Sidewalker

• No, we mean Republican's lie....and we think your opinions are whack job conspiracies...big difference.
  

Thett just made a thread about apparent lie accusations thrown at a Republican made ad campaign. Do you care to address his claims and stand behind this statement you are quoted as saying?

What is the current Republican Platform? Oh yeah, I forgot, you don't have one.  

I can give you some of it

• Border security, Republicans are against open borders.
  
• Republicans believe that Americans should have guns to protect themselves
  
• Republicans are pro securing elections as to prevent frauds and the integrity of the process
  
• Republicans want to get struggling mother's to be help so they don't feel forced to murder their unborn children
  
• Republicans are against making race based selections in hiring practices and think merit is what matters
  

I'll never forget the day the Washington Post, in a legit article, said the GOP was becoming a Russian asset:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2018/07/20/the-entire-republican-party-is-becoming-a-russian-asset/

If that isn't "lying to win elections" then I have no idea what is.

Let's face it, extreme Republicanism is still all about the fear of change from a "white" dominated Christian society to a multicultural egalitarian society.

Ah. Yes. Those extreme Republicans and their freeing of the slaves and giving women the right to vote and opposition to Jim Crow laws and fighting for desegregation in schools and society at large and their Civil War with the Confederates.

I can't imagine why Democrats would despise them.

So here is an example of him not saying it is fake.

Right, and you’re probably not a child molester, I mean maybe you are but maybe you’re not. It’s impossible to know.

He was playing to racist tropes that a black man can’t be a legitimate President, which is what many racists in America wanted to believe.

This is where a lot of the left is dishonest. For example they will say Trump made that claim, but he really just said Obama should be releasing his birth certificate to stop people from questioning it. 

This is why you have nonsense terms like "mostly true" or "partly true" on "fact check" sites.

An actual fact checking site would have 2 and ONLY 2 ways to describe a fact.

There have been studies on this and contrary to popular opinion, even first time politicians generally stay true to the platform they set when they campaign.

When Democrats say that Republicans lie they usually mean "we don't like that opinion so it is a lie"

everything you know is "map"

therefore, you cannot know "objective facts"

facts must be verifiable, quantifiable, empirically demonstrable and or logically-necessary

REAL-TRUE-FACTS must be empirically demonstrable and or logically-necessary (and emotionally meaningless) (aka NOT opinion) QUANTA

OPINION must be unfalsifiable, personal, experiential, GNOSTIC, qualitative (and emotionally meaningful) (aka NOT fact) QUALIA

Cheer up. Putin may still decide to start a nuclear war and prevent that outcome.

GA - Walker (R) vs Warnock (D) —> GOP Pickup

That would be an embarrassment to the country 

Lol I would love to hear your predictions and your reasoning behind them

PA - Parnell vs Fetterman —> GOP Pickup

Maybe you could try not reading the threads you don't want to read.

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure the site isn't going to start censuring threads based on whether you like them or not. 

Threads like “Republican Senate candidate in Nevada is literally a bastard” and “There is no compromising with MAGA Republicans. They are today’s slave holders” are of zero value. It’s true that I don’t have to read them, but since they are crowding out everything else I increasingly find myself not reading anything on this site at all. I seriously doubt I’m alone. If the owner and mods of this site are okay with that it is what it is, but if I were in charge I would try to clean it up a little  

The politics section is completely unusable right now, it’s pure low effort spam from IWantRooseveltAgain and Greyparrot. I’m also not a fan of Oragami basically copy pasting MSNBC but he doesn’t do it as much as these two

Greyparrot sorry buddy <3 u but the low effort threads are a problem

Oh, you mean we could stop the global change in demographics if we’d just build a wall and hang a big sign on it that says no brown people allowed?  The Trumper mentality is just stupid as shit, he dumbed down the Republican party so badly you whack jobs don’t have a clue what you are even talking about.  

 

Sorry kiddie, you can’t stop the world from changing, you can stomp your feet and throw a tantrum all you want, but the world isn’t going to listen.  You are just going to have to adapt, that or you and your walnut sized brain will go extinct. 

Well now that you mention it, I do believe that we (being a First World country) can put up a wall, defend our borders, and choose who we let in.

We have no need to stop the world from changing.

Are you really going to try to sell racism to me?  Save it, this is no Klan meeting, I’m one of those bad people that talk about racism like it’s a bad thing, that’s not going to change

You really aren’t worth talking to. Somehow you are more belligerent and less intelligent than that Roosevelt buffoon. The slightest bit of pushback and you descend into intelligible tirade

Can you define just what “strong and active resistance” to demographic change is, is it violence against ‘others”, is it voter suppression, is it a race war, how exactly do you actively resist demographic change? 

