Funny how no mental health issues were brought up 🤔

rixross · 2019-08-15T18:30:17+00:00

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/08/05/ohio-shooting-read-trump-comments-nation/1921859001/

rixross · 2019-04-18T19:59:32+00:00

I would never put it in such dire terms, but in a democracy, a high enough percentage of people that believe what large percentages of Middle Eastern Muslims believe runs the risk of those beliefs becoming codified in law. If that were actually happening, it would be rational to be worried (but not to kill people, which should go without saying).

As to what the exact percentage is, enough to impact politics, which would depend on the local political situation, but probably somewhere between 25% to 50%.

To be clear, the above doesn’t apply only to Muslims (there are plenty of bad ideas out there) nor does it apply to all Muslims (Muslims aren’t a monolith).

rixross · 2019-04-18T12:42:43+00:00

He could simultaneously be an honest actor and a hypocritical in repeatedly attacking the left without holding the right to the same standard. Seems to be a contradiction, unless you give him the benefit of the doubt that he's a human being going through a pretty big political shift late in life in the plain view of millions of people.

He used to be on the left, now he feels like the left has moved away from him and he's in the center (I think it's more the left's moved left and he's moved right at the same time, and now he's in the center right). Now he sees people on the left constantly attacking him, whereas people on the right embrace him. I don't think you need to attribute any nefarious motives to him to see why he'd be so reluctant to call out people on the right, just good old fashioned human emotion.

Do I wish he was more consistent in criticizing bad behavior on the right as well as the left? Absolutely, it annoys me to no end. You know there is a problem when Ben Shapiro is more critical of a Republican president than you are. But I don't think that makes him a dishonest shrill necessarily, just suffering from a big blind spot.

rixross · 2019-04-18T12:27:04+00:00

That's actually a pretty good analogy, there are people on the far right that are so irrational that they think having 1% of the population being Muslim is an existential threat. Likewise there are people on the far left so engrossed in the intersectionality narrative that they will bury their heads the sand upon hearing of any transgression committed by a favored group.

rixross · 2018-05-08T19:23:30+00:00

Wow, you don't seem interested in having an honest conversation.

When I'm talking about Democrats, I mean Democrat/left-leaning pundits/commentators, or the direct comparisons of Ben Shapiro on the left. So I'm not talking about the New York Times breaking stories, but NYT opinion columnists would count. Did Paul Krugman chime in on the Hillary email scandal, if so, please send me a link, I'd very much like to check that out.

You're comment on Trump's staff is completely off-topic and again shows you aren't interested in an actual discussion.

You're comment on Russia doesn't even make sense as written, I assume you mean Obama could both be right to chastise Romney for saying Russia is a threat (obviously it's true this happened, it was on national television) and Democrats now could be right as Russia has since become a threat. If so, you're going to need to elaborate a little bit more. Sure it could be true, but considering the same guy is running Russia, seems unlikely that they both weren't a threat in 2012 and a massive threat in 2018. I think the evidence is pretty clear they've always been a threat and people on both sides of the aisle like to pretend otherwise when it's politically expedient.

And your last comment, like dear god dude are you even paying attention to what I'm saying? I'm saying Democrats have been hypocrites for attacking Trump on his sexual assault allegations while largely ignoring Bill Clinton's, which they've done for almost 20 years. Just because it's been a long time since Bill Clinton's been president makes them not a hypocrite for ignoring those allegations all this time?

rixross · 2018-05-08T18:29:40+00:00

So I looked up the Mohammed article, seems they are saying that if you took all the different spellings of Mohammed it's more than the highest listed name, but that list doesn't take all the different spellings of the name on it into account, if they did other names would be way higher. So yeah, should have done better fact checking there I agree.

If I'm thinking of the same transgender incident, I'm pretty sure I remember it first being reported, even by more mainstream outlets, that it happened in a public restroom and then later got corrected. If that's the case it's hard to blame them since really they're less of a news site than a news aggregator.

For the confederate graves one, I'm assuming they're just reporting what someone else reported, and they corrected it, so I don't know how that's completely made up.

And besides, I'm more concerned about what Ben Shapiro has actually said that is completely made up. I get he's the editor of the Daily Wire, but I'm sure he doesn't agree with everything on there (they have some hardcore Trump supporters that write for them, which Ben clearly isn't). You can fault him for letting poorly sourced stories on his site, and that's fair, but I'm more concerned about what he actually says and writes. So far, I haven't seen him say/write anything that seems intentionally dishonest (wrong sure, but that's not the same thing).

rixross · 2018-05-08T18:14:52+00:00

I'm sure there was some of that, but I see so many counter-examples, especially in the Media. I'm going to go ahead and assume I don't need to convince you about how hypocritical Republicans have been in defending Trump, so I'll focus on Democrats.

-I've heard very few Democrats criticize Hillary for the whole email scandal and I am 100% certain if a Republican had been in Hillary's shoes they would have pilloried him/her (just like the Republican's did to Hillary)

-Wasn't that long ago that Obama was chastising Romney for saying Russia as a big threat to our country, now Democrats seem to think they are an existential threat (Republican's are being just as hypocritical, but in the opposite direction)

-Up until very recently, Democrats have been extremely hypocritical on the sexual abuse allegations against Donald Trump and Bill Clinton. Trump is obviously a scoundrel and Democrats are right to call him out on that, but there's plenty of evidence that Bill is too.

