:
Learned my lesson from 2020, I'm saving everything I see no matter how much hard-drive space it takes. They love to scrub this stuff.
Ballots found in stormdrain (Los Angeles):
Ballots found in stormdrain (Los Angeles):
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
The very idea of them "peacefully making their voices heard" is itself absurd. He's literally telling them that their voices are being stolen by the evil people at the Capitol who don't care about their voice.
He never blamed congress as a whole for the voter fraud.
No smart person pretends to be stupid. No informed person pretends to be ignorant. No good well intentioned person pretends to be a total asshole. But we all know the reverse does it all the time.
Those of us with enough information and intelligence know all three of those things can and do happen.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Oh let me try:
< present............(...........(.........(....(...(.............{ inflation{ .*.}inflation }...................).....)............)................)..present acceleration >
That is an insightful way to put it.
Created:
-->
@WyIted
You almost lost me, till the last line.
Created:
Posted in:
Trump didn’t cause COVID[FLRW] He absolutely did. China was punishing him because of his tariffs. The low intellect scum (trumpers) can't see this.
I have a new question: Does anyone take FLRW seriously?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RemyBrown
But yeah, do you like or dislike underdog? This doesn't effect me personally.
Life can be hard. It will definitely contain suffering. If you're asking that question, you will not find what you're looking for on a debate site (or a site purported to before debating).
May I suggest hobby or game communities, especially local casual sports clubs. People are there to have fun and spread the love (for the most part).
Created:
Posted in:
"Judge ORDERS 2024 Election To Be Certified NO MATTER WHAT!"
It just doesn't get more obvious than this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdxrM7m-OII
The purpose of a canvas is apparently to create the baseless impression of election integrity and nothing else. These are the "judges" that found claims of election fraud "without merit".
This order is unlawful and this pseudojudge is a domestic enemy of the constitution.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Do you take the things Trump says seriously?
Not particularly.
then can you please explain how you square your belief that someone whose words are not to be taken seriously can be fit for the most serious job on earth?
Fools are less dangerous than cunning enemies.
Bonus question: if you don't take his words seriously then on what basis do you form any judgement about him?
Wisdom and comprehensive understanding are rare. That is what would make me take him seriously. It's harder to be sure about a man who chooses his words carefully than one who always says what's on his mind. In that sense a man without a filter is a far safer repository of public trust.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
You have no evidence that the election was stolen
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
hehe, well if the 'experts' all say so who are we little folk to doubt?I know, who needs experts? We should all just use our own common sense, I'm sure that's what NASA did to put a man on the moon.
Well you know you have to balance those humors, leeches help, so they experts say.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
@RemyBrown
You didn't make an argument.Yeah I did; you just didn't understand it because you have a party to stick too.
100% underdog. Why do people even do this?
You learn to read between the lines when you're politically seasoned.
rofl, alright you can have fun with your fellow idiots I'm satisfied.
Shame, I think I'm just about done with this site.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RemyBrown
No, you cannot.How is my proof incorrect?
You didn't make an argument.
Why?Because bills take a long time to make; so they try to iron out all vagueness in the bill. I figured out in 5 seconds how it could all be ironed out; a bunch of politicians can easily do the same (especially with their law degrees where their brains are trained to find loopholes in the law; I was able to do it and I'm not even a lawyer).
Since it was vague it must mean "It is lawful to kill undocumented migrants"?
Missing a premise.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RemyBrown
Would it be accurate to say that the bill "Arizona GOP Bill Legalizes Killing Undocumented Migrants"?I would say yes
Underdog I presume.
and I can prove that by contradiction.
No, you cannot.
Lets say the answer to that is no. Then the AZ state government would have modified that text to something extremely similar to what I would have stated.
Why?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Well when Trump could have invoked the insurrection act, he choose not to.
I do disagree with the claim that just because Trump did 4 years we should know exactly what to expect. People do learn lessons and there is hardly a motivation to avoid using the military when they accuse you of doing it regardless.
I think his base, the real core of it including me, would not have objected if he used the military to secure the election process. There is a fundamental contradiction in the constitution between the body and the amendments. The amendments create a right to vote federally, but the body says that state legislatures have authority over how electors are selected.
The amendments imply that federal authority AND duty to secure every federal election. The electors clause implies that state legislatures can do whatever they want. There is no reconciliation, and you can be damn sure that if a swing state just happened to be in the possession of a radical but slight right-tribe majority and sent in electors without even holding a popular election the left-tribe federal infrastructure would certainly use the military to run an election or "force" the running of an election (as if there is a difference).
Now for some reason some people think there is a meaningful difference between a state simply failing to hold a legitimate election either through legislative process, judicial whim, or bureaucratic whim (state secretaries) and a state failing to hold any purported election what so ever.
Of course there isn't, and if there was a difference in practice any state wishing to act in an undemocratic manner would simply pretend to have an election. That is precisely what "election deniers" think occurred in several swing states so it's only natural for them (us) to believe federal military intervention was justified AND that the constitution needs to be repaired to remove the contradiction to make clear that federal elections have a nation-wide definition which supersedes state legislatures much less petty judges and unelected tyrants.
There is what ought to be and what is, I think anyone who really believes in democracy in any sense (and I barely do) would consider the implementation of biometric blockchain elections to be an overriding issue. I dismiss and scoff at anyone who appeals to 'democracy' without agreeing. They have failed king Solomon's test.
Rather more relevant to the reader than my logical if personal beliefs is the fact that election denial is not dead, far from it, and that Trump was given zero credit for any lack of heavy handedness. Indeed they've tried to railroad him, bankrupt him, and kill him as if he was someone who declared martial law at the first molotov cocktail.
It is not implausible that he has changed his outlook and will bring a new hard edge to his second term.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RemyBrown
Would it be accurate to say that the bill "Arizona GOP Bill Legalizes Killing Undocumented Migrants"?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RemyBrown
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
hehe, well if the 'experts' all say so who are we little folk to doubt?Also 400 expert Nobel laureates said his return plan is sound.
I do have a foolproof test in this case. If he can read, comprehend, and relate the meaning of this: https://www.azleg.gov/ars/13/00405.htm he's not underdog.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Egh, the real question is: If one side says "pedo", and the other says "hitler", why are the people predicting civil war the crazies?The question to ask is: If Waltz was a pedo, would it matter? Would voting for a pedo be a lesser evil than voting Trump/Vance?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
I don't think he is an alt or anything.
At 38 posts he knows people's claims from nearly a year ago? That's fishy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Anonymous sources say Underdog.
Did 51 former senior intelligence officials say he has all the classic earmarks of being Underdog?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
They basically like " hey you a terrorist" and I was like "not yet but show up to my door again and I might be". They claimed they were required to show up and didn't want to and I believe them.
Based?
So who is this RemyBrown character?
Created: