FourFans

So @Prozac and @nsplayr: What are your thoughts on how the president you voted for is addressing his family?

Adam. @congressman You are now part of the ex-congress and now-politic elect crowd. Please don’t quit on we, the crowd who got you there. are you there, or did you quit?

Had this waited until I read further, it would have been “High Calorie Bonus Hole”

In other news, Hunter Biden has agreed to assist in the investigation with the stipulation that he be allowed to examine the evidence in private.

Because he's a Bonus Hole

...and all the students of Russian history collectively said "oh shit"

I was born a yankee...now I live in Florida, but I don't follow the SEC. I'm a man without a country.

Another climate prediction based on computer modeling. The same computer modeling that can't even predict where a hurricane will land inside 48 hours of landfall. Yeah, we trust you. https://cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-years-of-failed-eco-pocalyptic-predictions/

@Negatory Curious: What do you do for a living?

Clearly you're not a herk crew member

If you think that's bad, wait till you meet some of our navigators and WSOs...

I've got a lot of thoughts here, but two quick ones: To answer your question about the nuclear family: Anti-family policies surrounding welfare (dads in low income families are incentivized to make children and leave the home), divorces has never been easier so families are split more often, abortion couldn't be more contentious and there is currently no policy that incentivizes men to have accountability in the baby-making process, in several states 'the state' in the form of schools and teachers unions are effectively trying to take over the moral instruction of children...to include the legal prosecution of parents if they 'mis-gender' their own 12 year old, there's a lot more. In short, the federal government should have absolutely no hand inside a family unit, yet they currently do. All of those policies are not tolerated or accepted, but celebrated and in some cases enforced by our current administration. Second: go to your stat source there: https://realtimeinequality.org/ and play around. You'll find that the Times did a wonderful job of zooming in on a very specific data set to tell a story that simply isn't true. Moreover, if you want to compare data, use the same time frame. You compare Jan 2021 to EOY 2022 directly to Trump's entire term. Not an apples to apples comparison. With stats like these, a long view of at least a decade, usually more, is the only way to get a real picture of the impact of policies.

I agree with most of what you're saying. There is, and should be, a heated debate about wealth vs income inequality, as well as whether that's even a good metric to determine the health of a society. Income does not equal wealth. One is a policy item, the other is a behavior item. Lots to debate on that in some other topic. To the point: The current administration states that it's trying to lower the income and wealth inequality, when in fact it's expanding it. This is perfectly in line with it's stance on most topics: make it a hot topic then do nothing to actually heal the topic. A healed and corrected topic can no longer be a hot button to push for votes whenever they want...therefore they haven't actually fixed anything. The current economic woes hit the poor hardest. Inflation, increasing interest rates, and lowered real income value hit them worst...thereby expanding BOTH wealth and income inequality. Which recent administration actually saw the highest rise in both wealth and real income value of the poorest section of American demographics? Yeah, that was the last one. I'm no trump fan, but that's an economic stat precious few administrations have achieved.

Has anyone else here read the Eden Chronicles by S.M. Anderson? The first book "A Bright Shore" was written in 2018, during the genesis of all this social upheaval. With all the excellent justifications provided by some liberals in government service on this forum concerning the 'correctness' of normalizing what began as 'fringe' and celebrating what was once simply tolerated, that first book is beginning to read like a societal prophesy. Simply look at the social narratives coming from our 'apolitical' politician general officer leadership. Students of history understand exactly what his happening. It happened in Greece, Persia, Rome, China, and several others. Hard times make strong men, who make good times, which makes soft men, who make hard times. Unfortunately, the soft men can make that cycle come to a screeching halt. In historical context, we have gone so soft, for so long, that those with opinions of governance which are rooted in neither integrity, fact, nor history can now set policy, which will result in the collapse of our society. To the liberal ideologs here: If you sincerely think that forcing the celebration (which is exactly what pride month is) of LGTBQ+, redistributing wealth, and enforcing ideologies that will eviscerate the family unit will improve things in our currently domestic and international environment, I request you please put it down in a journal and go re-read that in about 10 years and see how it aged...assuming we make it that long. You are supporting ideology that will destroy our society. History already proves it, we're currently living it, and you're supporting it.

