*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Savy

Why don't you? It makes no sense to me that you can't go where you want but other people can dictate where you can and can't go.

---

It makes no sense to you? Thing is, in the case of New Zealand, the NZ govt have a resposibility to provide for those already there. That's kind of their job, to ensure their population is educated, healthy as has the neccessary infrastrusture to work. Why should they just let me go there to live? What does New Zealand owe me? I'll tell you what... exactly the same amount that the UK owes people from outside of these shores.

I can't go to live in NZ because I don't have any moeny and I don't have a job to go to. Is it fair? Of course it is. If they have a responsibility to me, then they have the same responsibility to another 7 billion people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

Why is it punishment? If I try to move to New Zealand, and they say I'm useless to them so I can stay in the UK, well I'm not being punsihed by New Zealand. I have no God-given right to go where the hell I like on the planet. I mean, if I demand $100 off you, and you politely tell me to fuck off, are you punishing me? By your logic, it seems so.

---

I used the word punishment just as a general sentiment (crime and punishment), but I don't see why it wouldn't work here. Without a criminal record you're able to migrate to NZ if you qualified on the rest of the immigration criteria, right? The "punishment" for having one is denied access. A punishment by definition is "a penalty inflicted as retribution for an offence". I don't think that's such a leap in semantics. The demand for a $100 is obviously a different issue, it isn't a case where you'd be eligible for that money without having done an offence.

Sure, retribution for an offence. That's a fine definition.

Turning away a potential migrant, that's not retribution for an offence.

Quote:

---

The demand for a $100 is obviously a different issue, it isn't a case where you'd be eligible for that money without having done an offence.

---

Eligble? No one is automatically "eligible" to enter another nation. Rights are not being taken away from declined migrants. On the contrary, rights are granted to accepted migrants.

Another 2-page semantics circle-jerk over a one-liner side comment suggests that there's little disagreement with the actual subject.

This isn't semantics, not unless by "punsihment" you mean "an unfavourable outcome".

You can't just go abusing the meaning of words and then crying "semantics" when someone argues the point you're making. Find better language.

You talk about how it feels like a punishment to the immigrant when they are refused entry.

Is it a punishment if my child is refused entry to a particular school because I live in the wrong postcode and therefore fall outside of the school's catchment area?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BananaStand

It really bothers me that you're an educator.

If you expect a government to provide a sufficient infrastructure to maintain an economy, and you expect a government to maintain law and order to the degree that it ensures a fair market place........then OBVIOUSLY you care about who is coming into your country, and how many.

---

Yep we need government to do all of those things. God forbid they didn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

It makes no sense to you? Thing is, in the case of New Zealand, the NZ govt have a resposibility to provide for those already there. That's kind of their job, to ensure their population is educated, healthy as has the neccessary infrastrusture to work. Why should they just let me go there to live? What does New Zealand owe me? I'll tell you what... exactly the same amount that the UK owes people from outside of these shores.

I can't go to live in NZ because I don't have any moeny and I don't have a job to go to. Is it fair? Of course it is. If they have a responsibility to me, then they have the same responsibility to another 7 billion people.

---

The only thing with this is that you don't just want to go to NZ you want NZ to look after you they are different things.

Also it's very easy to argue that the UK has a larger obligation to fairly large parts of the world compared to what NZ does to you lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

This isn't semantics, not unless by "punsihment" you mean "an unfavourable outcome".

You can't just go abusing the meaning of words and then crying "semantics" when someone argues the point you're making. Find better language.

---

I said "getting punished for crimes that haven't happened is not ok" as a general anecdote. It's you who's been trying to implant a specific scenario to that. I still maintain that comparing a literal punishment for a crime to a declining a benefit due to a criminal record is not entirely inapt.

But all of this is of course meaningless to the discussion, as you well know. It is not ok to e.g. deny a person access to a country based on their beliefs, whether you call that a punishment or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CoccoBill

So which is it, a great idea or a 4D chess move? Doesn't sound at all unnecessary nor expensive.

---

Did your Finnish school not teach you what comedy is?

Is it really that sad over there. Everyone just waits patiently in line for turnip rations and never laughs?

That's your utopia?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

people from outside of these shores.

---

Is that an actual British expression?

"these shores"?

You're an island, you have ONE shore

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CoccoBill

A punishment by definition is "a penalty inflicted as retribution for an offence".

---

It's like you don't even know how entitled your thinking really is. Read what you just wrote there. Think about what each word actually means. Now apply that to the context of this conversation, and tell me how you're making any damn sense.

Go look up the word "penalty".

Being denied an unearned privilege is NOT a penalty.

It's this kind of "the world owes me" thinking that's driving Scandinavia's economy into the sewer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by savy

The only thing with this is that you don't just want to go to NZ you want NZ to look after you they are different things.

Also it's very easy to argue that the UK has a larger obligation to fairly large parts of the world compared to what NZ does to you lol.

---

Actually I'd like to go to NZ and find myself a job, but they're not exactly in need of bar staff or shelf stackers. If I were a doctor, then perhaps they'd be more accepting. Fair play to them, I mean why wouldn't they want skilled and useful people and opposed unskilled and useless?

And why does the UK have a larger obligation to foreigners than NZ does to me? The obligation is equal. Zero.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CoccoBill

I said "getting punished for crimes that haven't happened is not ok" as a general anecdote..

---

WRONG. In post 3132 you quoted Ong talking about keeping strangers out of his house and you claimed that it would be reasonable for that stranger to feel punished. Post 3132. You just misquoted your damn self man.

Quote:

---

I still maintain that comparing a literal punishment for a crime to a declining a benefit due to a criminal record is not entirely inapt.

---

Holy shit man, you are just cooked. Do yourself a favor. Go on Amazon.com, and order yourself some American textbooks. In there, you'll find words like "earn" and "privilege" and "responsibility". Educate yourself.

You keep using words like "decline" and "benefit" that just show you're brainwashed drone of the nanny state. Wake the fuck up.

Quote:

---

But all of this is of course meaningless to the discussion, as you well know. It is not ok to e.g. deny a person access to a country based on their beliefs

---

That's not how you use e.g.

And yes it is ok to do that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cocco

But all of this is of course meaningless to the discussion, as you well know. It is not ok to e.g. deny a person access to a country based on their beliefs, whether you call that a punishment or not.

---

You called it a punishment, and yes it is perfectly acceptable to deny someone entry for any reason whatsoever. We have no obligation in the first place. There is no entitlement. We should do what New Zealand does and only accept people who are of net benefit to the receiving state.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

Actually I'd like to go to NZ and find myself a job, but they're not exactly in need of bar staff or shelf stackers. If I were a doctor, then perhaps they'd be more accepting. Fair play to them, I mean why wouldn't they want skilled and useful people and opposed unskilled and useless?

And why does the UK have a larger obligation to foreigners than NZ does to me? The obligation is equal. Zero.

---

Yeah and you should be able to do that just not expect anything from the place. In practice that can't happen obviously.

India, WI, etc. Places that literally fought with us in wars and were promised rights as citizens as a result lol. The wider point is that the UK should have no obligation to do anything for you either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Savy

India, WI, etc. Places that literally fought with us in wars and were promised rights as citizens as a result lol. The wider point is that the UK should have no obligation to do anything for you either.

---

Ok yeah fair point with nations that made sacrifices for the UK. But still, those obligations are not unlimited. We obviously couldn't accept the entire population of India. And we're still doing it for the benefit of the UK.

Quote:

---

Yeah and you should be able to do that

---

Why? That bar staff job I get, that could've gone to a local who has no choice but to look for work in his local area.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

Why? That bar staff job I get, that could've gone to a local who has no choice but to look for work in his local area.

---

And if you were better at that job that's good and if you were worse well why would they hire you instead? On top of that you have had to travel to the other side ofthe world for a bog standard bar job so it's not like it's ever a net huge plus for you.

Also if you've got no money but you can still manage to get to NZ and survive long enough to get a bar job which will make you enough money to not really do much then fair play but this other person couldn't possibly move at all to get a job.

Quote:

---

And if you were better at that job that's good

---

Fair enough if we're talking about a skilled job, but can I really argue that I have more to offer as a barman than someone else?

I am unskilled. Any job that I get in NZ, pretty much anyone can do to the same standard. If that's not the case, well then perhaps NZ might be interested.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

Fair enough if we're talking about a skilled job, but can I really argue that I have more to offer as a barman than someone else?

I am unskilled. Any job that I get in NZ, pretty much anyone can do to the same standard. If that's not the case, well then perhaps NZ might be interested.

---

But it's up for them to decide that isn't it, if you apply for a job and get it well done you are in theory the best person for that job.

Also whilst barstaff is low skilled I've known enough shit bar staff that I certainly appreciate a good one & I definitely tip more to those who do a good job.

Quote:

---

But it's up for them to decide that isn't it

---

Well it's up to the employer to decide if I'm better qualified for the job, but it's not up to the employer to decide if I have the right to work in NZ. That's a government decision, and they'll make that decision based on their criteria, not the employer's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Savy

And if you were better at that job that's good

---

He's not. And LOL and talking about "better" in the context of unskilled labor.

Quote:

---

and if you were worse well why would they hire you instead?

---

Affirmative action maybe. Or maybe he's simply willing to work for less than a local. Maybe he's only 10% worse, but costs 25% less. Funny you seem to be citing the power of free markets here, but you've applied in the most naive and least thought-through manner possible. LOL

Quote:

---

On top of that you have had to travel to the other side of the world for a bog standard bar job so it's not like it's ever a net huge plus for you.

---

Again...so glib. Maybe he wants to have kids in a country where they can get free healthcare and a superior education (like America). That's not a "net huge plus"??? Like, you think that's just a wash because it's a long trip??

Honestly, you should seriously consider committing yourself to never discussing immigration policy again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Savy

if you apply for a job and get it well done you are in theory the best person for that job.

---

No.

Just....no

I think I might file for a restraining order. Plenty of hard evidence of anger problems to a wide array of people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BananaStand

He's not. And LOL and talking about "better" in the context of unskilled labor.


Affirmative action maybe. Or maybe he's simply willing to work for less than a local. Maybe he's only 10% worse, but costs 25% less. Funny you seem to be citing the power of free markets here, but you've applied in the most naive and least thought-through manner possible. LOL


Again...so glib. Maybe he wants to have kids in a country where they can get free healthcare and a superior education (like America). That's not a "net huge plus"??? Like, you think that's just a wash because it's a long trip??

Honestly, you should seriously consider committing yourself to never discussing immigration policy again.

---

I imagine Ong would be fairly good behind a bar.

Once again what we are talking about is in the context of the country not owing him anything. It's funny that you're incapable of understanding assumptions that are pretty key for a hypothetial discussion yet use that idiocy as a way of thinking you're smarter than everyone else. So none of your arguments even make sense in context so as usual little to no imput has been added thanks to your post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Savy

I think I might file for a restraining order. Plenty of hard evidence of anger problems to a wide array of people.

---

Tilt much?

Not a wide array of people. Just low IQ people

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Savy

Once again what we are talking about is in the context of the country not owing him anything.

---

Yeah, because you're not smart enough to realize that's not even slightly realistic or relevant. I was merely trying to take the conversation somewhere that made sense.

I am good behind the bar, but how hard is it to pour a beer, notice who's waiting first, make light conversation, do basic maths, clean tables etc? It's a piece of piss and anyone who can't do it to the same standard I can is not really someone I would seek to employ in any capacity to be honest.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/27/opini...-trump-callan/

HOLY FUCKING SHIT. This has gone WAY off the rails now. We are beyond derangement now. People are flat out hysterically insane.

Quote:

---

Still, it is so serious that it could theoretically give special counsel Robert Mueller the leverage to propose a deal: Resign the presidency in exchange for immunity for Don Jr. Otherwise Don Jr. will be indicted for lying to the Senate Judiciary Committee, and could -- again, theoretically -- go to jail

---

WHAT??? We don't democratically elect leaders anymore? We just oust whoever we don't like through brute force??

What's amazing to me is how brazen this is. We're not even pretending anymore like Mueller is investigating legitimate suspicious of collusion or obstruction. We're not even pretending anymore that he's an impartial independent 3rd party charged with a narrow scope of truth finding.

No, fuck that. Now the cards are on the table huh?

Dude. You jump at ridiculous shadows.

You're the first to claim that many media outlets are biased and serve their own agenda, with no trappings of reporting facts.
With which my only disagreement is that you didn't say "all media outlets."

I don't see why you can knowlingly read a fluff piece based on sensationalism and take it as any indication of reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oskar

lofty fake intellectual would have been better.

Even If that's the truth why would your ask me instead of using google?

---

So I know your position rather than just assuming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BananaStand

No.

Just....no

---

He's right in an important sense. Since the study of resources is also the study of desires and constraints, when a person gets a job, that status is the best possible outcome given the relevant desires and constraints.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey

Dude. You jump at ridiculous shadows......I don't see why you can knowlingly read a fluff piece based on sensationalism and take it as any indication of reality.

---

You really should try getting in touch with reality.

This isn't a mere case of media bias. This is bigger.

Think about what kind of emotion and opinions are required to disseminate a piece like this.

First, you'd have to believe that Mueller's goal is to remove Trump from the presidency. That's not stated in the scope of his investigation. And it's been widely reported that Trump is officially not a target of the investigation. When Trump impugns Mueller's impartiality....CNN is the very first to shit all over him for being paranoid. When Trump suggests firing Mueller, they liken Trump to a tyrannical dictator who can't stand critical inquiry. Yet now we have a CNN contributor, and it's editorial board, suggesting that it's absolutely fine to pervert our justice system to generate preferable political outcomes.

How does that not make your head explode?

Think about what they're actually suggesting here. If Don Jr committed a crime, then shouldn't he simply be charged accordingly? Wouldn't that be how justice is served? Identify the criminal, present evidence, convict, and sentence. That's what I learned in school. But CNN apparently doesn't think perjury under congressional subpoena is all that big of a deal. They're ready to forget about it and give Don Jr a pass if daddy is willing to fall on the sword.

And why would CNN want that? Trump's not guilty of anything here. In fact, if the sum total of the Mueller investigation is a perjury charge against Don Jr.....then doesn't that kinda vindicate Trump? He's not charged with anything. He's not the target of any investigation. There's no evidence of him doing anything wrong. And yet, CNN would still like to see him brought down by this any way they can imagine.

Prosecutors give immunity to witnesses when they testify against people guilty of worse crimes. It's a tool used in the furtherance of justice. in this scenario, Trump is guilty of no crime. Taking Trump down doesn't serve any interest of justice AT ALL. Using prosecutorial powers for political purposes is exactly the kind of tyranny and fascism that CNN regularly accuses Trump of perpetrating.

In fact, it's a complete perversion of justice. That would be a WILD misuse of power. Imagine if we lived in a world where any minor crime, by any family member of a politician, can be leveraged by any politically motivated prosecutor to force that politician to resign his/her office. Do you REALLY wanna live in that kind of America? Why would you get your news from someone who does.

The office of POTUS is not a bargaining chip. Anyone who thinks that is dangerous. Anyone who gives a platform to someone like that is the enemy of the people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BananaStand

How does that not make your head explode?

---

It's a fluff piece based on sensationalism and exactly nothing will come of it.

You're right that if anything comes of this it will be a complete perversion of justice.
It could well be different if we weren't talking about POTUS, but we are.
Which is why nothing will ever come of this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey

It's a fluff piece based on sensationalism and exactly nothing will come of it.

You're right that if anything comes of this it will be a complete perversion of justice.
It could well be different if we weren't talking about POTUS, but we are.
Which is why nothing will ever come of this.

---

Aren't you at least a little curious how a supposedly credible and independent media giant can become so corrupt?

I mean, they didn't used to be so overtly biased and manipulative. There was a time when ethics mattered.

We're not in that time anymore. Doesn't that trigger your scientific mind to ask "why"?

Maybe something happened. And maybe when it did someone asked what the fuck happened. And then that someone was told "don't be sensational, nothing will come of this"

And now here we are.

Hey guy. Guys... Can you do me a favor. When the deep state eventually gets Trump, please put your first amendment right to the test. This might sound selfish, but if I could get some news footage of a bunch of MAGA hats while trying to defend themselves from a tyranical government with firearms, get evaporated by a drone strike... I would not stop ejaculating for years to come. Years! Like a human geyser. Just a giant continuous stream of jizz. Please make it happen!

I hope you're just saying that for dramatic effect, and that actually you wouldn't revel in the death of citizens at the hands of government.

Does anyone remember when people used to respect the right for people to vote how they like without fear of being labelled and argued at?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BananaStand

Aren't you at least a little curious how a supposedly credible and independent media giant can become so corrupt?

---

They've always had their own agenda. Every mind has bias. If they duped anyone into believing otherwise, that's on the duped to figure out, not me.
It's not news that power corrupts. If the people watching the news aren't doing any of their own research to corroborate the news, and they believe the news like it's facts disseminated from an unbiased source, then lol obv. the news agencies have been given immense power by that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BananaStand

I mean, they didn't used to be so overtly biased and manipulative. There was a time when ethics mattered.

---

When was that, again?
the 90's? No.
80's? No.
70's? No.
60's? No.
etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BananaStand

We're not in that time anymore. Doesn't that trigger your scientific mind to ask "why"?

---

No. Accepting that power corrupts and noting that ignorance and laziness has ceded disproportionate power to certain agencies is enough explanation to me.
I don't see any point in presuming that the most likely answer is not the actual answer in this case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BananaStand

Maybe something happened. And maybe when it did someone asked what the fuck happened. And then that someone was told "don't be sensational, nothing will come of this"

And now here we are.

---

Maybe when there are consequences which are unjust we can continue this topic. Until then, there are myriad dipshit voices in the media proclaiming all sorts of nonsense, and I'm happy to ignore all of them as inconsequential noise until proven otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oskar

Hey guy. Guys... Can you do me a favor. When the deep state eventually gets Trump,

---

You're rooting for corrupt government operators to subvert democracy?

Quote:

---

please put your first amendment right to the test.

---

Too late. You can't even say cunt these days.

Quote:

---

This might sound selfish,...

---

Not in the least. Democratic socialism recognizes the need to be inclusive and accommodating to all races, ethnicities, religions, sexualities, and genders.....including auto-sexuals like yourself.

FUCK. Didn't get my amendments straight. Guess my low iq foils me again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

I hope you're just saying that for dramatic effect, and that actually you wouldn't revel in the death of citizens at the hands of government.

Does anyone remember when people used to respect the right for people to vote how they like without fear of being labelled and argued at?

---

No, I want to be very clear here. I would get sexual pleasure from watching brainwashed trumples explode into pink mist. Ideally I want there to be missile POV footage like they had in the gulf war. I'm sure they could do that shit in HD now so we can see their blank faces looking up in confusion.

I wanna see HD footage of Trump ordering Pence to shoot him in the head in the WH bunker while tweeting some rambling nonsense about how it was all Don Jr.'s idea as Mueller and the Feds surround the place.

To be fair Oskar, I got a semi reading that. If you were a chick posting that stuff, I'd need tissue.

Seriously though, people accuse Trump of "spreading hatred", when it's the accusers who are doing just that.

I mean, the strongest stuff banana posts in terms of violence is stuff about teeth when he's accused of being a racist, not die a horrible death for voting for a particular person.

I'd like to be clear about what I have sexual fanatsies about. Japanese lesbians, with nice hairy pussies. Not too hairy, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey

They've always had their own agenda.

---

You really have to be smarter than this. When the media consisted of just basically 3 TV networks and local newspapers, the agenda was to get people watching and sell ads. They did that by giving people what they wanted. Back then, people wanted the news. So the agenda was to given them the news. Now, people want to be stroked inside of an echo chamber. So, the agenda is bring them inside an echo chamber and stroke them.

Equating the two by saying "they've always had their own agenda" is ostrich-ism at it's worst. The methodology matters.

Quote:

---

Every mind has bias, If they duped anyone into believing otherwise, that's on the duped to figure out, not me.

---

So? Feeding that bias, and manipulating it for your own profit-motivated purposes, and disguising it as journalism is completely unethical. You seem to be saying that there should be no consequence for that because the victims aren't smart enough to figure it out. By your logic Bernie Madoff is totally fine, right? People who invested money with him should have been smarter right?

Quote:

---

It's not news that power corrupts. If the people watching the news aren't doing any of their own research to corroborate the news, and they believe the news like it's facts disseminated from an unbiased source, then lol obv. the news agencies have been given immense power by that.

---

Was that power given willingly? Why do you seem to believe that it's ok to abuse that power?

Do the students you teach independently corroborate everything in your curriculum before accepting your lessons as being accurate? Or do they extend a certain degree of trust because of your position and your credentials? What should happen if you violate that trust.

Quote:

---

When was that, again?

---

Before we invaded Iraq. That seems to be the moment when the liberal media snapped.

Quote:

---

No. Accepting that power corrupts and noting that ignorance and laziness has ceded disproportionate power to certain agencies is enough explanation to me.

---

Ok. That's enough explanation for me too. But now what? Does the ignorance and laziness bother you? Can anything be done about it? Does corruption bother you? Can anything be done about it?

It's like you recognize the problem, but your solution is "fuck it, just let it get worse until it's bad enough for me to care, and I'll deal with it then". LOL That's like saying "I'm not gonna brush my teeth, because they don't hurt". How do you feel about people who say "Just forget climate change for now, keep polluting as much as you want until the problem gets bad enough to affect me personally"

Quote:

---

Maybe when there are consequences which are unjust we can continue this topic. Until then, there are myriad dipshit voices in the media proclaiming all sorts of nonsense, and I'm happy to ignore all of them as inconsequential noise until proven otherwise.

---

What kind of unjust consequences might those be? Like ...oh...maybe....the opening of a special prosecutor investigation into a President elect?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

Seriously though, people accuse Trump of "spreading hatred", when it's the accusers who are doing just that.

I mean, the strongest stuff banana posts in terms of violence is stuff about teeth when he's accused of being a racist, not die a horrible death for voting for a particular person.

I'd like to be clear about what I have sexual fanatsies about. Japanese lesbians, with nice hairy pussies. Not too hairy, though.

---

If you go back, I think you can see that I tried civility for about a year straight and I made a conscious decision to just start hurling insults about 3 pages back because I really don't want to give the wrong impression that I have any sort of warm feelings about autocracies or the people who support them. I think wuf is an utter dunce who feels like he ate a smart pill and spouts the most inane nothing-statements in the most flowery language possible in an attempt to make himself sound smart. Banana has based all his arguments on the same three logical fallacies for as long as I can remember, and I honestly don't know what horse you think you're riding on. Is that an expression? It should be.

Trump is absolutely spreading hatred and inciting violence. There are numerous examples

Anyone supporting this obese retard can eat a giant dick for all I care.

https://youtu.be/oETJvp6js9Y?t=2m26s

What the Van Jones guy said after the clip.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oskar

...and I honestly don't know what horse you think you're riding on. Is that an expression? It should be.

---

I walk a fine line between trolling and talking bollocks.

Quote:

---

...because I really don't want to give the wrong impression that I have any sort of warm feelings about autocracies or the people who support them

---

Fair enough. But how is this any different to me not having any warm feelings for people who support female genital mutilation?

Why is it ok for you to hate on an entire group of people, simply catagorised by their political and economic persuasion, while it's not ok for me to hate on an entire batshit religion?

Quote:

---

Trump is absolutely spreading hatred and inciting violence. There are numerous examples

---

But YOUR POSTS are quite literally "spreading hatred".