You misread what I said. The strong resistance against trajectory is Congress’ refusal to lower immigration quotas or increase qualifications to let people in (ie. Public charge rule)

Most of us only know the term because of the slogan chanted in Charlottesville, and that got big time press coverage,

And once again, that only got attention because of lefties. Until “January 6th”, they were still constantly referencing the Charlottesville protest as some supposed representation of Republicans when it was just a few thousand wackos. Biden said he ran for president because of that little protest. The entire reason we know of any of that is because of left-wing exaggeration and fear mongering.

I don’t know I’d call it “celebrated”, it’s certainly “embraced” by the Democratic Party, as it should be.

It is something that can be changed if we want to. Why must we embrace it if demographic change can be reversed?

Is it something worth embracing? Sure, be pleasant to people already here, but there is no need to embrace the idea of further demographic shift in the future when it’s not inevitable.

And when diversity is treated like an undeniable good by all lefties despite evidence to the contrary and the countless news articles bashing anything or place not sufficiently diverse (non-white), I would call it celebrating

The Republican party made resistance and resentment of those demographic change into tactics, exploited fear and resentment, and turned it all into White Identity politics

You couldn’t be more incorrect. The Democrats have been the party of resentment: it is a coalition of the fringes that hate white people and Christians. How else do you have Muslim’s teaming up with feminists? It’s hatred. And Whites are objectively the group with the least identification with their race and the only reason it is increasing is because they are being attacked and demonized for being white. Most Republicans have and still want raceblindness but you idiots threw it away for “equity” and trashing their ancestors

but in the process, it became polarizing. 

What process... the theft of millions of dollars by the founders of BLM? I would be pretty polarized too if I donated to them. 

Replacement theory attributes global demographic changes to a Jewish conspiracy, 

Not necessarily. It just states that it is happening and there is intent behind it. There doesn’t have to be a specific or even a single group behind it. It is mainly a system that has been on auto-pilot with strong and active resistance against any change in trajectory. That’s pretty much undeniable at this point

The fact that we both even know what replacement theory is speaks to the fact that these supremacists are overrepresented in politics

That’s a term used by lefties far more often than anyone even remotely right-wing.

Noticing the fact that there is a changing demography is something that is both simultaneously celebrated by democrats

and also used as a political attack against anyone that mentions it is happening, labeling them “replacement theorists” or any combination of other such insults

There's probably some crazy angle in the phrase Replacement Theory I'm missing,

Since I don't pay attention to it much, or read things like the Turner Diaries.

Still, I'd imagine a fair bit of culture 'is blood and ancestry, though I suppose even a culture that relies on adoption could continue well enough,

But adoption 'would require the adoptees see themselves 'truly in the adopter.

Might be people saw the demographic changes coming 50 years ago,

And certainly 'seems like people were riled up about it back then,

I forget how few years have passed sometimes, in historical events that I wasn't around yet for.

. . .

I don't mean the above as defending any group,

Just as a note that 'any semi-established group develops an identity, I think,

And with identity comes defensiveness, desire to continue oneself, often,

Of course old groups become shed skin, but their immediate successors hold their characteristics,

Of course groups splinter into new pieces, but the splinters hold the grain of that which they splintered from.

I do think our justice system, police system,

Would benefit from some improvement.

Well, polarization 'does prove to be an enemy in modern politics, it seems,

Though I'm not sure that it's the people's 'politics, so much as people of such different views being so close to each other,

The Left and Right in general, nowadays, I mean.

No, then again as I think on it,

There's more conspiracy theories on the Right and active nuts, than I care for,

Not that there aren't any on the Left,

. . .

I really do think 'some of the Right's craziness, came from the Lefts craziness,

And of course when people encounter opposition to their values, beliefs, actions, they often become more entrenched.

. . .

Hm, no, 'most of all I blame Trump, who in a position of power has 'encouraged division, as the spark, 'moreso than the push that elected him.

Still, McCain wasn't that long ago, who was not a bad fellow,

McCain Counters Obama 'Arab' Question - YouTube

Hm, about race you say?

I 'do remember seeing Ferguson on the news, 2014,

When people right or wrong 'Identify themselves as a group, it makes others aware of them as The Other, I'd suggest,

Doesn't matter if race or politics,

Which isn't 'always bad, groups of different people can get along, all sorts of identifiable groups,

I remember Charlottesville, about a statue of Lee wasn't it?

