The Trump Shutdown

[Logic]

18 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

There's no point, as you can't think for yourself and you wouldn't pay attention anyway.  All you've earned are insults.

There you go again. Insults are all you've got. One-trick pony. I suppose I shouldn't have expected any more from someone who still thinks it's funny and acceptable to casually use the term "retards".

[Foxx]

8 minutes ago, Logic said:

There you go again. Insults are all you've got. One-trick pony. I suppose I shouldn't have expected any more from someone who still thinks it's funny and acceptable to casually use the term "retards".

control the words a man can use and you control the thought process. words have meaning. if the term ''retard' is offensive to you, perhaps you need to look inward to come to grips with your own demons.

 

1984 appendix

Edited January 18, 2019 by Foxx

[The_Dude]

11 minutes ago, Logic said:

There you go again. Insults are all you've got. One-trick pony. I suppose I shouldn't have expected any more from someone who still thinks it's funny and acceptable to casually use the term "retards".

 

That is a retarded post. A mongoloid wrote that for sure. I mean that was the gayest thing ive read all day. ‘Boo-hoo, words can hurt.’ I seriously hope you’re a woman because you’re a disgrace to men if you’re not. 

[Logic]

1 minute ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

I've addressed this here before, though I'm happy to do it again.

 

I don't support individuals, as I believe the "great man" perspective of history to be dangerous because it lionized cults of personality over the law.  I believe in supporting moral ideals, the protection of human freedom, and positive outcomes towards those ends.

 

I was vocally opposed to the President during the run-up to the election, as I'm a classically liberal rights theorist, and everything I knew about President Trump prior to his election led me to believe that he was a dangerous demagogue, with leftist tendencies, who had no interest in libertarian principals.  I thought he would be the downfall of conservatism in the United States, and would usher in an era of unchecked leftist populism which would be the final nail in the coffin of individual rights and national autonomy.  I voted for Johnson, as he presented himself as the least appalling of 4 terrible candidates.

 

But, as I said, I guided by a belief in human freedom, and rights theory; and as such I chance my stance based on evidence.

 

The President has changed my mind, and has done more for advancing the cause of human freedom both domestically and abroad than any President in my adult lifetime; and I support that.

I truly appreciate the thoughtful response and your willingness to share.

With regard to your notion that I am silently complicit in human trafficking by rejecting the idea of the wall, though:

Respectfully, I reject the ability of someone who believes that Donald Trump has "advanced the cause of human freedom" telling me that I am silently complicit in anything. To support Trump (though you were careful to say you don't support him, you DID imply that you support his actions as president) is to be complicit in a staggering laundry list of destructive, racist, xenophobic, inhumane, and vile acts and causes.

I'm glad that the issue of human trafficking is important to you, though I'm not sure how such an apparently thoughtful and empathetic person could turn a blind eye to the litany of OTHER human rights abuses for which Trump has been partially or wholly responsible during his national tragedy of a presidency.

1 minute ago, The_Dude said:

 

That is a retarded post. A mongoloid wrote that for sure. I mean that was the gayest thing ive read all day. ‘Boo-hoo, words can hurt.’ I seriously hope you’re a woman because you’re a disgrace to men if you’re not. 

Here comes some sexist comments from The_Dude to defend the guy who thinks saying "retards" is funny! Everyone gather 'round!

I've been through this song and dance with you before, guy. You've made clearly exactly what type of fella you are. 

Have a nice day!

8 minutes ago, Foxx said:

control the words a man can use and you control the thought process. words have meaning. if the term ''retard' is offensive to you, perhaps you need to look inward to come to grips with your own demons.

 

1984 appendix

I have no interest in controlling what words he can use. I just think that the words a person uses -- and the things that a person finds humorous, no less -- are often indicative of the character of the person using them.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[The_Dude]

12 minutes ago, Logic said:

 

Here comes some sexist comments from The_Dude to defend the guy who thinks saying "retards" is funny! Everyone gather 'round!

I've been through this song and dance with you before, guy. You've made clearly exactly what type of fella you are. 

 

I’m not defending Tom. I’m defending free speech and masculinity. Go grab a Gillette and shave your legs, Nancy. 

 

P.s., I believe 99% of the people who ask others not to say “retard” are being disingenuous, and are just trying to control other people. ***** off with that nonsense. Internet codes of contact have turned way too many people into snowflakes. 

Edited January 18, 2019 by The_Dude

[Deranged Rhino]

8 minutes ago, Logic said:

Respectfully, I reject the ability of someone who believes that Donald Trump has "advanced the cause of human freedom" telling me that I am silently complicit in anything.

 

Because you are ignorant of the actual realities of human trafficking and just how much this administration has done to combat it from day one of their administration. You're ignorant of this because it's not covered by the establishment media nor anyone of the unitparty establishment in office. It's not covered by those groups because they directly profit from the kickbacks of this long running, systemic plague. 

 

This is where breaking outside of your bubble helps a great deal. 

 

9 minutes ago, Logic said:

To support Trump (though you were careful to say you don't support him, you DID imply that you support his actions as president) is to be complicit in a staggering laundry list of destructive, racist, xenophobic, inhumane, and vile acts and causes.

 

This is just absolute nonsense, not backed by any facts other than feelings. It's a buzz list of virtue signaling designed to tap into your emotional brain rather than (gasp) your logical brain. 

 

Almost every example you'll throw out (mean tweets, caging children, condoning nazis) will be partisan talking points devoid of either context, history, or factual basis. They push this on you to get you to surrender your capability for independent thought. This is an information war above all, and that's the primary tactic deployed by all parties involved. You have to look past that bull#### if you're going to have any hope of surviving. 

 

12 minutes ago, Logic said:

I'm glad that the issue of human trafficking is important to you, though I'm not sure how such an apparently thoughtful and empathetic person could turn a blind eye to the litany of OTHER human rights abuses for which Trump has been partially or wholly responsible during his national tragedy of a presidency.

 

There's not a single thing that Trump's administration has done, or even been wrongly accused of doing, that's worse than the horrors of human trafficking/sex slavery. Not a single thing. So think about this argument you're trying to make and flip it around on yourself: 

 

Mean tweets are a bigger deal to you than the millions of people who are being abused in the worst possible ways imaginable and sold for profit. 

 

[Foxx]

21 minutes ago, Logic said:

 

... I have no interest in controlling what words he can use. I just think that the words a person uses -- and the things that a person finds humorous, no less -- are often indicative of the character of the person using them.

ummm... with all due respect, i'm going to have to call bull####.

 

you said, "I shouldn't have expected any more from someone who still thinks it's funny and acceptable to casually use the term "retards".". wherein, you clearly are trying to demean and shame the usage of the chosen term, 'retard'.

 

i would respect it more if it were owned. i still wouldn't agree with the objective but at least i would respect the origin of the thought.

 

be honest, with yourself at the very least.

Edited January 18, 2019 by Foxx

[3rdnlng]

1 hour ago, Logic said:

And another thing, @Deranged Rhino:

You keep talking about how you've "personally talked to people on the southern border about the wall" and they all, "to a man", back you up. My article, citing multiple OTHER articles, stated 

6. Border patrol agents don’t like concrete or steel walls because they block surveillance capabilities. In other words, they can’t mobilize correctly to meet challenges. So, in many ways, a wall makes their job more difficult.

7. Border patrol agents say walls are “meaningless” without agents and technology to support them. Are we prepared to pour countless billions annually—well after the wall is built—to create a nearly 2,000-mile militarized, 24-hour-surveillance border operation? Because according to patrol agents, that’s the only way a wall would work. 

So, as for the "many people" on the southern border that YOU'VE talked to about the issue who "to a man" want Trump's wall (which, by the way, I guess we're all just supposed to take you word for it that you've had these conversations and that these people actually exist): Not all border patrol agents agree. Yet you speak as though you represent the views of border agents universally. Between that bit of "take my word for it" conjecture and your "I care about it and you don't, that's the difference" line, you're pulling moves that would cause you to laugh your debate opponent off the floor if he tried them. That goes back to my point that you suffer from an assumed moral and intellectual superiority and hypocrisy...or as you once called it: Intellectual Dishonesty. And that's not to even MENTION the fact that you easily dismiss reasonable counter-arguments or op-eds as "pushing a narrative", while I suppose YOUR arguments and statements are...WHAT, exactly? Certainly not pushing your OWN narrative, right? Hypocrisy.

