Nancy Pelosi is a felon.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Beaconator, Feb 7, 2020.

  1. Vociferous Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,095
    Why do ignorant foreigners insist on proving their ignorance by opining on things of which they demonstrable have no clue? Just proves how important the US is, I guess. The tide is shifting. Better learn the right people to suck up to.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,102
    Is that what you actually believe, that we should be sucking up to you? Good thing forum rules doesn't allow me to tell you what I really think about that.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,102
    That would be the evidence, along with witnesses that were never allowed to be presented because corrupt Republican Senators (except Romney) broke their oaths and voted not to allow them to be heard.

    Yes, you demonstrated that in spades.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    29,977
    Thereby revealing the nature of those supposedly "independent" and "undecided" votes - as always before, they are just Republican base voters - self proclaimed adults who don't want to be accountable for their past, present, or future behavior.

    Can't blame them - it was, is, and will be, shameful and embarrassing stuff.

    But if Nancy's fellow Democrats have not yet learned to write them off rather than attempt pandering to them, the country will suffer again for such ludicrous pretense.
     
  8. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,469
    You are talking about her, and her name is all over. She won this round.
    You just named her again. She won.
    Yes. Trump supporters posted an altered version of the video showing her ripping up the speech while Trump was honoring those people. And there are plenty of Trump supporters gullible enough - and stupid enough - to believe that that's reality.

    Remember, there is a reason that Trump loves the poorly educated.
    See above; stupid and gullible.
    And Pelosi was never even charged to begin with.
     
  9. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,150
    Do you remember, several years ago, (Q), arguing to define religion as mere belief in God? The same stupid standards by which you got to tromp about in uneducated, antireligious bigotry persist to promote Vociferous' manner of ignorance and bad behavior.

    The underlying problem is that some "political views", such as we might describe them, are really hard to advocate in any responsible manner, so we're now expected to pander to those as if those advocates were vulnerable, subject people. I mean, you've been around long enough to remember when we described this place, in the browser title, even, as, "Intelligent Community"; that motto went away precisely in order to accommodate irrational prejudice and indefensible politics. The idea, apparently, was that if you didn't let people lie through their teeth in order to disrupt any discussion under the sun, you are somehow stifling political views. I used to joke that free speech doesn't mean the words have no value; around here, I've clearly lost that argument.

    But, yes, it's not entirely unlike when you needed to falsely simplify the definition of religion in order to make your argument. When people have to put aside actual intelligent discussion in order to accommodate such particular needs, those subjects and lost discussions aren't counted among the tragically silenced. That is, worry about silencing political views isn't universal, but applied to an unenumerated range of subjects apparently according to personal sentiment.

    Much like this. As I understand it, if we try to oblige Vociferous to start making sense, site administration considers that a silencing of political views.

    Think about it, though. From "intelligent community", to this. In order to protect unenumerated political views, Sciforums has come to prefer make-believe to actual facts and evidence. And since actually intelligent people tire of perpetually catering to immature insincerity, very few have stuck around over the years. In the name of free speech, we chased away the intelligent community.

    Thank you for your contribution.

    These years later, though, yeah, this is what it comes to. Get used to it.

    When it comes to what our neighbor actually believes, it doesn't actually matter, because we apparently set aside any pretense of intelligent community, obligation to good faith, and our alleged longstanding respect for the scientific method; what you see around here is the result. Some potshered says something stupid, occasionally even pushing to insult, and a bunch of people crash on the behavior, and then we do it all over again.

    I would love to say there's a simple explanation, but that also depends on the audience. The whipping-boy attitude about it all was actually intended to accommodate people like you. This sort of easy rhythm, barely lifting a finger to crash on whoever wants to humiliate themselves in the moment, is its actual purpose.

    Still, in Vociferous' case, reasonable attendance of his arguments will communicate a reservation of beliefs; we might, over time, collect enough data points to describe the shape of what is withheld, but most of what he does is make weird rhetorical demands from a position of apparent blithering ignorance.

    Forum rules? As far as forum rules are concerned, you're pandering to an audience of one, standards of rational discourse are in and of themselves anathema, and good faith is apparently some manner of political view that must necessarily be guarded against like an enemy. If you have the correct political outlook, the administration will throw down hard on your behalf, even making believe in order to ensure you can advocate crimes without having to put too much effort into it. Seriously: Some things are hard to argue rationally, but if those needs fall within a particular range corresponding to sentiment, sure, we'll apparently even redefine words for you.