Not that I cared much myself, communities can do what they want with their communities, though I might disagree, eh, their choice.

But, again,

Makes people aware of the other, suggests 'truth to the replacement theory,

BLM, which people disagree on how bad or good it was,

Certainly Trump handled it 'terribly.

I 'did have

"Sure it's something I count as a Con in Trump,

But it doesn't make him a traitor to be hanged, in my book."

In my #93 post, but edited my post shortly after.

I 'do think that Trump has had a negative effect on the country.

A coworker of mine who voted for him, didn't like him much, but hoped he would shake up the establishment, lead to something better during or after him, but more in 'spite of Trump, than Trump causing something posative,

Bit like a forest fire I suppose, causing regrowth after clearing out the forest.

I expected the Republican party to reject Trump myself, I was surprised when they didn't,

I'm unsure if they're intimidated by Trumps popularity, or whether they agree with some of his political stances,

Though the intimidated by popularity seems more likely to me,

And a great pity if so, as I think the Republicans could have been great and admirable, if they had not taken in with Trump.

suppression

We definitely don't want to suppress low IQ people from voting who are in no way qualified to make policy decisions.

That's why I always advertise to 18 year olds with rock the vote campaigns 

If we don't get the uneducated and disinterested voters to vote, then people with high IQs in ivory towers who need to touch grass will get to make their decisions for them, and there is no way those out of touch voters who care about and educate themselves on politics are in any type of position to tell the young disinterested voters that they know what is better for them.

People that get their news off tik tok should definitely have a huge impact on the elections. 

To me influence and propaganda looks like a 'constant in nations interactions,

Sure it's something I count as a Con in Trump,

But it doesn't make him a traitor to be hanged, in my book.

This week, the Stanford Internet Observatory and social media analysis firm Graphika detailed a five-year operation that was pushing pro-Western narratives. (The research follows Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram as they remove a series of accounts from their platforms for “coordinated inauthentic behavior.”)
The propaganda accounts used memes, fake news websites, online petitions, and various hashtags in an attempt to push pro-Western views and were linked to both overt and covert influence operations. The accounts, some of which appear to use AI-generated profile pictures, targeted internet users in Russia, China, and Iran, among other countries. The researchers say the accounts “heavily criticized” Russia following its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February and also “promoted anti-extremism messaging.” Twitter said the activity it saw is likely to have originated in the US and the UK, while Meta said it was the US.

 - A US Propaganda Operation Hit Russia and China With Memes | WIRED

What makes the intensity so great, so blatant, so Earth shattering, from your point of view?

(Not meant as a sarcastic question, I'm honestly looking for information about your view)

Not that I'm saying it's not something to be leery of,

But so many on the Left act as though a number of recent events are unheard of, or of Earth shattering importance.

generally, an idiot who kills someone accidentally

is more of a "danger to society"

than someone who kills a specific person for a specific reason

also,

any system of justice that relies on divining someone's unquantifiable "intent" is functionally indistinguishable from witchcraft

we should not resort to homophobia when insulting Trump's supporters.

endless anti-white government policies

I knew you were a neo-Nazi

Jesus in the Talmud.

Excerpts from Rabbi Rosends link.

Bastard.

The Accusation

Insults Against Blessed Mary, Sanhedrin 106a . Says Jesus' mother was a whore: "She who was the descendant of princes and governors played the harlot with carpenters." Also in footnote #2 to Shabbath 104b it is stated that in the "uncensored" text of the Talmud it is written that Jesus mother, "Miriam the hairdresser," had sex with many men.

"Jesus was a bastard born of adultery." (Yebamoth 49b, p.324). 

"Mary was a whore: Jesus (Balaam) was an evil man." (Sanhedrin 106a &b, p.725). 

"Jesus was a magician and a fool. Mary was an adulteress". (Shabbath 104b, p.504).

R. Shimon ben Azzai said: I found a book of geneologies in Jerusalem and in it is written "The man Plony is a bastard."

Balaam

R. Yochanan said (regarding Balaam): In the beginning a prophet, in the end a sorcerer. 

Rav Papa said: As people say, "She was the descendant of princes and rulers, she played the harlot with carpenters."