May I ask if you consider yourself a Donald Trump supporter?

Have you not kept up with things? After listening to the "experts" advice some time ago Trump opted for the steel slats type fence. It can be seen through, small animals can pass from one side to the other and it would mitigate any possible flooding.

Edited January 18, 2019 by 3rdnlng

[DC Tom]

39 minutes ago, Logic said:

There you go again. Insults are all you've got. One-trick pony. I suppose I shouldn't have expected any more from someone who still thinks it's funny and acceptable to casually use the term "retards".

 

There you go again, deserving nothing better.

 

If you don't like it, don't be retarded.

[Koko78]

5 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

 

 

Dear diary,

 

I don't see any illegals trying to get through that fence or otherwise cause trouble in this picture. Therefore it is ineffective. Mr. Trump, tear down this wall!

[DC Tom]

22 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

He's building a wall to keep Pelosi in DC.

[/dev/null]

2 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Another brick in the wall

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bad move by Trump

Some Democrat operative is going to throw a brick thru Nancy's window and everyone will scream that Trump is inciting violence.  Straight out of House of Cards

[3rdnlng]

2 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

There you go again, deserving nothing better.

 

If you don't like it, don't be retarded.

Uh, like he has a choice?

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, DC Tom said:

 

He's building a wall to keep Pelosi in DC.

 

  

[/dev/null]

8 hours ago, Chef Jim said:

Personally I think Trump blew it on this one.  It would have been better if he let her go.  And every day tweet "I'm here ready to negotiate.   Where's Waldo Pelosi?"

 

Or even better: Where In The World Is Carmen San Francisco

[DC Tom]

Just now, 3rdnlng said:

Uh, like he has a choice?

 

Yes, he does.  He's not developmentally disabled like my nephew; he doesn't have Downs like my uncle.

 

He's just slow to understand and accept information presented to him.  He doesn't form rational thoughts and opinions.  He is, by choice and in the literal sense of the word - to prohibit or hold back - retarding himself.

 

 

[Foxx]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1086395559504764930

 

[row_33]

17 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

He's building a wall to keep Pelosi in DC.

 

She is powerful enough to apparently be on a commercial flight taking off from an Air Force base and landing in a war zone.

 

 

Or so she claimed today....

 

[DC Tom]

Just now, row_33 said:

 

She is powerful enough to apparently be on a commercial flight taking off from an Air Force base and landing in a war zone.

 

 

Or so she claimed today....

 

 

See!  Walls don't work!

[Deranged Rhino]

17 minutes ago, Foxx said:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1086395559504764930

 

 

 

Just a reminder too:

 

[Cinga]

Pelosi flying out of DC today

 

https://video-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t42.4659-2/19137699_1543634852375860_7360811300886151168_n.mp4?_nc_cat=104&_nc_ht=video-iad3-1.xx&oh=cf0dca8fc5e7328f7d43c506c6e66870&oe=5C42975E

[Logic]

45 minutes ago, Foxx said:

ummm... with all due respect, i'm going to have to call bull####.

 

you said, "I shouldn't have expected any more from someone who still thinks it's funny and acceptable to casually use the term "retards".". wherein, you clearly are trying to demean and shame the usage of the chosen term, 'retard'.

 

i would respect it more if it were owned. i still wouldn't agree with the objective but at least i would respect the origin of the thought.

 

be honest, with yourself at the very least.

Here's the honest truth: Everyone is free to use whatever language they want. And I'm free to think they if THEY think that using language that is derogatory to the mentally handicapped is funny and "no big deal" -- and choose to use said language over an infinite amount of other options in their FOOTBALL MESSAGE BOARD PROFILE --  then they probably aren't the most empathetic or kindhearted person around. DC Tom insults people CONSTANTLY on these forums. I think he has a lot of anger, and it's easier to take it out on internet strangers than to deal with it.

