Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Greg Davidson

Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13]
General Comments / Re: Hell bent on the Caliphate
« on: December 26, 2015, 07:05:01 PM »

Could you please provide a link to a direct source of the attack of Hillary Clinton against George W Bush that you are referring to?  I tried googling and it did not come up immediately.

Once you do, I will look to comparatives not from Bernie Sanders (who I believe is less aggressive than average in political attacks, at least so far), but also a range of Republicans

General Comments / Re: Hell bent on the Caliphate
« on: December 26, 2015, 02:13:13 AM »
Maybe we all have to make a much bigger effort to be clear in our language.  I did not intend to "paint [you] as a useless participant" and my comments were in no way in retaliation for partisan positioning. 

You are not who I think of here when I think of those who never acknowledge an error or a change in position. 

I do think that the term "Clintonista" is both vague and inappropriately applied if I guess right what it means. 

And Bill and Hillary Clinton strike me as average politicians with respect to their track record for attacks on their opponents (average over the standards of the last 30 years or so). Bernie Sanders, like Obama, have been below average in their use of political attacks but that still does not make them "political attack pacifists", just below average. But I imagine this is a fairly subjective measure. I suspect that you will have a hard time making a case that Hillary Clinton is worse than average with respect to making political attacks, because any attempt to assemble an overall case to that effect can be countered by examples of others

General Comments / Re: Hell bent on the Caliphate
« on: December 25, 2015, 04:23:54 PM »
Actually, I don't know what you mean by Clintonista, but is sounds both derogatory and if you are asserting that I have a loyalty that trumps reasoned judgement.

Come to think of it, I am not sure of much of what you are asserting. Maybe this will work better if I don't reply to what I think your insinuations mean, but rather ask you to make your case more clearly:

It sounds like you may be implying that Hillary and Bill Clinton have commited as many or more inappropriate acts of political attack than their opponents - is that your claim?

General Comments / Re: Hell bent on the Caliphate
« on: December 25, 2015, 03:53:17 PM »
Greg Davidson, what's the end goal here? These people will say the words you want them to say, or they won't. At the end of the day, we're supposed to be arguing for and against ideas, not people.

ETA-Clarification. Referring to you being upset about some people not admitting when they're wrong.

That is an interesting context. Eliminate the sense of personalities and deal with arguments in the abstract.  That is a different view from where I have been coming from, and maybe that is seen in me using my actual name and others using nicknames. I need to think about why that matters to me.  Thanks for the comment

General Comments / Re: Hell bent on the Caliphate
« on: December 25, 2015, 03:36:58 PM »
Unfortunately this is how Clintonistas get as we grow closer to elections.  Your candidate does not sit well with your conscience and you take it out on the rest of the world.  Sanders people are much easier to talk to.

My candidate? So far my responses regarding 2016 Democratic candidates have been addressing anti-Clinton arguments I disagree with. This is one of my concerns with Sanders' candidacy, we don't yet know how he will fare against the enormous volume of bogus accusations that he will face (or don't you remember that Al Gore was so ambitious that his life would end if he didn't win the Presidency, or the John Kerry swiftboat smears or etc. etc.).  Clinton has a pretty good track record of survivng the endless series of false accusations that will be placed on any Democratic candidate.

General Comments / OSC's latest book Gatefather & theological fantasy
« on: December 24, 2015, 03:59:17 PM »
I am a little more than mid-way through OSC's 3rd book in the Mithermage cycle.  Without any spoilers, this book strikes me as a uniquely theological fantasy more than anything else (is that a new genre?).

Forgive my ignorance, but with the discussion of planets and souls, can anyone who has read this book tell me if there is any overlap with Mormon theology? Is this a Mormon version of midrash, the Jewish practice of storytelling to illuninate a percerived theologival truth. Or are the theological foundations a completely unrelated creation of the author himself? 

General Comments / Re: Hell bent on the Caliphate
« on: December 24, 2015, 03:32:40 PM »
My complaint was that when caught in a false statement Pyr blames others for taking his false remarks "out of context."

I would be far happier with the level of discussion on this forum if every time I identified what appeared to be a false statement, I got a clarification that modified or reinterpreted the original statement to be more in line with what we have established to be the truth. So the behavior that you are asserting the Pyr demonstrates is actually a higher level of responsiveness than what I encounter all to frequently here.

General Comments / Re: Hell bent on the Caliphate
« on: December 23, 2015, 08:11:22 PM »
That's not my experience with Pyr.

Should we start keeping statistics on these things? How many unsubstantiated assertions that later are proven to be false? 

General Comments / Re: Obamacare Predictions for May 2015
« on: December 22, 2015, 10:50:36 AM »
Which state do you live in?

General Comments / Re: Fear trumps facts
« on: December 21, 2015, 02:08:06 AM »
Status quo?

