OOTB's Political Thread . ..

[bluetoe]

I don't know how anyone is "feeling." I don't really care. I just think it's funny that DJT is selling the bullshit that COMMUNISM is alive and well in the USA. Fear sells. Between the border and the gays and the trans people... it's Defcon 1. The rich get richer and get more cover for their wealth. If that ain't communism, I dunno what is!

RFK Jr. is educated by the same institutions as Trump and Biden. You get a bowl of shit, no matter which bowl you choose. I realize it's been especially difficult for you these last 4 years. You deserve the orange shit. You earned it.

lol

there is no problem, it's all good. You're just scared. You're buying fear. There is no problem. it's all good. You're just scared. You're buying fear. There is no problem. it's all good. You're just scared. You're buying fear.

It's all just a bowl of shit. Don't eat the orange shit.

It's all just a bowl of shit. Don't eat the orange shit.

It's all just a bowl of shit. Don't eat the orange shit.

 

[strummingram]

Selling bibles the week before Easter to cover legal fees for a case on the hush money you paid to a porn star during your election campaign. These are amazing times.

And, thank God for Lee Greenwood and his wonderful song! I wonder how much of a percentage he gets from the Bibles.

I love that the Bibles INCLUDE the Consitution, DofE, and PofA. Mixing church and government. Rubbing shit all over the basis for the founding of the country. It's poetic!

 

[gunslingerdick]

I don't know how anyone is "feeling." I don't really care. I just think it's funny that DJT is selling the bullshit that COMMUNISM is alive and well in the USA. Fear sells. Between the border and the gays and the trans people... it's Defcon 1. The rich get richer and get more cover for their wealth. If that ain't communism, I dunno what is!

RFK Jr. is educated by the same institutions as Trump and Biden. You get a bowl of shit, no matter which bowl you choose. I realize it's been especially difficult for you these last 4 years. You deserve the orange shit. You earned it.

We all deserve the orange shit. Here’s to hoping!

And thanks for your tired diatribe. We’re all so much more informed after you sharing your thoughts. Thanks for being here at this board to educate all of us dum-dums. Where would we be without you?

 

[gunslingerdick]

I'll say this much, if I were to wager $100 and lose I would certainly pay up unlike your buddy Felonious Punk.

You’re not answering my questions today. You seem to be reluctant to do so. It appears you just want to fight about something. Did your farm animal wife make you mad this morning?

 

[gunslingerdick]

jmo but I think he won’t do as good as he’s polling. Once people have to actually pull the lever they’ll pick trump or biden. But I do think whatever votes he gets will come from the biden side. Overall I think dem representation will be way down from last election like it was when Hillary ran. The dem mods and independents in general I think are apathetic. Last time 13 million registered voters didn’t vote. This time I bet it’s close to 20 million.

Rational. Thank you. So are you predicting a Trump return?

 

[pooponduke]

Media corporations, including social media, are generally going to do what makes money (i say generally since Twitter seems to be the opposite, it has been hemorhaging value since Elon took over).

Agreed. Specifically regarding X, I'd say that because he actually believes in and implements the concept of free speech, that platform has been attacked at every turn. He'll survive and end up making money.

I've never said more gov is a good thing, i'd be all for shrinking defense budget, getting government out of the business of regulating medical decisions, etc.

But you say that all the time without saying it. Every "solution" to a "problem" ends up being more government. And how on earth could one ever remove government from medicine? I know you are obtusely referring to abortion on demand, but you really think we would believe you are in favor of ending Obamacare? And don't even try to say that has nothing to with "medical decisions".

Absolutely social media is a new type of problem that needs to be solved. I'd be fine with big gov here regulating social media & kids/teens.

Well, the solution is for parents, plural, to parent, but that horse is long out of the barn.

 

[pooponduke]

regarding social media and our youth, read the book "iGen" ... you'll be blown away.

we have a 16yo and two 13yo ... none of them will have a smart phone or social media accounts before they leave the house. they are fully functional, happy and mature kids.

Thanks for the book recommendation. And congrats on taking an active role in parenting your kids. You are literally the difference in their lives. My kids only got phones once in HS and then they were bricks. But they are older and certainly not the norm in today's got to have the latest iPhone world. The only thing I'll say is not to bury your head in the sand. Kids have plenty of access to stuff other than though their phones. If they have access to the internet through any device (borrowed, library, etc.), they can have social media.

 

[pooponduke]

Normally I would say leave it up to the parents, but this is one of those things that I'm ok with government interference. I would put it in the same category as porn, driving, smoking and drinking. All things we don't allow kids to do and I think everyone here is ok with that. These social media companies admit that it's bad for kids by having their own restrictions. They should just let this one go.