It has nothing to do with controlling or censoring anything. Freedom of speech is a wonderful thing, but its consequence is the freedom of those who hear said speech to form opinions about the empathetic and intellectual capacity of the speaker.

Cue more mean-hearted, sexist, homophobic or otherwise vitriolic responses now from the likes of DC Tom and The_Dude now.

53 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

Mean tweets are a bigger deal to you than the millions of people who are being abused in the worst possible ways imaginable and sold for profit. 

If all that you think Trump has done to damage human rights in this country and abroad is "mean tweets", then your head must be irretrievably deep in the sand.

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, Logic said:

If all that you think Trump has done to damage human rights in this country and abroad is "mean tweets", then your head must be irretrievably deep in the sand.

 

Explain how he's damaged human rights in this country and abroad. 

 

Then explain to me how that's worse than human slavery. 

[snafu]

4 hours ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Yes.  In the middle of Lake Erie.

 

And eventually you went home and didn't try to stay in the country. Why can't more people be like you?

 

 

[Koko78]

6 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Explain how he's damaged human rights in this country and abroad. 

 

Then explain to me how that's worse than human slavery. 

 

In lieu of an explanation, I'd rather Logic cite specific examples, perhaps providing links to primary sources detailing all of these human rights abuses Trump's perpetrated.

 

And no, being "mean" on twitter doesn't count as a human rights abuse.

Edited January 19, 2019 by Koko78

[TakeYouToTasker]

1 hour ago, Logic said:

I truly appreciate the thoughtful response and your willingness to share.

With regard to your notion that I am silently complicit in human trafficking by rejecting the idea of the wall, though:

Respectfully, I reject the ability of someone who believes that Donald Trump has "advanced the cause of human freedom" telling me that I am silently complicit in anything. To support Trump (though you were careful to say you don't support him, you DID imply that you support his actions as president) is to be complicit in a staggering laundry list of destructive, racist, xenophobic, inhumane, and vile acts and causes.

I'm glad that the issue of human trafficking is important to you, though I'm not sure how such an apparently thoughtful and empathetic person could turn a blind eye to the litany of OTHER human rights abuses for which Trump has been partially or wholly responsible during his national tragedy of a presidency.

 

I'll ask you to cite examples of these, with sources, detailing the exact nature of the abuses in question, as I have painstakingly done in this thread in regards to the human trafficking and child sex slavery issue.

 

The I would like for you to explain why you think it's appropriate to oppose the President in his work to end human slavery and child sex trafficking because you don't like other things he has done:  "I think the President has done some bad things, so I will deny him the ability to do good things."  seems like a lousy argument to make.

[Hedge]

29 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

Just a reminder too:

 

 

I have a Q:

 

Remember THIS DAY?

[3rdnlng]

9 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

And eventually you went home and didn't try to stay in the country. Why can't more people be like you?

 

 

Now think about your response. You're glad that he didn't decide to stay in Canada? That's like looking forward to Gleeful Gator's next post.

[Logic]

17 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Explain how he's damaged human rights in this country and abroad. 

 

Then explain to me how that's worse than human slavery. 

Your requests of me are flawed and unreasonable, and here's why: You're presenting Trump's wall as the ONLY reasonable way to curb human trafficking. You're speaking as though, by not wanting to build Trump's wall, I must support or overlook human trafficking, or that I don't think it's a problem. 

So when I said that Trump has done damage to human rights, you responded by asking me to justify how said damage is worse than human slavery, despite the fact that I said no such thing. I said that the ability to pinpoint human slavery as an issue to be passionate whilst also ignoring the litany of OTHER human rights abuses taking place under Trump's administration seemed a hypocritical position. I DID NOT say, nor have I at any point implied, that human trafficking isn't a problem or shouldn't be addressed. It obviously IS a problem. Trump's wall is not the only answer to that problem, though. Insisting that it IS the only answer, while also implying that I think human trafficking isn't a problem to begin with simply because I disagree with the wall, is inaccurate and unfair.

TRUMP'S WALL IS NOT THE ONLY ANSWER TO HUMAN TRAFFICKING. 