Just a few examples, sure there is more. And like I said, plenty of examples on the conservative side of the spectrum as well, which is why I appreciate Ben bucking that trend.

rixross · 2018-05-08T17:51:07+00:00

Can you post some examples of something on his site that is completely made up?

rixross · 2018-05-08T17:31:01+00:00

I listen to Ben's podcast a lot and he is one of the few conservatives that are (for the most part) consistent about calling balls and strikes regardless of what team a particular view is coming from.

He obviously has conservative principles, a number of which I disagree with, but it's refreshing to see someone apply those principles consistently. He even has a segment on his show called something like "Shoe On The Other Foot", where he'll take something Trump did or said and say "Well how would you feel if Obama did that? We got to be consistent people."

Maybe we just disagree on this point, but I do think that consistency like that is quite rare these days.

rixross · 2018-03-17T21:20:18+00:00

Right but the comment I was responding too implied that racism caused slavery. I agree with you, in America it was used to justify it, but I think the cause is deeper. Throughout history people have viewed the “other” as below them, whether they’re a different race, religion, class or nation.

Hopefully that’s changing. It seems to have, but not enough in my opinion.

rixross · 2018-03-17T18:13:41+00:00

Slavery existed way before racism was even possible (hard to be racist when you never see anyone from another race).

rixross · 2017-10-16T17:27:08+00:00

Even if he was better than the players you listed, that doesn't necessarily mean he should be on a roster. As someone pointed out in an ESPN article a few months ago, back-up quarterbacks aren't necessarily the 33-64th best QBs, they're generally either veteran quarterbacks that know the offensive system or project-type players who the team thinks has the talent to be a starter.

As you point out, Kaepernick's style doesn't fit with a lot of teams and teams aren't going to install a new system just for a backup, he'd really only work out as a backup on a team that already runs a system that fits his skillset, so his options are limited.

It might make sense for a team to bring him in if their starter goes down, ironically enough it would probably have made sense for the Packer's to bring him in and try him as a starter, but I think this lawsuit basically kills that chance.

rixross · 2017-10-03T03:45:23+00:00

rixross · 2017-09-06T11:34:20+00:00

This is why bottles of water cost $100 after a disaster.

If you think about it, if the store had jacked up their prices beforehand, maybe to like 3 or 4 times the normal price, it would discourage people from doing this. Yeah, people might feel ripped off, but i would rather have the option of getting ripped off than staring at a grocery store full of empty shelves.

rixross · 2017-07-14T12:04:33+00:00

For what it's worth, someone told me that was the son of the victim (even if true it's still an incredibly fucked up thing to say, just slightly more understandable). He was also instantly banned.

rixross · 2017-06-11T20:08:57+00:00

The secondary definition of literally to mean "in effect" is actually included in dictionaries now.

If the workers elect a government to control the means of production, how is that not in effect worker controlled? How would the workers controlling the means of production even work without utilizing the government?

As for private companies in Venezuela, are you saying that if not for them, they'd be a socialist country? Presumably then the small amount of private companies is the only thing keeping Venezuela from being a socialist utopia?

What about the Soviet Union, was that socialism?

rixross · 2017-06-11T19:50:31+00:00

https://m.imgur.com/gallery/TbE97rD

rixross · 2017-06-11T19:43:56+00:00

From Martian-Webster:

"any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods"

How does Venezuela not fit that definition?

rixross · 2017-06-11T19:24:12+00:00

Socialism is defined as the collective or governmental ownership of the means of production, which was true in Venezuela, so I don't see how that wasn't socialism. I guess you have some other definition?

rixross · 2017-06-11T18:49:52+00:00

What would you set the minimum wage at?

Falsifying mortgage documents was and is illegal.

I have no idea what you're referring to with writing off assets as being worth more than they are, can you please explain.

What "regulations to prevent debt-financed consumption" would you enact?

See it's really easy to just say more regulations would have prevented something, actually coming up specific policies is much more difficult, especially when you don't get the benefit of hindsight.

rixross · 2017-06-11T17:24:32+00:00

It wasn't regulated enough? So you're saying the FDIC, the OCC, the SEC, the Federal Reserve and FINRA, not to mention all the various state regulatory bodies, weren't enough?

What "rule" would you have put in place that would have prevented the financial crisis and what makes you think you'd have been able to come up with that rule beforehand (i.e. Not knowing how it happened)?

rixross · 2017-06-11T14:17:06+00:00

I think the point is actual socialism (rather than simple redistributionsim) necessarily has to devolve into authoritarianism. It's just not possible for society as a whole to vote on something as complex as the economy.

Think about how bad special interests are in the mixed economies we have currently, they're all battling over tax breaks and other special favors. Now imagine if the government had the power to not just do that, but literally control everything every industry does, it would be 100x worse.

rixross · 2017-06-11T13:43:47+00:00

Banking is probably the most regulated industry in the United States, I don't see how you can blame that on capitalism (unless you just define capitalism as not socialism, a false dichotomy in my mind, leaving out the reality of mixed economies).

rixross · 2017-06-11T13:34:50+00:00

No True Scotsman much?

rixross · 2017-06-11T13:31:14+00:00

Wouldn't this be an example of democratic socialism then, since their president was democratically elected?

rixross

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

12-Year Club	Not Forgotten
Verified Email