The Accusation

Gloats over Jesus Dying Young, A passage from Sanhedrin 106 gloats over the early age at which Jesus died: "Hast thou heard how old Balaam (Jesus) was?--He replied: It is not actually stated but since it is written, Bloody and deceitful men shall not live out half their days it follows that he was thirty-three or thirty-four years old."

The passage

A sectarian said to R. Chanina: Do you know how old Balaam was?  [R. Chanina] replied: It is not written.  However, since it says (Psalms 55:24) "Men of bloodshed and deceit will not live out half their days..." he was 33 or 34.  [The heretic] said: You said well.  I have seen the chronicle of Balaam and it said "At 33 years Balaam the lame was killed by Pinchas (Phineas) the robber."

Sifrei on Deuteronomy 34:10 

"Never again did there arise in Israel a prophet like Moses" - But in other nations there did arise.  Who? Balaam the son of Beor.  But there is a difference between Moses's prophecy and Balaam's prophecy.

Moses did not know who spoke to him but Balaam knew who spoke to him, as it says (Numbers 24:16) "The words of the one who hears the sayings of G-d..."

Moses did not know when G-d would speak to him until he was spoken to but Balaam knew when He would speak, as it says (ibid.) "Who knows the knowledge of the Supreme One..."

With Moses, G-d would not speak to him until he was standing, as it says (Deuteronomy 5:28) "But as for you, stand here with Me..."  But with Balaam, G-d would speak to him even while fallen, as it says (Numbers 24:4) "Who sees the vision of the Almighty, while fallen with uncovered eyes."

Avot DeRabbi Natan 2:5 

Why is Job called (Job 1:8) "A perfect and upright man"?  To teach us that he was born circumcised.  Adam was also born circumcised as it says (Genesis 1:27) "So G-d created man in His image..."  Seth was also born circumcised as it says (ibid. 5:2 ) "He begot in his likeness and his image..."  Noah was also born circumcised... Shem was also born circumcised...  Jacob was also born circumcised...  Joseph was also born circumcised...  Moses was also born circumcised...  Even the wicked Balaam was born circumcised...  Samuel was also born circumcised...  David was also born circumcised...  Jeremiah was also born circumcised...  Zerubabel was also born circumcised...

Talmud Sanhedrin 106a 

Numbers (24:14) "Come, I shall advise you..."  Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said:  [Balaam] said to them: Their G-d hates promiscuity and they desire flaxen clothes.  Let me give you this advice.  Make tents and put old prostitutes in front of them and young ones inside...  When the Jews are walking in the market, the old lady offers to sell them clothes at market value and the young one offers it cheaper.  After two or three times she tells him that he is already a comfortable visitor and should choose what he wants, all the while a bottle of Amonite wine sitting beside her.  She offers him a glass of wine.  After he drinks it will burn him up and he will ask for sex.  She will take out her idol and demand that he worship it first.  He will say that he is a Jew and she will say that all she is asking is that he defecate [and he will not know that this is the worship of that idol].  She will also say that she will not sleep with him until he denounces the Torah of Moses.

Mishnah Avot 5:19 

Whosoever possesses these three qualities belongs to the disciples of Abraham our father: a generous eye, a humble spirit, and a meek soul.  But he who possesses the three opposite qualities -- an evil eye, a proud spirit, and a haughty soul -- is of the disciples of Balaam the wicked.

How do the disciples of Abraham differ from the disciples of Balaam? The disciples of Abraham enjoy this world and inherit the world to come, as it is written (Proverbs 8:21) "Endowing with wealth those who love me, and filling their treasuries." The disciples of Balaam inherit Gehenna and go down to the pit of destruction, as it is written (Psalm 55:23) "But you, O G-d, will cast them down into the lowest pit; the bloodthirsty and treacherous shall not live out half their days. But I will trust in you."

Professor Louis Ginzberg, "Some Observations on the Attitude of the Synagogue Towards the Apocalyptic-Eschatological Writings", Journal of Biblical Literature (1922), p. 121 n. 18

One may therefore state with absolute certainty that the entire Talmudic-Midrashic literature does not know of any nicknames for Jesus or his disciples.

John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew (1991), vol. 1 p. 95

For instance, a radical position is represented by Johann Maier, who maintains that not only the Mishna but also both Talmuds lack any authentic, direct mention of Jesus of Nazareth41...

In my opinion, Maier's arguments are especially convincing for the Mishna and other early rabbinic material: no text cited from that period really refers to Jesus.  He thus confirms the view I defend in this section.