NOT WANTING SAID WALL DOES NOT EQUAL NOT CARING ABOUT HUMAN TRAFFICKING OR NOT WANTING IT TO BE ADDRESSED!





 

 

Edited January 19, 2019 by Logic

[IDBillzFan]

16 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Explain how he's damaged human rights in this country and abroad. 

 

Then explain to me how that's worse than human slavery. 

 

I'd be curious about this, too. He's a goofy dude, but damaging US human rights? By what measure?

 

[Deranged Rhino]

13 minutes ago, Logic said:

Your requests of me are flawed and unreasonable...

 

I disagree.

 

33 minutes ago, Logic said:

If all that you think Trump has done to damage human rights in this country and abroad is "mean tweets", then your head must be irretrievably deep in the sand.

 

You made a statement of fact. I asked you to support it with sources and to expound upon it.

 

Either you can do so, or you can't.

 

...But if you can't, you should ask yourself what that means about your position. 

[IDBillzFan]

15 minutes ago, Logic said:

Your requests of me are flawed and unreasonable, and here's why: You're presenting Trump's wall as the ONLY reasonable way to curb human trafficking. You're speaking as though, by not wanting to build Trump's wall, I must support or overlook human trafficking, or that I don't think it's a problem. 

So when I said that Trump has done damage to human rights, you responded by asking me to justify how said damage is worse than human slavery, despite the fact that I said no such thing. I said that the ability to pinpoint human slavery as an issue to be passionate whilst also ignoring the litany of OTHER human rights abuses taking place under Trump's administration seemed a hypocritical position. I DID NOT say, nor have I at any point implied, that human trafficking isn't a problem or shouldn't be addressed. It obviously IS a problem. Trump's wall is not the only answer to that problem, though. Insisting that it IS the only answer, while also implying that I think human trafficking isn't a problem to begin with simply because I disagree with the wall, is inaccurate and unfair.

TRUMP'S WALL IS NOT THE ONLY ANSWER TO HUMAN TRAFFICKING. 

NOT WANTING SAID WALL DOES NOT EQUAL NOT CARING ABOUT HUMAN TRAFFICKING OR NOT WANTING IT TO BE ADDRESSED!

 

Where in any of this did you explain why you believe Trump has damaged American human rights.

 

Please explain. Forget everything else. Answer that simple question. You made the claim. Please support it.

[Logic]

https://www.amnesty.org.uk/trump-human-rights-autopsy-report

https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2018/country-chapters/united-states

https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/politics/421814-us-risks-human-rights-abuses-by-funding-border-wall

https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/trump-human-rights-and-hypocrisy/

http://hrlr.law.columbia.edu/the-trump-human-rights-tracker/

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/06/withdraws-human-rights-council-180619173311272.html

Above are six links from a variety of places, including Amnesty International, The Hill, The Seattle Times, and Columbia Law School's "Trump Human Rights Tracker". The second to last of these lists, among others, the following (and goes into further detail, if you click the link):

- Ended Deferred Action for DACA program
- Secretary of State lifted the human rights conditions on arms sales to Bahrain
- Revoked protections for women in the workplace
- Repealed a rule restricting coal companies from dumping mine waste into streams

And as the Al Jazeera article discusses, the United States, under Trump's watch, withdrew from the Human Rights Council. 

As the above links detail, there have been a litany of human and civil rights abuses under Trump. Instead of immediately insulting me, feel free to click through the links and read the things that I'm reading that make me say that Trump is a human and civil rights NIGHTMARE.

And before anyone comes back with "none of those are worse than human trafficking!": I NEVER SAID THEY WERE! NOT ONCE! I only said that to selectively be outraged about one (admittedly horrendous and important) thing while conveniently ignoring many OTHER horrendous and important issues (ranging from environmental destruction that will have far-reaching impact on many American citizens to civil rights abuses against immigrant and LGBTQ populations) was hypocritical. That's all. To keep claiming that I dismiss or don't recognize the importance of the human trafficking issue -- or that my dislike for Trump's wall plan means that I don't recognize the seriousness of said issue -- is just dishonest.
 

