Phi for All Posted March 17, 2016 Posted March 17, 2016 According to Phi, that makes you a liar, comparable to Trump and Nixon. Please don't ever do this again. If this was supposed to be funny, it fell quite short.
overtone Posted March 18, 2016 Posted March 18, 2016 (edited) No, in one of the instances you are wrong Overtone.Either he is responsible for opening trade relations with China, or he isn't. You've argued both, and claim you were right both times. I have not argued "both". I have argued that he is responsible for having screwed up trade relations with China. He managed to do that without closing the deal, and actually opening up China to trade etc. When he resigned, a step ahead of the Senate impeachment proceedings, China was not open for trade but the US had made commitments and promises - these included setting aside the human rights and political freedom standards previously required of parties to US trade deals (the ostensible reason we were not trading with Cuba, say). The argument against that would be that Kissinger was actually responsible for the US getting off on the wrong foot, and ending up with a bad deal for its citizenry in consequence. But I hold Nixon responsible for Kissinger's involvement. Carter finished negotiating and closed that deal, and gets credit for opening up China - it's interesting that Ford didn't. Ford had the chance. Whether Carter would have made a better deal if it hadn't been bollixed by Nixon I have no idea. And something else. If you consider trade relations with China a bad thing, where would the US have gotten the trillions which you guys owe China, and which pay for most of the US government's social spending. Why would I - or anyone - consider trillions owed to China, which were used to cover tax cuts for the rich, a good thing and a benefit of a lousy trade deal? Edited March 18, 2016 by overtone
MigL Posted March 18, 2016 Posted March 18, 2016 Yes, it was meant in jest, and I'm sorry if I overstepped. But you put it out there in a public forum, and compared two liers and their criminality. The only issue is the amount of lying, and you're right, Overtone doesn't come close to meeting that criterion. But who appointed you arbiter of how much lying is criminal ? Or did you not say "Nixon liar. Trump liar. Criminal in my mind."
Endy0816 Posted March 18, 2016 Posted March 18, 2016 What are everyone's thoughts on it ending up a brokered convention? 1
Phi for All Posted March 18, 2016 Posted March 18, 2016 What are everyone's thoughts on it ending up a brokered convention? As the possibility looms nearer, it's scary to hear Trump talking about how his base might riot if he doesn't get the nomination. I think the Republicans are counting on the convention to get rid of Trump, but I think it's clear if he can't bully them into it, he'll go independent. IF he can still get the loans he made to his campaign back. 2
dimreepr Posted March 18, 2016 Author Posted March 18, 2016 Yes, it was meant in jest, and I'm sorry if I overstepped. But you put it out there in a public forum, and compared two liers and their criminality. The only issue is the amount of lying, and you're right, Overtone doesn't come close to meeting that criterion. But who appointed you arbiter of how much lying is criminal ? Or did you not say "Nixon liar. Trump liar. Criminal in my mind." That has made it into my top ten worst apologies and top five for the most insincere ... And if you claim that was also a jest, that would be funny. 1
MigL Posted March 18, 2016 Posted March 18, 2016 Yes it was originally meant in jest. And the apology was for losing my 'cool'. ( I'm a meek, apologetic Canadian, eh ? ) NOT because there was anything wrong with my post for which I needed a scolding from Phi.
iNow Posted March 19, 2016 Posted March 19, 2016 I'm a non-resident in the US, so it may be a misunderstanding, but I'm confused as to how a political figure who is seemingly taking a massive, steaming figurative dump on constitutional rights could be considered in any way supportive of the values of the nation. As is the case in a number of other predominately white, western, Christian nations I've lived it seems that "traditional *insert country* values" is coded language for "the values of white, xenophobic, Christian, cis, citizens of *insert country* and the suppression of everyone else's rights". In other words, it seems that Trump and his supporters don't care about "American values" in the sense of constitutional freedoms, fair governance and judicial systems at all. It's rather similar IMO to those individuals we see fighting most vigorously against gay marriage later being revealed to be themselves repressed homosexuals. On another note, this seems to apply:
StringJunky Posted March 19, 2016 Posted March 19, 2016 It's rather similar IMO to those individuals we see fighting most vigorously against gay marriage later being revealed to be themselves repressed homosexuals. On another note, this seems to apply: It's funny really, America is a mongrel nation, just like GB. Those ruling the country are not the indigenous people... the 'aliens' are calling the shots. Pot.. kettle...
swansont Posted March 19, 2016 Posted March 19, 2016 That would almost make a great topic, does history repeat or rhyme? ! Moderator Note Discussion on this tangent has been split. http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/94022-does-history-repeat-or-does-it-rhyme-split-from-trump/
Phi for All Posted March 19, 2016 Posted March 19, 2016 It's funny really, America is a mongrel nation, just like GB. Those ruling the country are not the indigenous people... the 'aliens' are calling the shots. Pot.. kettle... Our past massive immigration efforts are a huge part of what made us great, imo. To act this way now is the height of stupidity, denying ourselves access to one of our greatest assets.
