|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 49 (9221 total) |
| |
KING IYK | |
Total: 920,792 Year: 1,114/6,935 Month: 395/719 Week: 37/146 Day: 10/8 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Phat Unplugged | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23191 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6
|
All your attention is on YouTube videos, globalists, fiat money, precious metal websites and so forth, and now Copilot. It doesn't matter what we say, just on and on you go, off in your own world.
--Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23191 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6
|
You just gave yet another perfect example of you not listening:
nwr writes in Message 1096 of thread 2024 US Presidential Election: The progressives are a small minority of the political left. Yes, they are the part of the left that gets the most media attention. However, most of the left are not progressives. nwr writes in Message 363: You pay no attention to the ideas of others. Phat writes in Message 364: The progressives have to go back into hiding. Engaging with you is pointless. Please get some help. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23191 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6
|
Phat writes: First off, I DID recall what nwr told me about the strict definition of progressive politically.I DO pay attention to the ideas of others, though I do not necessarily agree with them You have provided no indication that you listeni to what others say. You're just saying this because it's what's expedient right now, not because there's any truth to it. If you disagree with the facts nwr provided, which is what they were, facts, then you need some pretty good reasons for rejecting facts, namely counterevidence indicating that nwr was incorrect in stating the facts.
I just got off the phone with my sister and she asked me "I guess that means you are voting for Trump!" I told her that each election is a choice and that it is worse to not vote than it is to make a decision. On that note I have concluded that given a clear choice between ONLY Biden and ONLY Trump, Trump is more capable of deciding on a course of action rather than leaning on his wife and the party behind him to help govern. Who, if elected, would be more likely to leave behind a functioning democracy at the beginning of 2029?
In addition to that, I support shutting down the borders rather than letting everyone in. Why on God's Earth do you think we're "letting everyone in"?
We have a lot of people who came in, and I agree with the idea that one has to earn citizenship rather than simply be granted it. Citizenship cannot merely be granted. You are an idiot.
The 40,000 Venezuelans in Denver are by and large good people, but they are in gig jobs such as Door Dash and are not contributing to our government funding. (Please correct me if I am wrong, but I see it every day.) See what every day? Door Dash workers not paying taxes? You could not possibly observe that. You're just making up nonsense again.
Please Get Some Help. I have a Urologist, An Endocrinologist,A Retinal specialist and a primary care physician. In addition, I have a counselor and support in my community. I'm unsure what other help that I need, but am open to suggestions. If you listen to your doctors with the same attentiveness that you listen to people here, there is no way they could possibly help you. What was this probably completely avoidable operation that has you out of work for four weeks? When someone has pancreatic cancer there is usually little they can do, but you have a very manageable disease, diabetes, but seem incompetent in dealing with it. This incompetency seems to extend to many aspects of your life.
The bottom line is that the very nature of elections involve freedom to choose and perhaps the responsibility of living with that choice. Nothing anyone said could have prompted you to say this. Of course you have the right to choose who to vote for. You also have the right to choose to wallow in ignorance. You're doing a fine job with both.
My main point to the DNC is to offer us a better choice than Mr.Biden. There are two parts to the the primary responsibility for the DNC: one is to provide a better candidate than Mr. Trump; the other is to provide a candidate who is electable. It would be impossible to find a worst candidate than Trump, so we can consider the first part accomplished already. The second part, electability, is more difficult and depends a great deal on the degree to which the American people recognize the threat to democracy that Trump represents. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23191 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6
|
Unless I missed something Phat said, to me the Phat/sister/rape discussion seems questionable in terms of accuracy, fairness or appropriateness.
--Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23191 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
dronestar writes in Message 387: Oh, how shocking . . . a cult-member is not convinced tRump raping is so horrible and terrible. Ergo, Phat would not be so upset if his sister was raped. It was a civil trial that found Trump had committed defamation. He was not found criminally guilty of rape beyond a reasonable doubt. He was civilly found to have more likely than not lied and defamed Carroll about sexually abusing her. The standard for civil trials is far lower than for criminal trials. Had Trump been criminally charged with rape it is highly unlikely that a jury would have returned a verdict of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. At present there is no statute of limitations for rape in New York, but at the time the limit was 5 years, so Carroll could not have brought criminal charges after 2000 or so. One reason she didn't bring charges at time might be that she was aware that a he-said/she-said case wouldn't sway a jury. To me the attempts to bring home the point of the seriousness of rape by personalizing the discussion are inappropriate. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23191 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6
|
dronestar writes in Message 389: To me the attempt to marginalize the point of the seriousness of rape is astonishingly inappropriate. I'm not disagreeing with your point, just your methods. Emphasizing the seriousness of rape by inappropriately personalizing the discussion shouldn't be done. It was a civil trial about defamation, not a criminal trial about rape. The standards of civil and criminal trials differ dramatically, as do the outcomes, dollars versus jail time. I know what the judge said, but many other jurists have also weighed in. For example, some more in-depth perspectives and discussion can be found in Fact Check: Was Donald Trump Found Guilty of Rape? Guilt beyond a reasonable doubt was not established, not about anything. Pointing that out is not an "attempt to marginalize the point of the seriousness of rape." It's the opposite, calling attention to the fact that rape is so serious that judging it to have occurred deserves the highest standard of jurisprudence, which is not "more likely than not" or "a preponderance of the evidence" but "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt." The in passing rape determination made by the jury on their way to a decision about defamation in a civil case is not the same as being found criminally guilty of rape. We shouldn't compromise our own standards of fairness, honesty and uprightness when dealing with someone who respects none of these, because then we become just as bad as them. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23191 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
I made my points as clearly as I could. If you're not going to address them but just issue unsupported denigration then there's no need to reply.
--Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23191 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
dronestar writes in Message 395: I am comfortable using what the actual judge of the trial stated:
A judge has now clarified that this is basically a legal distinction without a real-world difference. He says that what the jury found Trump did was in fact rape, as commonly understood. This is just an excerpt from a news article. Reading what Judge Kaplan actually wrote offers a more clear understanding of her ruling against Trump's motion that the award was excessive, which can be found here: Memorandum Opinion Denying Defendant’s Rule 59 Motion. This is probably the most relevant excerpt:
quote: As best as I can interpret this, the judge is saying that the jury did not find Trump guilty of rape as it is defined in New York Penal Law but rather liable for rape as the term is commonly understood. I think that a common understanding of rape is all the jury could go on because this was a civil case and rape is not covered in New York's civil laws. AbE: According to New York Penal Law Section 130.35 Rape in the first degree, penetration of the vagina by the fingers is a class B felony which has a minimum sentence of 5 years in prison and a maximum of 25 years. --Percy Edited by Percy, .
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23191 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
You are correct, it is not a class B felony. I was unable to reconstruct how I came to make that mistake, unless perhaps I misread "class D" as "class B".
--Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23191 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6
|
I would describe it differently than Tangle. I find your thinking creative and agile but lacking the ability to make reasonable inferences from facts. That's make you a great fabulist (in the sense of concocting fascinating scenarios, not of lying or being dishonest) but a horrible pragmatist.
So why try to be something you're not? Give up commenting on politics and start writing fiction. Maybe you're the next Tolkein or Rowling. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23191 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6
|
Phat writes: You guys have started to get personal... It doesn't concern you that you have gotten so determinedly weird that people talk about it? I don't understand why people are pledging not to take note of it. Naturally we all would like to avoid getting personal and just focus on the topic, but your behavior is beyond the pale. Simply ignoring it would be bizarre. Your diabetic problems are so persistent and so severe and having such a severe impact on your health (out from work for six weeks - wow!) that I'm very surprised you're not on a drug like semaglutide. You're either getting incredibly bad care or making incredibly bad decisions. If you don't want people to comment on your behavior than stop behaving like an insane person. If you don't like people getting personal then don't get personal yourself, for example byt calling us "a bunch of humanist elitists" (Message 1186) or this from your current message.
Virtually ALL of you have chosen Harris over Trump and are critical thinkers and skeptics long before you dare accept Christianity You don't mean "critical thinkers and skeptics" in a good way. You mean that we're using critical thinking to reject the truth, in this case the truth of your brand of Christianity, as if religion should in any way be a political issue in this country. It's just more of your crazy thinking. And, not speaking for others, I have not chosen Harris over Trump. I have chosen "anyone who is sane and values democracy and hasn't committed fraud or rape or theft and isn't a racist" over Trump. Even Brian Kemp or Ron DeSantis would be better candidates then Trump. Trump would only be the better candidate if he were running against Matt Gaetz, Marjorie Taylor Green, George Santos, Samuel Alito or Clarence Thomas. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23191 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6
|
I hope most people who have known Phat for a long time (in my case, since 2003) don't really care who he votes for. It is what has happened to him as a person that we care about.
--Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23191 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
The documentary doesn't mention it, but I think her father must have had the form of dementia where you forget things in backwards order. Events of the not very distant past fade first, then older events, and so on. Memories of childhood through early adulthood tend to remain very clear.