"I'm not triggered, YOU'RE triggered" Cute. Sad to see that you have no intention of to answering hard questions or engaging in nuanced discussion. I do genuinely want to hear the reasoned arguments behind why people believe liberal agendas, but I guess that won't be coming from you.

Interesting response. Clearly you've been triggered. Thanks for not illuminating your position with any facts or responding to any of the questions that are asked to you. This response really does tell me a lot about you. You, likewise, don't know very much about me, and as far as I can see, you've not asked very many people here why they believe what they believe. Instead, you've actively displayed disgust, disbelief, and emotive response of distain for viewpoints that are not your own, including the above post. That's telling. Frankly, I'm not concerned if you call yourself a liberal, conservative, independent or other. Do you think you deserve some special treatment because of your viewpoint? One of the two of us actually tries to engage and present nuanced arguments. My comment about hate had nothing to do with liberals. It has to do with views you personally have expressed on this board, the contempt you've repeatedly expressed toward opinions you don't like, and the fact that you feel entitled to throw shade at opposing viewpoints just because you don't like them, not because you have a factually based argment against them that you're willing to share. That's an expression of hate, hence my comment.

I was trying to make a joke and it went poorly....

While I appreciate the bravery of posting a video of yourself, I gotta say that it's dangerous. People will find out what you look like, and possibly geolocate you, though you did a good job with the ambiguous background...irregardlessly Worst of all: That cat owes you.

For what reason? Would you support ending the electoral college if your party were in the minority?

I'm willing to ignore all the other items that feel are being rammed down your throat and that you feel you should, instead be able to ram a whole bunch of OTHER items the other way down conservative throats. You've proven that you think you're right and should not consider other points of view that might force you to evaluate what you believe. Hopefully someday you'll realize you can't fix hate with more hate. Regardless, can we get back to this above quote? Do you seriously disagree with the basic foundational civics of our republic, such as the electoral college? You were asked once and obviously completely ignored it. Do you realize that without the electoral college, our country would not exist? The city dwellers are 100% reliant on the country dwellers for their ability to live in a city. That sparsely populated center section of our country that you appear to despise is THE ONLY REASON CITIES EXIST TODAY. Urbanites who believe they can and should be able to exist and be compensated largely based on the intellectual products they create have clearly forgetten where their out of season avocados come from (try looking in the Columbia river valley or Mexico) for their all so important avocado toast. It appears they don't realize just how dependent they are on things that come from outside the city. If the cities didn't exist, the quality of farm life would be lower, but they'd survive...as they know how to make their own food and in general survive without much outside input. If farms didn't exist. Cities would disperse out of pure necessity. Without the electoral college, our country would be effectively a pure democracy where the 51% decide how everyone lives. In every instance in history where that's happened, pure democracy leads to mob rule leads to dictatorship, and ruin. Put another way, if the city dwellers are allowed to dictate how farmers live and work, farms would cease to function. The USSR and China are fantastic examples. The first forced non-farmers to become farmers. The second now imports a huge section of it's needs. Neither of those are sustainable in the future that's dawning right now. In North America (and even some of south America, depending how we team up), we can exist largely separated from extra-hemispheric imports...IF and only IF we properly manage our natural resources. That's a skill city dwellers claim to have, but in reality have demonstrated they largely lack. Doubt that? Go make your own tortilla from scratch with products made and produced only in a city. The electoral college prevents the domination of one portion of society over the other. The door swings both ways, for which you should be grateful. You may scream for it to be gone now, but you probably not do so when republicans are in control. Why is that? That's basic civics. Not politics. CIVICS. The thing all Americans should understand and appreciate. I highly urge you to re-examine your baseline understanding of our government and WHY it was framed the way it is. Stop calling for re-writes before you re-read.

As someone who's intimately familiar with going off the deep end, you gotta really go for it to get moderated. Thanks @DFRESH for keeping it honest.

Bruh. Those two have made it into every other thread... It's almost like this one was literally made to avoid that shit.