I mean, imagine if I were moaning at someone for smoking weed.

@nanners:
Keep it on topic. This isn't really about the fact that American news agencies are in the entertainment business, not the education business.
It's about 1 puff piece that you took seriously.

There's nothing in that puff piece that I find remotely believable, and I find it odd that someone whom is already opposed to CNN as a biased source suddenly treating a CNN puff piece like it's foretelling the future.

All I'm saying is maybe lay off the coffee, 'cause this is not going to amount to anything.


As for the side-track:
There's tons of corruption in this world. I do not have the social faculties to do anything about that. I'm simply terrible at trying to navigate large groups of people. I lack any ability to see into a deep social morass and find anything to latch onto which could help direct people toward being less fucking led by the nose. I'm not the one to help, here.

If playing with toys and showing physical phenomena to people will help them fight corruption, then I'm your guy. Otherwise, I'll let other people whom are good at that stuff do what they're good at.
I'll keep doing what I'm good at.
and the world will get along.

Just because I see why corruption exists doesn't mean I'm in favor of it. Just because I lack the skills to combat corruption doesn't mean I want people to be fucked over by the corrupt. All I can do, personally, is to try to keep myself aware of corruption and bias and to be vigilant against being manipulated by people whom don't have my best interests in mind.

As for me as an educator: I don't ever make an appeal to authority, since my position is to literally put something in front of a skeptical student and show them what's happening. I give them observations and I tell them what the current understanding in physics has to say about predicting the outcome of an experiment. I challenge them to find another solution which makes the same predictions, but which is simpler or which calls on different parameters to make that prediction. I am not a lecturer. My role is to literally put science in their lives, and avoid appeal to the authority of the textbook's author or their lecturer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey

This isn't really about the fact that American news agencies are in the entertainment business, not the education business.

---

Actually, that's exactly what it is about.

Quote:

---

It's about 1 puff piece that you took seriously.

---

Just one? Go through the links I've posted in just, say, the last two weeks. How many of these do there need to be before they stop being "puff pieces" and start becoming mainstream ideas. The most alarming thing about this piece is how 'ordinary' it is.

I'll admit though, the one where the NY times said "New Hampshire is too white" has me still heavily tilted more than a week later.

Check out Vox today. they're SO deranged over Trump's immigration policies that they actually produced a video saying that Trump gave us all the wrong idea about MS-13. They're not a violent drug cartel....they're kids with part time jobs who ride bikes! I'm not kidding. It's on Vox.com right fucking now.

Quote:

---

All I'm saying is maybe lay off the coffee, 'cause this is not going to amount to anything.

---

Honestly man...how much weed do you have to smoke to be this chill? How do you not see the increasing violence and tribalism in this country. It's a powder keg ready to burst. Now I live in a place that the NY times calls "too white", so chances are I won't be caught at ground-zero when the idealogues finally start a legit civil war. But you.....you live in St. Fucking Louis.

Unless you have several guns, a few thousand rounds of ammo, and six months of food and water stocked in your basement....you're stupid.

Quote:

---

There's tons of corruption in this world. I do not have the social faculties to do anything about that.

---

Wrong

Quote:

---

I'm simply terrible at trying to navigate large groups of people. I lack any ability to see into a deep social morass and find anything to latch onto which could help direct people toward being less fucking led by the nose. I'm not the one to help, here.

---

You're ignoring the line between setting a simple example and blending into the background noise. You don't have to be a vocal leader or activist for change. Just stay on the right side of that line.

Quote:

---

I'll let other people whom are good at [fighting corruption] do what they're good at.

---

That's supposed to be CNN!

Quote:

---

Just because I lack the skills to combat corruption doesn't mean I want people to be fucked over by the corrupt. All I can do, personally, is to try to keep myself aware of corruption and bias and to be vigilant against being manipulated

---

You're not giving yourself enough credit here. All banter aside, everyone in this forum (except maybe Jack) has an IQ that is well above average. Well above. Most people CAN'T "be vigilant against being manipulated". Most people are barely smart enough to read.

I know you guys like to rail on me for being stubborn, but this is one area I can honestly say my worldview has matured. For me, life hasn't been particularly hard. School was easy, so I got into college, that was easy too. I got a job in my field. I showed up on time. I did what I was asked to do. And life turned out pretty good. So for 30+ years, I just figured "Well look where I am, and it was easy. It's not difficult to be me. So fuck anyone who's struggling more than I am"

But the reality is there is a HUUUUUUGE chunk of society that is downright stupid. . They can't think critically. They can't articulate their ideas well enough to form coherent thoughts. They literally lack the cognitive ability to follow a fucking recipe. And something has to be done to protect these people from those that would take advantage of their naivete.

It's fine for you and I to expect each other to filter out the noise. But we're WAAAAAAAAY smarter than the average person. You're asking far too much from people if you expect them sort out fact from fiction themselves.