If they were to eliminate minors from their rosters, it would be colossal numbers in losses. I don't see that ever happening voluntarily. And I don't know that everyone here would agree. We can't even get an agreement on what age is appropriate to talk to kids about sex and have to lie about laws that address waiting.

 

[bluetoe]

What does that case have to do with conservative vs liberal? The questions:

1. Do statements conveying observed sensory impressions in factual, descriptive terms constitute protected “opinion” under the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States?

2. Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit effectively eliminate the distinction between fact and opinion articulated in Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Company, 497 U.S. 1 (1990)?

1. the media went beyond that and reported conclusions drawn from those observations.

2. the basis here is a little bass ackwards IMO. In order to make the claim, the claimant had to show that the opined offending statement is in fact untrue. How are you going to do that? It seems to me that it would be more logical and exponentially more fair that the defendant show that his statement is true or based on provable or at least highly likely fact. That way, such statements would tend to be factual rather than spurious, or simply not made at all.

This leaves it wide open to you being able to say anything about anybody as long as they aren't able to prove you wrong. That's wrongheaded bordering on insane.

It's a case among many of going overboard with 'freedom of speech'. Mainstream media are commercial enterprises, selling news for profit. As such, their product should be held to standards like any other commercial product. Those standards need to be set in law in order to establish commercial media responsibility. One standard would be that anything reported as news, and any opinion offered as factual, be provable and not speculative, or at least identified as otherwise.

It's an implied warranty of sorts.

So...'A youth wearing a MAGA hat and a Native American protester came face to face at a rally in what appeared to be a confrontation', and not 'A youth wearing a MAGA hat confronted a Native American protester and blocked his path'. The latter wording sells papers, and the media involved is not liable because it drew a conclusion and reported what was 'apparent'. That's wrong.

Endeavors undertaken to gain a profit should NOT be considered with the same FOS leeway that the general public is entitled to.

 

[tarheel0910]

LOL, the actual questions posed aren't partisan at all, but cuz libsofTikTok and archer2 hyped it, then it is suddenly worthy of SCOTUS?

 

[blazers]

1. the media went beyond that and reported conclusions drawn from those observations.

2. the basis here is a little bass ackwards IMO. In order to make the claim, the claimant had to show that the opined offending statement is in fact untrue. How are you going to do that? It seems to me that it would be more logical and exponentially more fair that the defendant show that his statement is true or based on provable or at least highly likely fact. That way, such statements would tend to be factual rather than spurious, or simply not made at all.

This leaves it wide open to you being able to say anything about anybody as long as they aren't able to prove you wrong. That's wrongheaded bordering on insane.

It's a case among many of going overboard with 'freedom of speech'. Mainstream media are commercial enterprises, selling news for profit. As such, their product should be held to standards like any other commercial product. Those standards need to be set in law in order to establish commercial media responsibility. One standard would be that anything reported as news, and any opinion offered as factual, be provable and not speculative, or at least identified as otherwise.

It's an implied warranty of sorts.

So...'A youth wearing a MAGA hat and a Native American protester came face to face at a rally in what appeared to be a confrontation', and not 'A youth wearing a MAGA hat confronted a Native American protester and blocked his path'. The latter wording sells papers, and the media involved is not liable because it drew a conclusion and reported what was 'apparent'. That's wrong.

Endeavors undertaken to gain a profit should NOT be considered with the same FOS leeway that the general public is entitled to.

We're discussing this cuz a particular poster feels this is a conservative vs lib issue scotus-wise... So do you feel it is a conservative vs lib issue? Pretend it was a youth wearing a BLM covid-mask being blamed as confrontational & blocking a peaceful pro-lifer with identical circumstances in which it blows up on social media then MSM runs with the partial story instead of a more full accurate story.

 

[bluetoe]

We're discussing this cuz a particular poster feels this is a conservative vs lib issue scotus-wise... So do you feel it is a conservative vs lib issue? Pretend it was a youth wearing a BLM covid-mask being blamed as confrontational & blocking a peaceful pro-lifer with identical circumstances in which it blows up on social media then MSM runs with the partial story instead of a more full accurate story.

Ha ha, that's a good one, the media reporting it that way.

Seriously, as much as my opposition would claim that I side with anything conservative, the truth is that the only thing that I value above all else is...the truth. If I could push a 'truth' button such that the truth in all things past and present would be instantly revealed, I would push it before you could blink an eye and I'd gladly deal with the fallout [what? Dean was paying off the refs and K was unfairly judged?]. Of course, where I've been on the internet and that kind of thing would be excluded.

