[zk]

[quote=SK in CV]
The solution is not for negroes to be quiet about it, as you may wish.[/quote]

A couple of excellent posts, SK. Your use of “negroes” there was a great touch that made me laugh.

[zk]

[quote=livinincali]

The political rhetoric always gets bad before an election. [/quote]

The political rhetoric spewed by the right-wing noise machine has been non-stop since before Obama even took office. Rush Limbaugh hilariously called the recession The “Obama recession” in November (or December) of 2008, before Obama even took office. The rw noise machine has been saying Obama hates America for 7 years. They’ve been saying he’s a Muslim, a Kenyan, a socialist, etc. for 7 continuous years. This rhetoric has nothing to do with the election.

[quote=livinincali]
He hasn’t been all that effective at bringing the country together. It’s much more divided now than it was when he was elected.[/quote]

And you honestly think that’s his fault? When the republicans have been more interested in stopping anything he does than in doing their part in governing, and when the right-wing noise machine has been brainwashing millions of people into thinking Obama hates America?

[zk]

dup

[zk]

[quote=livinincali]
I don’t think Obama hates America. I think he’d like to see America become more socialist federally controlled country. [/quote]

Irrelevant to this discussion.

Surely someone here thinks Obama hates America. Most people who get their “news” primarily from the right-wing noise machine seem to be convinced of that, and I know we have some of those here.

I think they’re afraid to admit they think Obama hates America while they’re outside the confines of the right-wing echo chamber, because out here somebody will actually disagree with them and they’ll have to have a reasonable argument.

[zk]

[quote=FlyerInHi]

I don’t know if you feel the same zk, but I’m losing patience with my right wing friends.

They tend to have a Trump like attitude about things. They use lots of sarcasm and “duh, you’re so stupid” type arguments. So, we’re supposed to be the nice intellectual, ivory tower elitists who take it quietly and politely. But when you dish out the same rhetoric, they get all in a tizzy.

ZK, do you feel that you give more in your friendship with that person? Is it an assymetric friendship where you have to be more patient and forgiving?[/quote]

I try to avoid talking politics with my friends. If a right winger brings it up, I try to change the subject. Even if it takes a couple attempts.

This particular friend kept bringing it up. We played golf together regularly, so we’re out there for 4 hours at a time. He never got the hint that I didn’t want to talk about it. So, I gave in and talked about it. I think I was at least appearing to be respectful of his views, and I think I was able to hide what I was really thinking. I was thinking, god, he’s an idiot. Not unintelligent. I know him to be somewhat more intelligent than average. But an idiot nonetheless. Not because he disagreed with me, but because he had nothing to back up his statements/arguments. Some of which were entirely nonsensical, and could only, in my opinion, have been believed by someone as intelligent as him if he was both unskeptical and had been emotionally manipulated. After a few of these (long) conversations, he said, “it’s great that two intelligent guys who disagree can talk politics and not get angry at each other.” And he was right about neither of us being angry (to this point). I wasn’t angry, I just thought he was an idiot. My opinion of him got lower every time we talked about politics. He was unskeptical, irrational, and couldn’t answer basic questions about his opinions. Again, my opinion had nothing to do with whether we agreed on anything.

So one day he posts some nonsensical rwnj stuff on facebook. I private message him on facebook, asking him some basic questions about that post. This time I mentioned that I thought he’d been emotionally manipulated by the right-wing noise machine, and I pointed out why I thought that. He unfriended me on facebook, and we haven’t talked since.

It’s not for fear of losing friends that I don’t talk politics. It’s because 1) what’s the point? and 2) I don’t want to think they’re idiots (and I don’t want them to think I’m an idiot, which, regardless of who’s actually an idiot, they probably will).

[zk]

dup.

A lot of these lately, I know. The mouse on this computer at work (I’m on break) is kinda messed up, and clicks repeatedly with one click. Sorry.

[zk]

[quote=FlyerInHi]Zk, the reason Obama is deliberately hurting the country is because he’s Muslim and hates America.

The right wing has 2 narratives. 1) Obama is an incompetent idiot. 2) Obama knows exactly what he’s doing.

However, if he’s incompetent, he cannot know exactly.[/quote]

Thanks, Brian, but I want to hear from somebody who believes it. And “Obama hates America” isn’t enough, I want to know what they think is the reason he hates America.

“Because he’s a muslim” doesn’t really fly, either. Most muslims don’t hate America. I’d say only a very small percentage of them do. And I want to ask a believer (among many other questions) questions about their belief that he’s a muslim.

paramount? Anyone?

[zk]

[quote=paramount]
The American Spring is different than the Arab Spring.

The American Spring is America embracing anti-establishment candidates.
[/quote]

Fair enough. I couldn’t find anything on your version of American Spring when I googled it. All I really found was this, so this is what I thought you were talking about:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-zombeck/operation-american-spring_b_5345686.html

[quote=paramount]
Thoughtful Americans are sick and tired of the establishment.

[/quote]

Thoughtful Americans? Hmm.

“Thoughtful Americans for Trump”

That would be a good motto for his campaign. It really captures his style and that of his followers. And, bonus, for his followers, it could be a code word/dog whistle. Thoughtful=white.

[zk]

[quote=utcsox]
Last month, when CNN asked Rubio’s spokesman Alex Conant whether the senator believes Obama is “intentionally trying to destroy the country,” Conant said “absolutely.”