StringJunky Posted March 19, 2016 Posted March 19, 2016 Our past massive immigration efforts are a huge part of what made us great, imo. To act this way now is the height of stupidity, denying ourselves access to one of our greatest assets. Immigration/emigration is a logical consequence of our ever increasing global communication technologies. It is not sensible to swim against the tide if we want the world to be electronically connected.... "It's not logical, Captain." I think about this with half an eye on the incoming EU referendum in the UK. We can't turn back without severe consequences for everyone we deal with.
iNow Posted March 19, 2016 Posted March 19, 2016 (edited) Too many of my fellow citizens seem to confuse and conflate scapegoats with solutions. Edited March 19, 2016 by iNow
StringJunky Posted March 20, 2016 Posted March 20, 2016 Our past massive immigration efforts are a huge part of what made us great, imo. To act this way now is the height of stupidity, denying ourselves access to one of our greatest assets. Another thought that struck me about America - could be a confirmation bias - that I noticed: whenever I trawl the internet about US politicians, military, judicial personnel, they are nearly always photographed with stars-and-stripes in their immediate background. In the UK, I see this mostly with the extreme Right... the people that want to stop immigration and hate immigrants completely. 1
zapatos Posted March 20, 2016 Posted March 20, 2016 It's been my experience that the Stars and Stripes in the background is just part of the look for politicians. If you want to portray the image of a family man you have your child in the photo. If you want to be portrayed as patriotic, you have a flag in the background. If you watch closely you'll often see politicians mimicking the flag themselves; wearing navy blue suits, white shirts, and a tie with red in it. No doubt the extreme right loves to fly the flag, but for politicians it seems more image setting. Seems that way to me anyway.
StringJunky Posted March 20, 2016 Posted March 20, 2016 It's been my experience that the Stars and Stripes in the background is just part of the look for politicians. If you want to portray the image of a family man you have your child in the photo. If you want to be portrayed as patriotic, you have a flag in the background. If you watch closely you'll often see politicians mimicking the flag themselves; wearing navy blue suits, white shirts, and a tie with red in it. No doubt the extreme right loves to fly the flag, but for politicians it seems more image setting. Seems that way to me anyway. Maybe I'm seeing it negatively because the UK's Right make a big thing of patriotism.
Phi for All Posted March 20, 2016 Posted March 20, 2016 Maybe I'm seeing it negatively because the UK's Right make a big thing of patriotism. This tactic reminds me of calling oneself a skeptic. You assume you're automatically in the right because of your position, because skepticism, like patriotism, can't EVER be bad, right? And then you get to judge anyone who criticizes anything wrong with your country as unpatriotic. Just like Trump gets to say his detractors don't want America to be great again. But Trump is also using gaslight techniques. His lies are denied, he doubles down with confidence on all of them, and he tries to make you think YOU are wrong as you're telling him he's wrong. He's using the worst of the Republican tactics, and he's added his own brand of sociopathic predictions of violence, bigotry, and hatred. 1
zapatos Posted March 20, 2016 Posted March 20, 2016 America's Right makes a big thing of patriotism too. It is just that run of the mill Americans also make a big deal of patriotism. We sing the national anthem before sporting events, where everyone is expected to take off their hat and cover their heart. A neighbor of mine has a flag pole and flies the flag daily. When my father in law stays visits his cabin in the woods for the day, he runs the flag up his flag pole. I remember an attempt a while back to pass a Constitutional Amendment to make flag burning (a form of speech interestingly enough) illegal. 1
StringJunky Posted March 20, 2016 Posted March 20, 2016 I remember an attempt a while back to pass a Constitutional Amendment to make flag burning (a form of speech interestingly enough) illegal. That sounds like a sure path towards fascism. The irony there is the Republicans always opine about individual freedom and personal rights.
zapatos Posted March 20, 2016 Posted March 20, 2016 The irony there is the Republicans always opine about individual freedom and personal rights. Yes, but don't be confused. They are talking about their freedoms and personal rights, not the freedoms and personal rights of others. To me that is one of the most hypocritical aspects of the Republican party. 3
StringJunky Posted March 20, 2016 Posted March 20, 2016 Yes, but don't be confused. They are talking about their freedoms and personal rights, not the freedoms and personal rights of others. To me that is one of the most hypocritical aspects of the Republican party. "Do as I say, not as I do."
Willie71 Posted March 20, 2016 Posted March 20, 2016 Another thought that struck me about America - could be a confirmation bias - that I noticed: whenever I trawl the internet about US politicians, military, judicial personnel, they are nearly always photographed with stars-and-stripes in their immediate background. In the UK, I see this mostly with the extreme Right... the people that want to stop immigration and hate immigrants completely. The flag in the background is appealing to the nationalism. It's a dog whistle racism strategy, and has been for a long time.
Phi for All Posted March 20, 2016 Posted March 20, 2016 America's Right makes a big thing of patriotism too. It is just that run of the mill Americans also make a big deal of patriotism. We sing the national anthem before sporting events, where everyone is expected to take off their hat and cover their heart. A neighbor of mine has a flag pole and flies the flag daily. When my father in law stays visits his cabin in the woods for the day, he runs the flag up his flag pole. I remember an attempt a while back to pass a Constitutional Amendment to make flag burning (a form of speech interestingly enough) illegal. I've read where other countries think we're a bit obsessed about the flag. They considered it a bit fascist to have so many things either draped with the flag, or colored like it. Nationalism run rampant. It's a bit more difficult to define what our flag stands for. Every place you see it, it's flown for a different reason. I've always viewed pride in our flag as a potential. I love the country, but I'm not always patriotic about the actions done in its name. When we do the right thing, it's easy to look on with pride.
dimreepr Posted March 20, 2016 Author Posted March 20, 2016 I love the country, but I'm not always patriotic about the actions done in its name. When we do the right thing, it's easy to look on with pride. I think the definition of utopia, is to live in a country where that is never true.
zapatos Posted March 20, 2016 Posted March 20, 2016 The flag in the background is appealing to the nationalism. It's a dog whistle racism strategy, and has been for a long time. I didn't know so many people were racists...
Recommended Posts