    Don't bother appealing to the forum rules, like that. I mean, sure, staff will occasionally invoke the rules, in some way, when they feel moved to act, but the forum rules were somehow problematic, and instead of changing them to say what whoever really wants them to say, we've left them in place and not so much abandoned them as turned against them. And the joke is that it's over five years later, and we've never found out what these mysterious, endangered "political views" we're supposed to fret for actually are. (Spoiler alert: With enough data points, the shape of what is absent can sufficiently resolve.)

    The way of things around here is actually intended to your benefit, among others, and performances like our neighbor puts on are apparent symptoms the rest of us are intended to endure along the way, the price of attending the former Intelligent Community.

    Beyond that, the explanation becomes a complicated mess orbiting strangely particular priorities. There isn't really any pretty description.

    A lot changed while you were away, except not really.

    In dealing with Vociferous, try this approximate model: Someone who twitches with what appears to be a strange envy moving him to constantly overstate himself in search of quick-fix emotional gratification, but doesn't seem to have the chops to stand the line. His behavior is what it is, so that model will eventually fail; or, at least, I would hope it eventually fails, as such blithe summaries really ought to be inherently flawed just as a principle of the Universe. But that's the thing. I razz him, frequently, about a litany of puffery that just never works out for him. Like misusing fallacy names; or botching basic distinctions such as the law itself compared to means of enforcement, or the difference between commentary and reportage; and at one point he even getting snotty about the custom of s-apostrophe as singular possessive, and got it precisely wrong. The present example↑, about, "ignorant foreigners", who, "insist on proving their ignorance by opining on things of which they demonstrable have no clue", seems nearly reflective of heat he's taken on a regular basis for opining in such a manner as to demonstrate his own cluelessness.

    He's been that way pretty much the whole time. Often, you'll find yourself wondering where to start. It's kind of like, 「Can you tell me where it hurts?」 and the answer is, apparently, "Uranus". At that point, there is very little anyone can do to help, aside from holler when the probe is ready to go, and even then, it's a long journey before we can even begin analyzing data toward our answer. Nor, in this illustration, is it clear that he understands the double entendre; rather, someone, somewhere in his life, said something funny about Uranus and now he can't help himself.

    And, yeah, if that is enough to rile you to the edge of decorum, well, this is Sciforums, where my constant reminding Vociferous about his clownish errors apparently doesn't count as criticism.

    No, really, somebody actually said that, recently, complaining, "Why do you spend your time criticising me instead?" after wagging that nobody prevents me from engaging with Vociferous on my own terms. And, really, at that point, what does one do with such alternate realities?

    It's the Sciforums adventure, a lot like you left it, only more so.

    Welcome home, (Q).
     
  10. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,469
    THERE'S the arrogant, xenophobic attitude Trump supporters are known for! Congratulations for getting back into the politically correct groove. Now just don't screw it up and start in with science again.
     
  11. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,102
    Sciforums is nothing of what I left it, hardly anyone posts here anymore and considering the number of folks who openly complain about you, I clearly had nothing to do with that exodus, especially considering that when I left here, this place was bustling with people. Sorry pal, you can take your pathetic childish insults and rants and shove them. I'm not again going to let you goad me into following you down your rat holes.

    That's all this was T, you wanting to have another go at it, you want to initiate another brawl, just like you did before. Not buying it this time.
     
  12. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,099
    and left a world populated by those ignorant of their lack of intelligence. Such a waste of time...
    Sadly what you say is observably true.

    As demonstrated in the Trump Administration. Ruled by someone who has undying faith in his own supreme intelligence while mis-spelling his own title of Precident in an official document.
    So why do you think the the USA has fallen to this level of false intellectual vanity?
    How is it that a 4th grade primary school scholar can claim to be and act as a "stable genius" and get a way with it?
    Inteligence with out emotional, moral, maturity is not only useless, it is dangerous.
    How does the current sciforums reflect this insanity?
    To me this fora is demonstrating a good reflection of what appears to be happening in the USA today.
    Seriously, if you take the time you can see tremendous parallels.

    Essentially it leaves you with the big question...
    What the hell is wrong with people?
     
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2020
  13. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,150
    Well, the downward road is trodden. Don't get me started on the downward spiral.

    A fundamental currency of neurotic exchange is, empowerment. That's where it starts. While most of the rest seems psychomorally relativistic, what is wrong with people has to do with the manners of empowerment they trade in. Where this gets really, really complicated is identifying everything that means; it isn't an effectively infinite range, but variations are myriad.
     