[/quote]

I had a friend who listened to fox news and read the blaze and pretty much had been thoroughly manipulated by the right-wing noise machine. He mentioned that he thought Obama was deliberately hurting the country. It’s a common theme in the right-wing echo chamber. They really do believe it. I asked my friend what he thought Obama’s motivation to hurt the country was. That extremely simple and obvious question stumped him. He hadn’t thought about it (surprise!).

I have yet to hear what right wingers think Obama’s motivation for destroying the country would be. Even when I google it, I get a bunch of right-wing noise machine websites saying “here’s proof Obama is purposely destroying America,” but I get nothing on “why.”

The proof that he’s destroying America is all nonsense, of course, but I can see how somebody not very skeptical would fall for it. What I don’t understand is how they can get all those people to fall for the idea of him doing it on purpose without even providing at least some semi-plausible reason why Obama would want to do that. You apparently don’t have to answer such obvious questions if you’re really good at emotional manipulation.

If anybody reading this thinks Obama is deliberately destroying our country, I’d really be interested to hear what you think his motivation for that would be. I’m hoping to hear something reasonable, because I hate to think that such a large a segment of our population is so unquestioning that they could be so easily made to believe something so far-fetched, and with no explanation of why, even.

[zk]

[quote=paramount]American Spring. It’s here.[/quote]

Correct me where I’m wrong, here, paramount:

“American Spring” would be an uprising where patriots overthrow the fascist American government.

You prefer Trump to Obama, and you think Obama is more of a fascist than Trump would be.

Is that all correct?

Is this “American Spring” going to be like the one in 2014 where the “organizers” expected somewhere between 10 million and 30 million patriots but instead somewhere between 10 and 30 patriots showed up? This is the kind of thing I try to save my exclamation points for: Off by a factor of a million! In my 54 years, I don’t think I’ve ever heard of anyone being off by a factor of a million on anything. That’s really quite amazing. And it shows how detached from reality the whole idea really is.

[zk]

[quote=paramount]Oil has been up sharply – looks like we’re being punished for Trump’s surge.[/quote]

I’d be fascinated to hear what you mean by that – why you think it’s due to Trump’s surge and why it’s “punishment.”

[zk]

dup

[zk]

[quote=paramount][quote=zk][quote=paramount]The Chicago jails should be a full house tonight with disruptive Trump protesters.

At least I would hope so…[/quote]

So far all the violence I’ve seen has been perpetrated by Trump supporters, not protesters. Why would the jails be full of protesters?[/quote]

Oh, that’s just because you were watching CNN.

[/quote]

Not sure what difference it makes what channel on which I saw video of Trump supporters assaulting Trump protesters without provocation (unless you call asserting their first amendment rights provocation). Unless you’re saying CNN faked the videos. Are you saying CNN faked the videos?

If you have links to videos that clearly show Trump protesters instigating violence without provocation, by all means show them to us. Show us links to videos that show enough Trump protesters initiating violence that they would fill the Chicago jails.

[quote=paramount]
The socialist progressives and their victims were the ones that were actually breaking the law.[/quote]

First off, not all Trump protesters are “socialist progressives.” Most of them are probably protesting Trump because he’s a racist, misogynist fool.

Second, what laws were the protesters breaking?

And who are “their victims” and what laws were they breaking?

[zk]

[quote=paramount]The Chicago jails should be a full house tonight with disruptive Trump protesters.

At least I would hope so…[/quote]

So far all the violence I’ve seen has been perpetrated by Trump supporters, not protesters. Why would the jails be full of protesters?

[zk]

[quote=livinincali]

Have you actually looked at some of the stuff the skeptics have produced. This guy went back into old studies and shows how newer studies actually lower the past temperatures to make if look like there’s a larger warming tend then there really is. The past temperatures didn’t change. There’s no reason to adjust them unless you are trying to make you CO2 model work out when it isn’t working out.

http://realclimatescience.com/history-of-nasanoaa-temperature-corruption/
He provides links to the actual older studies so I don’t think he’s just making this stuff up, but who knows.
[/quote]

You keep pointing to individuals who have done unsubstantiated work. And, in this case, one with an obvious political agenda. Why is that? Is it because virtually all the substantiated, peer-reviewed work supports the hypothesis that man is causing global warming?

[quote=livinincali]

Climate change/global warming is becoming a religion or belief system. Not believing in climate change is blasphemous.

[/quote]
This stuff is right out of the right-wing noise machine playbook. It’s designed to manipulate you. It appears to have worked.

[quote=livinincali]
I want real science not people with agendas screwing with the data to fit their models to keep the grant money rolling in.
[/quote]
I’m going to have to call B.S. on you saying you want real science. If you want “real science,” you don’t go to a webpage with a clear political agenda for that science. (realclimatescience.com) There’s tons of real science out there. The only “science” you’re focusing on is individuals who clearly have an agenda and, therefore, aren’t doing real science.

[quote=livinincali]
The bottom line is there’s a huge economic investment that has to happen to do any of this and in most cases it will hit the lower middle class and poorest the worst. A new car payment, a new gas tax, higher electricity prices all hit them harder than it would hit me or you.

[/quote]

First of all, if we’re concerned about “real science,” this has nothing to do with anything. Secondly, to use concern for poor people as a reason to sell the idea that climate change is bogus is highly disingenuous. Basically, the people trying to deny climate change are the same people who regularly show a complete lack of concern for poor people.

[Author]

Posts