ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Coronavirus , Coronavirus conspiracies , donald trump , Trump controversies

Reply
Old 16th September 2020, 02:13 PM   #481
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 46,645
Originally Posted by Mikemcc View Post
Governments have the right to hide information from their populations for wide range of reasons. The idea of a 'right-to-know' is frankly crazy. using an old adage 'You can't handle the truth!'. In that example it was used to obscure illegal dealings, but it can be used to hide sources, techniques, personnel or the information itself.

During WW2 there were plenty of examples where the Government hid, and in some cases, outright lied about what they knew to protect their sources especially the sucess against Enigma. The peak for this was the destruction of Coventry.

The flip side of this is you have to be prepared to defend that position legally at a later date.
Or if not legally, at least morally.

I don't disagree with your point, but I wouldn't use the language of "rights". I'd say the government has the responsibility to hide information, sometimes.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2020, 02:37 PM   #482
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 15,370
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
It can't be that one to say he's a pedo. Stephanie Carter isn't a child.
That's one of the ones they use to say he inappropriately touches women and sniffs their hair.
There is video of him acting a little weird with kids..
It is. Look at the hashtag #pedoBiden. That's the one that Trump retweeted that started the whole thing.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2020, 02:40 PM   #483
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,595
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
It is. Look at the hashtag #pedoBiden. That's the one that Trump retweeted that started the whole thing.
If you are correct, then the legal case for defamation just looks better.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2020, 03:18 PM   #484
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 15,370
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
It can't be that one to say he's a pedo. Stephanie Carter isn't a child.
That's one of the ones they use to say he inappropriately touches women and sniffs their hair.
There is video of him acting a little weird with kids..
And right on stage in front of their parents and the cameras for the world to see! Why, the chutzpah of the man! I say, I do feel somewhat faint, Sir!

https://media1.tenor.com/images/496b...itemid=8405096

ETA: I am correct. I supplied the link to the story about Trump retweeting the Conservativegirl QAnon CT #pedoBiden with the Stephanie Carter picture in my first post.

Last edited by Stacyhs; 16th September 2020 at 03:23 PM.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2020, 09:32 PM   #485
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 13,912
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Has ANY candidate ever won a MAJORITY of Americans? Probably Washington. But I'd bet my last dollar not one since. Certainly not Lincoln. Nor FDR. Nor Jefferson. Nor Roosevelt.

It doesn't matter that she was running against Trump because, like I said, she still BEAT HIM in the popular vote. And no matter how many times you and Squeegee et al want to claim she was 'unelectable' she wasn't because she only lost to him due to the stupidity of the electoral college by 77,000 votes. She was completely electable.
I didn't say she was unelectable. I just said most Americans are stupid. Yeah, she could have won. I expected her to win. Even if she had won, Democrats still would've been stupid.
__________________
April 13th, 2018:
Ranb: I can't think of anything useful you contributed to a thread in the last few years.
Cain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2020, 09:58 PM   #486
Hlafordlaes
Disorder of Kilopi
 
Hlafordlaes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: State of Flux
Posts: 13,441
Originally Posted by Mikemcc View Post
Governments have the right to hide information from their populations for wide range of reasons. The idea of a 'right-to-know' is frankly crazy. using an old adage 'You can't handle the truth!'. In that example it was used to obscure illegal dealings, but it can be used to hide sources, techniques, personnel or the information itself.

During WW2 there were plenty of examples where the Government hid, and in some cases, outright lied about what they knew to protect their sources especially the sucess against Enigma. The peak for this was the destruction of Coventry.

The flip side of this is you have to be prepared to defend that position legally at a later date.
Holding back information to increase security or protect the populace is the polar opposite of what Trump and the GOP have done, do, and will consistently do whenever partisan advantage is to be had. They will also pump out toxic waste for the same reason. Contrast the "death panels" fear-mongering re Obamacare with the contemporary suggestion seniors should take a bullet (virus hit) for the good of, not the people, but the economy. The ends justify the means.