I don't want to automatically couch things or see things couched in conservative terms, I want to know that I can take the news at face value and then couch things conservatively. I want the stark reality, because I am a realist.

So whether you believe it or not, and even with my admission to having my prejudices, I would protest your scenario as much as any other. But if it was reported factually, I would find it perfectly acceptable as far as it goes. I say that with this in mind...the most common oath before providing testimony in a court of law says 'the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Context is key. Reporting a fact out of context can be purposely misleading.

But let's go just a bit further. You might say yeah but in regard to so and so, you contradicted what you just said. And I might have, because in arguing points against someone who is arguing disingenuously, the temptation to fight fire with fire is strong. But an argument on a message board falls under true freedom of speech. Commercial media shouldn't have the same latitude.

Have you ever stopped to consider the enormous influence media has had in this country, with maybe the greatest bulk of it tinged legally yellow?

 

[heelmanwilm]

Rational. Thank you. So are you predicting a Trump return?

yepp, and yes I’m admittedly not happy about it. But the alternative doesn’t make me
Any happier. I’ve accepted it and I just hope whoever it is is successful, does something about the border, keeps the economy improving, and protects personal freedoms.

 

[bluetoe]

I've never said more gov is a good thing, i'd be all for shrinking defense budget, getting government out of the business of regulating medical decisions, etc.

so, less conservative government and more lib government. What a surprise.

How about this. We are a nation comprised of individual citizens, and groups of citizens, of all kinds. As such, it behooves to govern with all citizens, and all groups of citizens, equally in mind, right? Equality is a liberal rally cry isn't it? I agree with that.

So what should the government be tasked with? Before I answer, bear in mind that I strongly feel that we ARE the government. We should be providing for ourselves collectively those things that serve our collective purposes. Defense. Justice. Infrastructure. A sound financial framework, etc....

We should NOT be deciding which individuals and which groups of individuals should be treated differently than any other citizen or group.

But that's what libs want to do. Out of one side of their mouths they espouse equality, but out of the other they want to provide a band-aid fix for any individual or group who doesn't have everything.

Let's look back to Bill Clinton's admin. He famously took credit for a balanced budget (even though his hand was forced). One way he did that was by making cuts in our military and our intelligence efforts instead of entitlements. That stewed for a bit and the reigns were handed over to the likeable idiot George Bush. Not long after that we were singing the 9/11 blues, at least partly due to the reduced support for the intelligence community.

See my point?

 

[bluetoe]

yepp, and yes I’m admittedly not happy about it. But the alternative doesn’t make me
Any happier. I’ve accepted it and I just hope whoever it is is successful, does something about the border, keeps the economy improving, and protects personal freedoms.

attaboy. We knew you'd come around. Do you have your MAGA hat yet?

 

[blazers]

Another RINO

 

[strummingram]

Another RINO

View embedded media

He just gave Wisconsin to DJT! Good job, Paul! Way to go!

 

[Heels Noir]

The stupid party.

 

[bluetoe]

He just gave Wisconsin to DJT! Good job, Paul! Way to go!

if it's just different bowls of shit, why does that matter to you? Does shit come in different flavors? What's your favorite flavor? I'm thinking it isn't orange.

 

[pooponduke]

So, all those "newcomers" were just out of the goodness of our hearts and had nothing to do with a long term plan that benefits those in power who are allowing it to happen?

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

So, all those "newcomers" were just out of the goodness of our hearts and had nothing to do with a long term plan that benefits those in power who are allowing it to happen?

View embedded media

Never buy their "no such thing as a slippery slope" bullshit. Each incremental step they take is the next page in a long playbook.

 

[pooponduke]

Never buy their "no such thing as a slippery slope" bullshit. Each incremental step they take is the next page in a long playbook.

Yep. Get everyone voting in local elections, then it will slide into statewide stuff, and then national. This isn't accidental.

 

[Heels Noir]

Never buy their "no such thing as a slippery slope" bullshit.

Yeah, that sounds almost as sketchy as "Stop the Steal."

 

[pooponduke]

Yeah, that sounds almost as sketchy as "Stop the Steal."

What part of my post above yours failed to lay it out and makes it "sketchy"???

Voting as Americans is a privilege that we have been the envy of the world over for hundreds of years. It is a precious gift to us simply by the good fortune of having been born here or gone through the process of joining the club. It sounds like you simply don't have any appreciation for it due to blind hatred for anything shaded orange (do you understand that he can be a complete ass in general and still be right about individual issues?). Perhaps you should try to remember how far your leadership and party position has changed on this issue simply for short term gain and power acquisition.