I say this because he didn't care that his radio became broken during their move to assisted living, and his radio was ancient anyway. That he used a radio with an analog dial instead of a digital device or streaming on a computer (this would have been around 2005, I think) meant that he hadn't kept up with what was going on around him for a long while. Then when he was in the hospital for his gallstone procedure his wife unsubscribed his email from his conservative newsletters, and she subscribed to several liberal ones, and when he returned home he didn't seem to notice. His wife also reprogrammed the TV remote so it would no longer get Fox News (my guess is that she took Fox News off the favorites list) and he didn't seem to notice that, either. I've known people with this kind of dementia. They're always very much engaged in the moment, but if you spend a lot of time with them (say, by living with them for several years) you learn that they can only remember the topic of conversation for about 3 to 5 minutes. After that it's gone and they have to wait until they can pick up on the thread of a new conversation, or maybe rejoin the old conversation if it continues long enough. You'll hear a lot of the same stories over and over again. And whatever were their biggest concerns in their 40's, 50's and 60's seem to just melt away. I do agree that Phat has become caught up in the conservative tempest of anger and hate that has captured much of the media, from radio to TV to podcasts to streaming. To him, others are not just people with a different point of view. They're a threat to the country's very foundations who are blind and don't deserve any respect. The history of the conservative movement was interesting, too, even though I lived through the period she talked about. The most important part to me was where Ailes, I think it was, built a conservative coalition from groups of single-issue people, issues like abortion, religion, law and order, guns, etc. I was a Reagan guy not because I was conservative but because Carter, as nice a guy as he was, just felt like he just wasn't up to the task. It didn't seem that Reagan's more threatening positions, such as on abortion and on supply-side economics, would see much headway in the current environment. While inflation abated and the country resumed a robust economic track under Reagan, it was his policies that initiated and institutionalized the transfer and concentration of wealth with the rich. And it was Reagan who killed the unions, or at least got the process started, when he decertified PATCO. Not that unions hadn't gone a bit overboard by that time. A friend who was an electronic technician at Raytheon described for me how when a new piece of equipment was delivered to their lab, they couldn't touch it until the right union people arrived to lift it off the floor and place it on the lab bench. My own experience with unions was on a trip as a helper delivering an 18-wheeler of IBM paper into New York City. The building was a skyscraper, so down in the basement loading dock we'd wheel each pallet of paper onto the elevator where the elevator operator, sitting on a chair in the corner, would punch the button for the right floor. This wasn't a problem until 5 o'clock approached, at which point he announced that he only worked until 5 PM and that we'd have to resume in the morning. A $100 bribe solved the problem, and that was a lot of money back then. I guess I'm saying that maybe the pendulum had swung too far in one direction by the 60's and 70's, and with Reagan, who took office at the beginning of '81, things began to swing back the other way, but now they've swung way too far back the other way with a huge proportion of the money flowing to the rich and the country surrendering to nut jobs who don't believe they lose valid elections and who want to scrap the constitution as long as it means they get their way. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23191 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6
|
Phat writes in Message 416: Tonight I am watching the debate between Harris and Trump. I am watching an angry and bitter old man being skillfully dismantled by an intelligent woman who has done her homework. She won the debate and my vote. My opinion changed due to the persuasion of some conservatives whom I respected. Which ones, and what did they do or say that brought them your respect?
She sold me based on her intelligence and her lack of hate. Compared to Trump even Attila the Hun had a lack of hate, but why are things like intelligence and hate suddenly apparent to you? It's not like they haven't been overtly out there all along?
His propensity for exaggeration and lies was painfully obvious. It's been painfully obvious for years, like for at least 40 years. Where have you been?
My only concern is for the financial future of our Nation. None of you know enough about it yet but you will learn. And you were doing so well. Did you know there's a row of keys above the letters for typing numbers? They're real handy for discussing financial topics.
One advantage of Harris is she may just unify the nation rather than divide it. Ya think? Trump thrives on chaos, and nothing creates chaos so much as warring factions. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 23191 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
NosyNed writes: It is safe to say that neither Kamala Harris nor Donald Trump will win November’s presidential election by pledging fiscal prudence. The deficit and debt are afterthoughts for most Americans these days. And proposals from both candidates for cleaning up the country’s finances are fundamentally unserious. Mr Trump has talked about using cryptocurrency or drilling for oil in order to pay off the national debt—ideas that amount to utter nonsense. Although Ms Harris has vowed to reduce the deficit, she has declined to offer any substantive plan for doing so. Complaints like these have been the constant refrain of economists for literally centuries. The British caused the Revolutionary War by trying to tax the colonists to help pay down the incredible national debt they had incurred from their wars with the French. By and large, the national debts of countries are not typically paid off. Rather, national debts gradually become smaller and smaller percentages of GPD by growing the economy. A healthy economy is how a national debt is "paid down," not by running surpluses. Surpluses are one way that recessions happen, and they can send a country into a whirlpool of cycles of diminishing national income followed by diminishing tax income followed by increasing national debt that eventually suck a country into default. We had to do what we had to do to get through covid, which meant running huge deficits. Now a period of fiscal responsibility combined with stimulative economic policies are required so that we can gradually grow ourselves out of debt. --Percy
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025