41 See Johann Maier, Jesus von Nazareth in der talmudischen Uberlieferung (Ertrage der Forschung 82; Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1978).  His position, which is argued in minute detail throughout the volume, is summarized on pp. 263-75.

The Accusation

Gittin 57a. Says Jesus is in hell, being boiled in "hot excrement."

The Text

[Onkelos Bar Kalonikus] called up Balaam from the dead.  [Onkelos] asked: Who is honored in that world?  [Balaam] replied: Israel. [Onkelos asked:] What about joining them?  [Balaam] replied: (Deut. 23:7) "You shall not seek their peace or welfare all your days."  [Onkelos] asked: What is your punishment?  [Balaam answered]: In boiling semen.

[Onkelos] called up Yeshu from the dead.  [Onkelos] asked: Who is honored in that world?  [Yeshu] replied: Israel.  [Onkelos asked:] What about joining them?  [Yeshu] replied: Seek their good.  Do not seek their bad.  Whoever touches them is as if he touched the pupil of his eye.  [Onkelos] asked: What is your punishment?  [Yeshu answered]: In boiling excrement.  As the mast said: Whoever mocks the words of the sages in punished in boiling excrement.

Based on my understanding of physics, it seems likely that the atoms in my brain work in the same deterministic fashion as all other atoms; that is, humans don't fully understand everything to the point that they can exactly predict what any given atom can do, but that with the right knowledge and understanding it theoretically could be predicted in advance.

If we define free will as the ability of a person (human or otherwise) to act in a way that isn't determined simply by the laws of the universe or "fate," then I would argue that humans do not possess free will.

This doesn't seem to match sidewalker's definition of free will, which seems to be dependent on "sentience", "awareness and interaction", and "agency." Agency is clearly just a synonym for free will, so I won't be going into that one.

Awareness and interaction with the world. Anything with sensory capabilities is "aware" of the world, even if they don't recognize a thing as it is. This goes from the ant that walks on a sidewalk, even if it doesn't realize it's a sidewalk, all the way to humans, to not only have sensory experiences, but tie names and anticipate further experiences based upon those experiences. For example, when I see a staircase in front of where I'm walking, I will anticipate the sensations of stepping down a series of stairs. If I'm paying attention, I can even anticipate how many times I will experience it. If I'm not paying so close attention, I may believe that I am at the bottom of the stairs sooner than I actually am, often resulting in stumbling or falling. Both of these are a fairly universal experience.

The same goes with interaction. A human may interact with the world in more complex ways, but every living thing interacts as well.

Sentience. Sentience is another controversial topic. Some advocates argue that dolphins, octopuses, chimpanzees, etc. are sentient as well as humans. I've even seen arguments that all animals, or even plants, are sentient. Sentience is generally agreed to be an emergent property of intelligence, the ability to not only think about your environment and actions, but to think about yourself and your thoughts. Clearly the language barrier between humans and other living things makes it difficult to determine how much, if any, self-reflection takes place in other minds. A true skeptic might first ask, how can we be so sure that humans are sentient?

sentence fragment "a boatload of scientific evidence" that

refusing to support your own claims is not a particularly persuasive tactic

False dichotomies are not problems that need to be solved.

a tautology is not a "false dichotomy"

there is only

determined (cause and effect)

and or

uncaused (functionally random)

and or

some MIX OF THE TWO

please explain which "other option" you personally believe i'm overlooking here

a boatload of scientific evidence

please link to this "boatload of scientific evidence" supporting "free-will"

How do you quantify insects "seeking".

scientific observation

Do you think insects are seeking to reduce cognitive dissonance?

insects seek food and shelter and reproductive opportunities

please explain what point you think this obsession with contradiction makes. 

seeking logical coherence is the only way to reduce cognitive dissonance

Your argument that reality is either universally determined or universally random is nonsense,

or a clever mix of both

which doesn't solve either "problem"

The strongest argument for the existence of free will is that we all observe it during every conscious moment, it is a fundamental and significant part of our experiential reality at all times, hence it is self-evident, a brute fact.

the FEELING of "free-will" is a private and personal gnostic experience that cannot be verified by science and therefore does not qualify as a "fact"

The real free will debate is about whether we have the cognitive ability to conceive of future courses of action, deliberate about various reasons for choosing among them, determine our actions on the basis of such deliberation, and control our actions despite the presence of competing desires. If we do have these abilities, and we can exercise these cognitive abilities to act without our actions being unreasonably compromised by external pressure, then we possess free will and human beings are morally responsible causal agents.

how do you propose we quantify "intent" ?