 

[bluetoe]

What part of my post above yours failed to lay it out and makes it "sketchy"???

Voting as Americans is a privilege that we have been the envy of the world over for hundreds of years. It is a precious gift to us simply by the good fortune of having been born here or gone through the process of joining the club. It sounds like you simply don't have any appreciation for it due to blind hatred for anything shaded orange (do you understand that he can be a complete ass in general and still be right about individual issues?). Perhaps you should try to remember how far your leadership and party position has changed on this issue simply for short term gain and power acquisition.

View embedded media

I've posted this before. Trust me, the sheep don't care.

 

[Heels Noir]

What part of my post above yours failed to lay it out and makes it "sketchy"???

Easy, now. I'm not so much at odds with your post as I am with Hark's slippery slope comment. But I'm just playing devil's advocate to remind those who argued the 2020 presidential election was stolen that they too have had some rather brazen ideas.

For the record, I agree that this is a bad idea that opens a can of worms we probably don't need in this country. For some the electoral process is already confusing enough.

 

[bluetoe]

Yeah, that sounds almost as sketchy as "Stop the Steal."

but not nearly as sketchy as 'Russian collusion'. It's hard to outsketchy the lefties.

 

[gunslingerdick]

Yeah, that sounds almost as sketchy as "Stop the Steal."

 

[gunslingerdick]

What part of my post above yours failed to lay it out and makes it "sketchy"???

Voting as Americans is a privilege that we have been the envy of the world over for hundreds of years. It is a precious gift to us simply by the good fortune of having been born here or gone through the process of joining the club. It sounds like you simply don't have any appreciation for it due to blind hatred for anything shaded orange (do you understand that he can be a complete ass in general and still be right about individual issues?). Perhaps you should try to remember how far your leadership and party position has changed on this issue simply for short term gain and power acquisition.

View embedded media

Bill Clinton was a piece of shit. And almost certainly, a womanizer and sexual predator. But OMG, I would kill to have his sanity back in the White House over the radical embarrassment we have now. Also assuming we have the GOP lead Congress that kept Bill straight for his time in office.

 

[pooponduke]

Bill Clinton was a piece of shit. And almost certainly, a womanizer and sexual predator. But OMG, I would kill to have his sanity back in the White House over the radical embarrassment we have now. Also assuming we have the GOP lead Congress that kept Bill straight for his time in office.

And that's just the point. Today, you could digitally alter the voice, face and labels to put Orangeman on President Clinton and there would be a complete and total meltdown due to the hatred and the light years they have jumped leftward to pacify the base of fringers. It always cracks me up how they want to accuse the R's of being the crazy extremists and never look back just a few terms to see how far they've leapt.

 

[Heels Noir]

Speaking of digital alterations, this photo is currently circulating on MAGA social media:

 

[Heels Noir]

Of course two can play that game . . .

 

[pooponduke]

Speaking of digital alterations, this photo is currently circulating on MAGA social media:

I'm curious as to how you'd actually know that since it's impossible to imagine you on TruthSocial (which I think is the only actual MAGA social media).

 

[pooponduke]

Of course two can play that game . . .

View embedded media

That was pretty funny.

 

[Heels Noir]

I'm curious as to how you'd actually know that

"AI deep fakes of Donald Trump posing with Black people are circulating on MAGA social media this week."
https://www.thestar.com/entertainme...cle_f76c2ec2-dbe8-11ee-85a6-1f30129c0a29.html

 

[gunslingerdick]

Speaking of digital alterations, this photo is currently circulating on MAGA social media:

Another irrelevant poast. Good job. You’re killing it today!

 

[Heels Noir]

Another irrelevant poast. Good job. You’re killing it today!

Ditto.

 

[gunslingerdick]

Someone’s TDS is flaring up today. Eeesh.

 

[pooponduke]

"AI deep fakes of Donald Trump posing with Black people are circulating on MAGA social media this week."
https://www.thestar.com/entertainme...cle_f76c2ec2-dbe8-11ee-85a6-1f30129c0a29.html

Rofl. The entertainment reporter from the Toronto Star (another country, btw, not MAGA) is what you consider reliable as to what is happening on MAGA social media (again, this only potentially means TruthSocial)???????

The subheadline says the following and you think it is going to be anything but anti-orange with neutral presentation??? Haha. That's a knee slapper.

"Basically, if you see footage in which the former president is making sense, being reasonable, not lying or sounding smart, that video is fake."

You could easily change the word former to current.

 

[blazers]

Someone’s TDS is flaring up today. Eeesh.

Biden's is definitely flaring up today.