(Aside. I'd say "You can't handle the truth!"" is no adage. More like a groupthink meme from entertainment, aka, "the circus".)
__________________
Driftwood on an empty shore of the sea of meaninglessness. Irrelevant, weightless, inconsequential moment of existential hubris on the fast track to oblivion.
His real name is Count Douchenozzle von Stenchfahrter und Lichtendicks. - shemp
Hlafordlaes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 12:18 AM   #487
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 15,370
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
I didn't say she was unelectable. I just said most Americans are stupid. Yeah, she could have won. I expected her to win. Even if she had won, Democrats still would've been stupid.
If you combine those who voted for Trump with those who just plain didn't bother to vote at all, then you're right: most Americans, not necessarily Democrats, were stupid.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 05:16 AM   #488
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,157
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
If you combine those who voted for Trump with those who just plain didn't bother to vote at all, then you're right: most Americans, not necessarily Democrats, were stupid.
Well yeah but if we're going that route "Didn't bother to vote" has been the overwhelming landslide Presidential winner in every election.
__________________
- I don't know how to convince you that facts exist
- I don't know how to convince you that you should care about other people
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2020, 06:02 AM   #489
Mader Levap
Muse
 
Mader Levap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 984
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Quote:
It is even worse than that, since there is evidence that they thought it will affect disproportionately states and people that support their political opponents.
Which I'm am sure you are working dillegently to present, posthaste.
Already presented, and not just on this thread after your question. For some reason you overlooked it when it was presented previously on this forum.
I know, you probably are delusional enough to think republicans are okay, only Trump is bad or something equally nonsensical.

Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Quote:
This is behavior of foreign hostile occupier, like some african colony in third world. How much more they have to do until violence against them will be morally justified?
Depends on what you mean by "them" and "violence."
Them? Republicans, obviously. As far I am concerned, right now they are modern equivalent of Nazis in their early days. And they won't get better.

Violence? Civil war or something similar (like Troubles in UK).

Either way, I see violence as only tool that will remove far-rightwing wannabe authoritarian party of USA (that works hard every day to remove "wannabe" part) from power*. I do not see any peaceful way possible to halt, let alone revert, trends in USA that are currently happening.
In short term, even if Biden wins, it will only slightly slow down rot of USA for four years.

Just temporary setback on way to glorious corporate fascism state.

* Taking aside that violent revolutions usually leave everything even more bleeped than before. Some other posters were right, we're** screwed.
** I am not murican, but any nonsense going on in this unholy mix of first and third world affects rest of world, all way down and including me personally. This is why I am forced to be interested in what happens there.
__________________
Sanity is overrated. / Voting for Trump is morally equivalent to voting for Nazis in early 30's.
Mader Levap is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 02:12 AM   #490
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 29,812
The latest Opening Arguments podcast goes into whether or not this is manslaughter. The TL/DR version is no it's not, and you don't want it to be. If it was, the Republicans would have tried to prosecute Obama/Clinton for manslaughter over Benghazi.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 04:10 AM   #491
rockysmith76
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 1,854
Originally Posted by Mader Levap View Post
Already presented, and not just on this thread after your question. For some reason you overlooked it when it was presented previously on this forum.
I know, you probably are delusional enough to think republicans are okay, only Trump is bad or something equally nonsensical.



Them? Republicans, obviously. As far I am concerned, right now they are modern equivalent of Nazis in their early days. And they won't get better.

Violence? Civil war or something similar (like Troubles in UK).

Either way, I see violence as only tool that will remove far-rightwing wannabe authoritarian party of USA (that works hard every day to remove "wannabe" part) from power*. I do not see any peaceful way possible to halt, let alone revert, trends in USA that are currently happening.
In short term, even if Biden wins, it will only slightly slow down rot of USA for four years.

Just temporary setback on way to glorious corporate fascism state.

* Taking aside that violent revolutions usually leave everything even more bleeped than before. Some other posters were right, we're** screwed.
** I am not murican, but any nonsense going on in this unholy mix of first and third world affects rest of world, all way down and including me personally. This is why I am forced to be interested in what happens there.
Closer to the balkans war maybe, once there's a push back by the antifa/sjw mix (There will be), it will be closer to a civil war scenario, though hopefully not.
rockysmith76 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 11:45 AM   #492
Babbylonian
Penultimate Amazing
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,102
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
The latest Opening Arguments podcast goes into whether or not this is manslaughter. The TL/DR version is no it's not, and you don't want it to be. If it was, the Republicans would have tried to prosecute Obama/Clinton for manslaughter over Benghazi.
The "what about..." argument is no more convincing here than anywhere else. Failing to identify how dangerous a situation might become is a far cry from purposely downplaying a known dangerous situation for political reasons.