Quote:

---

As for me as an educator: I don't ever make an appeal to authority,

---

Who are you trying to convince here? Me? or you? Your whole job is an appeal to authority. Do you stand at the front of the class? Do your students call you "Mr./Prof. Monkey"? Do the students know that it will be YOU evaluating their performance and determining their level of success in class?

Quote:

---

I give them observations and I tell them what the current understanding in physics has to say about predicting the outcome of an experiment.

---

And what if you happen to misrepresent the current understanding in physics? What's the accountability there?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

But YOUR POSTS are quite literally "spreading hatred".

I mean, imagine if I were moaning at someone for smoking weed.

---

Your trolling needs to be less transparent to be effective really.

A guy talking to six other guys on an internet forum, none of whom hold him up as any kind of authority (no offence Oskar) is hardly "spreading hatred". A guy who 1/3 of a country thinks is a hero has a lot more influence ldo.

The issue I think is more that Trump reflects, not incites, the kind of racist bigotry that's common in the U.S. Not everyone, and God forbid not banana, that paragon of human kindness and understanding, but enough people that it gives him support.

The problem is that by giving them a sympathetic authority figure he's also encouraging them to act on their dipshit views. Hence, Charlottesville, hence kidnapping brown children at the border, etc. etc.

It's the people who turn a blind eye to that, who say MAGA, witch hunt, Hillary, the stock market, he's just blowing off steam, it's their own fault, blah blah blah, who are the real turds. They're basically enabling a racist leader.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OngBonga

I walk a fine line between trolling and talking bollocks.



Fair enough. But how is this any different to me not having any warm feeling for people who support femal genital mutaliation?

Why is it ok for you to hate on an entire group of people, simply catagorised by their political and economic persuasion, while it's not ok for me to hate on an entire batshit religion?

---

You're trying to put me in a box. I believe I'm on record saying something along the lines of: if you made every syrian refugee draw a picture of mohammed getting boned in the ass, that would make for a supremely effective vetting system. (obvious hyperbolic theoretical, if you cry hypocracy at this, you're an idiot) I hate theocrats and I hate islam, but I don't hate muslims and that's an important destinction. Immigration should be merrit based. Turning back all muslims is not a merrit based system. Everyone should have a right to a fair hearing. Blackmailing people into giving up their right to asylum by threatening to steal their children is not that.

I have very clearly said, even if I got the amendments wrong: Those who believe they can fight back a tyrannical government, and who have used this as an argument against any type of gun reform every time there's a school shooting - if they could put that to the test when they feel Trump has been toppled by the deep state, I would be absolutely delighted to see them blown to bits.

I'm going to just drop the rest of this, because you can't seem to understand that I'm not talking about anything other than your reaction to a single puff piece.
You may want to talk about some greater ghost of lost ethics, but look at the history of political discourse in America and tell me where in the past 200 years things were different. There's 2 sides, roughly evenly divided and they're both full of overreacting howler monkeys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BananaStand

Who are you trying to convince here? Me? or you?

---

Lol. You're the one who keeps insisting I'm a lecturing professor. I'm not. I'm the Physics Demonstration Technician.
I put physical demonstrations in the classroom, tell the faculty lecturer how to operate it and I walk away.

The interactions I have with students are when they approach me after a lecture and ask me to clarify the demonstration.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BananaStand

Your whole job is an appeal to authority.

---

No. My job is to put physical apparatus in the classroom so that the students can make their own observations for the exact reason that otherwise the lecture is nothing but an appeal to authority. The presence of the demonstrations gives them their own observations, so that they don't have to trust anyone but themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BananaStand

Do you stand at the front of the class?

---

As they file into and out of the lecture hall, yes, I am standing behind the demos, ready to answer questions or explain the setup. If it's after their lecture, I invite them to play with the demo themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BananaStand

Do your students call you "Mr./Prof. Monkey"?

---

No, they call me Sean.
If they try to call me Mr. or Dr., I make a lame joke that I'm scared that my dad has snuck up behind me.
Besides, I'm not Dr. anything, so just Sean is best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BananaStand

Do the students know that it will be YOU evaluating their performance and determining their level of success in class?

---

Quite the opposite. They know that I have literally nothing to do with their grade in the course.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BananaStand

And what if you happen to misrepresent the current understanding in physics? What's the accountability there?

---

Then I apologize and correct myself. This is science. There's always room to say "oops."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey

This is science. There's always room to say "oops."

---

These will be humanity's final words.

MAGA

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45139071

@MMM I guess I stand completely corrected. I really thought you had a better job

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BananaStand

@MMM I guess I stand completely corrected. I really thought you had a better job

---

You're going full trainwreck again.
You criticized me as making an appeal to authority as though that's some problem with the entire world's education structure, and when you find out that I actually do the opposite, you can't even be a man about it. You gotta try and take a dig at me.