The largest stimulus package in generations (including the largest government investments in clean energy that have, oddly enough, been followed by surprising levels of growth in clean energy)? Restructuring GM (successfully)? Recovering all $700B of TARP (with a surplus)? Obamacare? Relations with Cuba? A deliberative approach to permit gays to serve openly in the military, contributing to a general recognition of gay rights and gay marriage?  A deal that eliminated Iran's plutonium production capability, removed 97% of the enriched uranium from the country, eliminated 2/3rds of the centrifuges and put into place 24/7 inspections of all known nuclear sites?

How much of that would you have predicted based on the prior status quo?

General Comments / Re: DNC Software Breach
« on: December 19, 2015, 05:23:15 PM »
I was seeing a lot of noise on it, I just wanted the day to pass to talk about something else

General Comments / Fear trumps facts
« on: December 19, 2015, 12:00:25 PM »
Testing this line of thought - comments, anyone?

In the battle of narratives, history shows that fear is a powerful motivator. Donald Trump is tapping into fear and converting it in to anger, and reaping the appreciation of voters who prefer to be angry over being scared.  This narrative cannot be countered by facts, because ultimately it is an emotional transaction. The counter-argument is an emotional truth: Trump's support is driven largely by fear, or more bluntly, by cowardice. Cowards value talk of "winners' because they feel like losers. For them, fear trumps facts. And so the right response is not fact-checking, it is calling them out for what they are.

General Comments / Re: Duh Debates
« on: December 18, 2015, 08:48:00 PM »
NH, thanks for the clarification - there really does have to be more fonts to reflect nuance

General Comments / Re: DNC Software Breach
« on: December 18, 2015, 07:25:21 PM »
How soon can we get to the point where we can agree that we are all sick of hearing about this damn data breach? Someone made a mistake or was overzealous - that person was suspended. The primaries will not turn on this event.

I'd like to follow the example set by Bernie Sanders himself and focus what matters far more than inside politics frenzy: #1 ability to positively implement policies that matter, and #2 importance of a win for Clinton or Sanders or O'Malley over any of the Republican candidates.

General Comments / Re: Duh Debates
« on: December 18, 2015, 12:37:25 AM »
The level of investigation is an additional piece of data to infer from.

That's the same logic that says that all those witches in Salem must have been guilty, too

General Comments / Re: Duh Debates
« on: December 16, 2015, 11:14:12 PM »
"Honestly though on Hilary, she is a criminal"

I disagree, and I must admit, these unsubstantiated criticisms of Hillary from the right (and some from the left from Bernie Sanders supporters) are repeatedly getting me to defend her from crazy and foundationless accusations.

Hillary has been accused of criminal behavior on a large number of occasions by disingenuous and deluded people. Seriati, be honest and tell us how many of those previous accusations agains Hillary Clinton have you ever believed to be true. Then, could you please outline the specific criminal violation that you believe that she has made, and the evidence that convinces you that she is guilty of that crime?

General Comments / Re: Serial Season #2: Bowe Bergdahl
« on: December 15, 2015, 09:29:26 PM »
Link to Serial Season #2

General Comments / Serial Season #2: Bowe Bergdahl
« on: December 13, 2015, 08:20:51 PM »
I was wondering what the podcast Serial would do to come up with a sequel to their remarkable investigation of an ambiguous high school murder in the late 1990's. What I found particularly compelling about the first season was the lack of certainty, the ability to fully investigate the situation from many perspectives and to follow, cautiously, where the evidence led (and if you are going to assume that the outcome of the show was foretold from the beginning because NPR is a crypto-liberal something-or-other, I suggest you listen because that is neither the tone nor the outcome).  If you haven't listened, I won't give you a spoiler about the case of Adnan Sayed, but I do recommend the 10 part podcast highly.

Season #2 is about Bergdahl. Going in, I believe that the salient fact is that he committed an act of desertion. There are conflicting claims as to his motives and the impacts of his desertion. I am not sure what else there is to say, and I can't really see anything else that could possibly be exculpatory. But based on Season #1, I have some confidence that those producing the show have found something that makes rehashing this case relevant, but I can't imagine what. Episode #1 presented the story of his desertion and capture from Bergdahl's perspective (they got a hold of 12 hours of his discussion on tape); Episode #2 will be from the perspective of the Taliban.

If possible, I'd like to keep this thread about Bergdahl's case itself (and the information brought to light by Serial) and if someone wants to to talk about the Obama Administration's action to bring about the prisoner exchange, please start an additional thread. 


General Comments / Re: Welcome to the New Ornery American Forums!
« on: December 13, 2015, 01:56:00 AM »
On the other hand, where is everyone?

General Comments / Re: Welcome to the New Ornery American Forums!
« on: December 12, 2015, 01:05:45 AM »
Thank you for your efforts to update the Forum!

General Comments / Re: Obamacare Predictions for May 2015
« on: December 12, 2015, 01:04:32 AM »
Welcome, topic, to the new forum. But I was hoping that this would get 2,000 postings - guess we have to start all over again.

Pages: 1 ... 11 12 [13]