    Quantum Quack likes this.
  14. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,099
    hmmm... giving people a voice when they would not ordinarily have one comes to mind...
    Perhaps the phenomena of social media, the Facebook, Twitter etc has provided such empowerment? ( Empowerment being the currency as you suggested?)
    "Hey, I am smart enough to say what's on my mind and you can't stop me" sort of attitude....Perhaps not being so much about freedom of speech but more about the ability to speak ( to an audience )?

    If you watch and listen to this recent video of Trump.
    you can see that his social media use is fundamental to his position.

    "Social media to me, is very important because I get a voice". Trump.

    The question:
    How would Trump fare if he had no social media access and explain why?
    It is actually both a simple and hard question simultaneously IMO.
     
    Last edited: Feb 20, 2020
  15. CptBork Robbing the Shalebridge Cradle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,114
    Are you 13 years old or something? You have it all backwards. The US is losing influence because of people like you and is causing great concern to foreigners who don't want to see retarded tyrannical dictatorships filling the void. We don't want to be sucking up to Russia and China, we'd rather build on the status quo so that more people gradually get to have a voice rather than less.
     
  16. CptBork Robbing the Shalebridge Cradle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,114
    I personally wish the rules were more strict about honesty, consistency of opinion, refraining from promoting blatant propaganda, and having to provide meaningful justifications for one's opinions. Claiming that some behaviour is or isn't constitutional should be matched with at least basic details of what the specific behaviour is and what the US Constitution specifically says about said behaviour. I'll readily admit that I haven't always contributed to positive decorum in my manner of addressing certain other posters on certain topics, but it comes out of a sense that no other method of argument will actually get through to them or any of their followers and have any kind of impact on them as long as the site is willing to tolerate anyone stirring up shit as they please. Blocking Schmelzer's Kremlin propaganda blogging was a great start, if more actions like that are taken to promote and demand basic honesty and intelligent conversation, we'll see less bigots coming here and treating the place like a wrastling arena.
     
    Last edited: Feb 20, 2020
  17. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,099
    yeah... he often talks about the gains Trump may or may not have generated but fails to consider the incredible losses involved in Trumps and his administrations behavior.
    Why does he not consider these things I wonder?
    Trillions of dollars worth of good will down the toilet. Strategic interests destroyed ( ie. Philippines) and that is just for starters...
    It is hard to fathom how someone can ignore the losses so easily...
     
  18. CptBork Robbing the Shalebridge Cradle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,114
    I mean he's building bridges too, but it's with guys who fall in love with Lindsay Lohan while doing cocaine in the bathroom with her and then order journalists to be sliced to pieces in foreign embassies.
     
  19. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,279
    The world thinks your dear leader is an ignorant and uneducated buffoon...

    He is openly mocked by world leaders for being a moron and a complete twat.

    Ya, the tide has turned. Now your country is just the crazy uncle the adults usually try to shift to the kid's table so that the adults can eat and talk in peace without the added distraction of having to explain the basics yet again to said crazy uncle, because crazy uncle is an ignorant and uneducated buffoon.
     
    Quantum Quack likes this.
  20. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,090
    i mean he made boris johnson look good how do be that crappy.
     
  21. Vociferous Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,095
    Even Democrats have said it was a bad move. Talking about one thing is not as equally good as talking about another. Otherwise talking about Charles Manson would be just as positive as talking about Mother Teresa.

    So, Bloody Mary rules? Say her name enough and she just wins, regardless of context?

    And everyone knew that was edited for effect. The only gullible ones are those you believe otherwise. So gullible that you don't think other humans are just as capable of recognizing clearly edited videos as anyone else.

    Remember, the polls and media didn't think Trump would win.

    Charged for what? I already said she didn't commit a felony.
     
  22. Vociferous Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,095
    Nope, just repeatedly demonstrable fact.
     
  23. Vociferous Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,095
    The US is a booming economy, leading the prosperity of the world.


    Yet Labor in the UK just suffered a historic loss, and Democrats here are worried about losing the House, much less winning the Presidency.


    Wow, you really sound miffed that you can't just blithely silence people who disagree with you, like a fascist.

    It's nice that you think you've corrected me. I'm sure that goes a long way to help with your daily affirmations.
    But you can rest easy, knowing that you inhabit parts of the internet that wrap your ignorance in a blanket of consensus. Where you can readily substitute your own partisan bubble for reality and have many people pat you on the head for it.

    If anyone sounds "razzed" it's you. All this about little ol' me. This can't be healthy. Let it go.
     

Share This Page