My job:
I play with toys all day. Some of those toys are lasers and tesla coils, and a thing that blows apart an empty soda can in 0.002 seconds without actually touching it. I'm surrounded by literal geniuses whom love what I love and are awesome at it. I get to make toys that put smiles on their faces, and making a good person smile is something I just can't get enough of. I get to interact with a cross section of young adults from all over the world whom never knew anyone could have so much fun doing science as I do, and I share with them my passion and curiosity and willingness to explore a question with toys. Which opens them up to be passionate about the scientific process as so much more than dry words on a page. I show them how a single raindrop contributes one tiny, tiny part of a rainbow, and that it takes millions, billions of drops to make the rainbow they see. I put smiles on their faces.

My job is so kickass and fun, when people see me do my job, they smile and want in.
You wish with you had my career satisfaction.

Mojo probably has the best job out of everyone left here.

Quote:

---

I'm proud to be an American more and more every day, when Trump got elected I really thought that'd be my proudest moment.....but Q-Team's constant beast mode domination of the cabal makes me so thrilled to have survived the Obama years. To be clear as a person with severe Bipolar Depression who spent 7 of the 8 Obama years is psychiatric hospitals because I was hopeless for myself, my family & this country, Trump was the gift that allowed me to bring myself back to greatness and even become happy/healthy enough to get married. So watching Q-Team essentially shoot these fish as though they were in a barrel, I live for this type of American greatness on display. I love when Q-Team is loud and proud about how easily they can dismantle this stupid operation being run by SICK STUPID people.....if you can really call them that, to me they are SUB-human.

---

https://np.reddit.com/r/greatawakeni...tupid/e3z0ybj/

Sometimes I wonder if it is ingrained in me to never fall in line with vast empires that drown information channels with what they tell me I should believe.

#MAGA

#AltFacts

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nK3YcHYObHU

What's that now??? A Fox News pushing for the truth, even if it's Anti-Trump?

Weren't they supposed to be irredeemably biased? Weren't they supposed to be sucking Trump's dick all day long? Werent' they supposed to be the mouthpiece for the idiot Trumpers?

The world is made up of two different kinds of people: those who get their opinions from what they consume, and those who get their opinions from what they consume.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BananaStand

What's that now??? A Fox News pushing for the truth, even if it's Anti-Trump?

Weren't they supposed to be irredeemably biased? Weren't they supposed to be sucking Trump's dick all day long? Werent' they supposed to be the mouthpiece for the idiot Trumpers?

---

Even broken clocks tell the correct time twice a day

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wufwugy

The world is made up of two different kinds of people: those who get their opinions from what they consume, and those who get their opinions from what they consume.

---

I get my opinion from what I eat.

He's getting good at this:

https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net...70&oe=5BEF7E76

https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net...1c&oe=5BF1D651

https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net...98&oe=5BFFA4B9

Perhaps someday it will not be necessary to have the ability to defend yourself against lethal force. To think today is that day is foolish.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DlFCNDZU0AAqp66.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YD_LUqr5M-A
Here's synthol man with the well known fact that liberals use babies for firewood as an example of how truth isn't truth.

Want a better example?

Michael Flynn discussed sanctions with the Russian ambassador and then later told the FBI that he didn't.

The recordings show that they did indeed bring up the subject of sanctions. They spoke for maybe two thirds of a second on the topic. No specific action was taken. No recommendations were made. No advice was given. No requests were made. No negotiations took place. The conversation amounted to nothing more than a mutual acknowledgement that sanctions exist. The conversation was so innocuous that any reasonable person might immediately forget that it even took place. That's especially true if that person is charged with the multitude of responsibilities that come with being an incoming National Security Advisor.

Furthermore, anyone in that position would know, definitively, that telephone conversations with foreign agents are being recorded. There is ZERO chance that Flynn could reasonably believe that he could get away with lying.

FBI agents who took his statements are on record saying that they do not believe that Flynn was being deceitful. They believe that the most likely explanation for Flynn's contradicting statements is forgetfulness related to the insignificance of the conversation. Again, they are on record saying this.

Flynn's potential legal fees to effectively defend himself against this allegation far surpass his ability to pay.

Flynn's son was in some kind of legal trouble at the time. I don't remember exactly what it was, but it was bad. And after Flynn's guilty plea, suddenly his son is totally fine.

The statement "Flynn gave false statements to the FBI while under oath" is true. But it's not the truth

Do you get it now? Or do we have to do Popadopoulous next? Mueller is 2 for 2 in this game. Why in the world do you think Trump would ever consider an interview?

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...right-peterson

What's wrong Ezra? No one likes your stupid website anymore and now you're bitter huh?

Kanye pushing too many pencils at the CIA confirmed

https://i.redd.it/47qelchy5mr11.jpg