@ Prozac. Congrats on your tenure at baseops. I've been here the whole time you have. I've read many of your posts. Those who claim "I expressed my views, you should know them by now" is being either intellectually lazy, or has completely stopped learning and updating his world view based on new information. I don't take you for either, hence me asking lots of why questions. People change, as they should, and I refuse to assume that someone is intellectually where I last left them. I asked you WHY you believe what you believe. Your response contained a whole lot of WHAT you believe and a significant collection of CNN talking points (which a google search quickly highlighted). Not a single why as far as I can see. For example: That' a what. Not a how. Definitely not a why. What do you qualify as a 'best' healthcare system? One that makes people wait 8 months for cancer diagnosis (english/canada) or one that you don't have to pay for...but that your really do through higher taxes? Why would you support it? Straight up a CNN talking point not validated or elucidated with a single fact from the CDC. What age group? What demographic? What qualifies as "gun violence"? Please dude. Question the statements you hear before repeating them. This is literally click bate that you appear to have swallowed completely. Do some research of multiple reputable and unbiased health tracking sources...of which the CDC has epically proven itself not to be...and you'll find that statement is mis-leading at best. I did, and it simply isn't true. Negligent parenting and McDonalds are killing more kids below the age of 18 than IRRESPONSIBLE PEOPLE WITH guns are. A little note: a gun has never, not once, of it's own volition killed anyone. Irresponsible people do that. I agree that No child should ever die from gun violence. What you regurgitated there is simple emotive response material not rooted in fact or data. Again that's a what without foundation. In what demographic? Homeschooling? Public Schooling? What about christian schools? Are you ok if they learn Darwinian theory at the same time (which Darwin himself disavowed before he died)? What about homosexual behavior and the mechanics how to do it? That's taught to some kids today in public school right now. Are you ok with that? Seems like you're cheery picking some emotive moral hotspots. WHY do you not like that? That is one of your broadest statements yet. So do believe in whole-sale socialism? Can you point to a historic or current successful example of how you would employ that? P.S. Life isn't fair. Trying to make it 'fair' as defined by one section of society only makes it worse. Yes reforms are needed. History completely disagrees with you about increasing federal power. Never has an increasingly powerful centralized government resulted in higher liberty, freedom, and prosperity for it citizens. If I'm wrong about that please give me your examples. Once again. That's all WHAT material. WHY DO YOU BELIEVE THIS What is your logical backup for your stance? What are you basing your beliefs on? More. Ok. What exactly are the pitfalls that make conservative strategy worse? Are you happy with the last 3 years of liberal controlled government? You're happy with the economy? With the spending of your tax dollars? With the unity that the party of unity has brought to our country? If you cannot understand how that belief structure leads directly to tyranny, oppression and dictatorship, I can do nothing to help you. You are directly arguing for a communist society where "the state" is more important and more capable of deciding what is good for people than the individual people are. Please go live in a former eastern bloc country...not visit...LIVE IN for 6 months and you'll learn exactly how toxic that viewpoint is. What has led you to that conclusion? Where did modern hospitals, orphanages, adoption processes, welfare systems, vaccines, and mental health institutions come from? This is a violently ignorant and arrogantly bigoted (actual meaning of that word, not the modern liberal use of it) statement. Once again. It explains nothing of WHY you believe it. Why do you disagree? Please back up your statement. You sound very much like you listen to a lot of media...from whatever side. Here's what concerns me the most: American's that violently defend a stance of WHAT they believe while having NOT A SINGLE RATIONAL CLUE as to WHY the believe it. In the end, I think it's a lot of people who simply what to fight and stand up for "their side" without ever actually putting to brain bites into truly analyzing the facts behind "their side" and deciding if it make logical sense. Put differently: people want to passionately defend their side because if feels good. Understand the why behind that side is usually too intellectually challenging so they just skip it...turning themselves into what stalin call "useful idiots". Please don't be a useful idiot, regardless of what side you land on. Please tackle the why behind your stance. I have ask a LOT of why questions in order that I might truly understand what's behind your belief structure. I'm not getting a lot of solid feedback beyond some strongly defended talking points based on emotion and not fact. Still standing by for the answer to the WHY questions.