[row_33]

1 minute ago, Logic said:

https://www.amnesty.org.uk/trump-human-rights-autopsy-report

https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2018/country-chapters/united-states

https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/politics/421814-us-risks-human-rights-abuses-by-funding-border-wall

https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/trump-human-rights-and-hypocrisy/

http://hrlr.law.columbia.edu/the-trump-human-rights-tracker/

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/06/withdraws-human-rights-council-180619173311272.html

Above are six links from a variety of places, including Amnesty International, The Hill, The Seattle Times, and Columbia Law School's "Trump Human Rights Tracker". The second to last of these lists, among others, the following (and goes into further detail, if you click the link):

- Ended Deferred Action for DACA program
- Secretary of State lifted the human rights conditions on arms sales to Bahrain
- Revoked protections for women in the workplace
- Repealed a rule restricting coal companies from dumping mine waste into streams

And as the Al Jazeera article discusses, the United States, under Trump's watch, withdrew from the Human Rights Council. 

As the above links detail, there have been a litany of human and civil rights abuses under Trump. Instead of immediately insulting me, feel free to click through the links and read the things that I'm reading that make me say that Trump is a human and civil rights NIGHTMARE.

And before anyone comes back with "none of those are worse than human trafficking!": I NEVER SAID THEY WERE! NOT ONCE! I only said that to selectively be outraged about one (admittedly horrendous and important) thing while conveniently ignoring many OTHER horrendous and important issues (ranging from environmental destruction that will have far-reaching impact on many American citizens to civil rights abuses against immigrant and LGBTQ populations) was hypocritical. That's all. To keep claiming that I dismiss or don't recognize the importance of the human trafficking issue -- or that my dislike for Trump's wall plan means that I don't recognize the seriousness of said issue -- is just dishonest.
 

 

All total bull crap 

[Logic]

Just now, row_33 said:

 

All total bull crap 

What a thoughtful and thorough response. So glad I spent the time. ?

And with this, I'm logging off for the night to go have some dinner and watch a movie. 

I will happily pick up this conversation in the morning if anyone wishes to.

[Q-baby!]

3 hours ago, LABillzFan said:

 

Yep. Just tell Mexico if we don't build the wall, Canadians will start invading Mexico.

 

They'll HELP build the wall. Because let's face it...not even the Mexicans want anything to do with Canadians.

***** you guys are lame. Trump is making your entire country dumber! 

[The_Dude]

1 hour ago, DC Tom said:

 

There you go again, deserving nothing better.

 

If you don't like it, don't be retarded.

 

Tammy, you are kind of a one trick pony. But I’ll say this — you do it well. 

[Rob's House]

48 minutes ago, Logic said:

Here's the honest truth: Everyone is free to use whatever language they want. And I'm free to think they if THEY think that using language that is derogatory to the mentally handicapped is funny and "no big deal" -- and choose to use said language over an infinite amount of other options in their FOOTBALL MESSAGE BOARD PROFILE --  then they probably aren't the most empathetic or kindhearted person around. DC Tom insults people CONSTANTLY on these forums. I think he has a lot of anger, and it's easier to take it out on internet strangers than to deal with it.

It has nothing to do with controlling or censoring anything. Freedom of speech is a wonderful thing, but its consequence is the freedom of those who hear said speech to form opinions about the empathetic and intellectual capacity of the speaker.

Cue more mean-hearted, sexist, homophobic or otherwise vitriolic responses now from the likes of DC Tom and The_Dude now.

 

The consequence of this speech is that I (and I'm sure others) have formed the opinion that you hold self-righteous beliefs that were spoon-fed to you by tv/media that you think are your core beliefs.

 

The idea that using the word retarded to refer to stupid people is derogatory to the mentally ill iisn't enlightened or empathetic...it's retarded.

 

The only difference between "retard" and "moron" is one was arbitrarily deemed offensive by the PC crowd in search of a new source of outrage. So if you hold this belief and still use the term moron or idiot, you're retarded.

[3rdnlng]

21 minutes ago, BigMcD said:

***** you guys are lame. Trump is making your entire country dumber! 

It has to be tough on your psyche to have such a dumb country as your daddy, eh?