Trump didn't make a mistake of fact. He took actions that he absolutely knew would result in the deaths of American citizens and he did so for no reason beyond a desire to boost his own image and/or reelection chances.

Unless you believe that Obama and Clinton failed to act regarding Benghazi because they believed that sacrificing those lives would be profitable to them personally, the two situations are not in any way comparable.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 12:59 PM   #493
Roger Ramjets
Illuminator
 
Roger Ramjets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,953
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
If you combine those who voted for Trump with those who just plain didn't bother to vote at all, then you're right: most Americans, not necessarily Democrats, were stupid.
Many who voted for Trump were cynical, not stupid. They knew Trump would lie and hurt people, but they didn't care. And their choice has proven to be intelligent. They got exactly what they wanted - political power, courts stacked with right-wing judges, progressive initiatives halted, the barrier between Church and State broken down, democracy further dismantled. So a few people had to die? Big deal - most of them were liberals, win-win!

We might think the Deplorables are stupid for wanting a one party state, putting the economy before lives, denying global warming etc. But they aren't, they are just selfish. Most of them stand to gain from getting what they wanted (even if it's just feeling better because they got to own the libs). Trump has been wonderful for them personally, so it's no wonder that they continue to support him.

Once you remove the Deplorables from those who voted for Trump, the majority of Americans are not stupid - just naive. Naive enough to think that there weren't that many of them, that Trump couldn't be that bad, and that it couldn't happen here.
__________________
We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good.
Roger Ramjets is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 01:01 PM   #494
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,157
Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets View Post
Many who voted for Trump were cynical, not stupid.
I really fail to see the difference.
__________________
- I don't know how to convince you that facts exist
- I don't know how to convince you that you should care about other people
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 01:55 PM   #495
Roger Ramjets
Illuminator
 
Roger Ramjets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,953
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
I really fail to see the difference.
The difference is stupid people don't understand the consequences of their choices, while cynics do. There's nothing stupid about being motivated purely by self-interest - if you only care about yourself.

But if they both support Trump then what's the difference politically? The difference is that cynics cannot be be persuaded (by logic or emotion) to change their minds. Stupid people eventually get the message. Cynics already know what the message is, but reject it because they expect to gain more by being selfish.

They say you can't fix stupid, but that's not true. People with low intelligence might be slow to figure things out, but they can still be educated. It's the people who have figured it out, but whose narcissism and lack of empathy determine their choices, that can't be fixed. Right now the cynics have the reins of power, and they are using it to control the stupid and naive alike. We can't fix them with rational discourse or by appealing to their emotions - all we can do is kick them out. This is what Hillary meant when she talked about 'Deplorables'.
__________________
We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good.
Roger Ramjets is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2020, 04:05 PM   #496
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 15,370
Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets View Post
Many who voted for Trump were cynical, not stupid. They knew Trump would lie and hurt people, but they didn't care. And their choice has proven to be intelligent. They got exactly what they wanted - political power, courts stacked with right-wing judges, progressive initiatives halted, the barrier between Church and State broken down, democracy further dismantled. So a few people had to die? Big deal - most of them were liberals, win-win!

We might think the Deplorables are stupid for wanting a one party state, putting the economy before lives, denying global warming etc.
But they aren't, they are just selfish. Most of them stand to gain from getting what they wanted (even if it's just feeling better because they got to own the libs). Trump has been wonderful for them personally, so it's no wonder that they continue to support him.

Once you remove the Deplorables from those who voted for Trump, the majority of Americans are not stupid - just naive. Naive enough to think that there weren't that many of them, that Trump couldn't be that bad, and that it couldn't happen here.
People who want those things are stupid.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2020, 12:26 AM   #497
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 29,812
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
The "what about..." argument is no more convincing here than anywhere else. Failing to identify how dangerous a situation might become is a far cry from purposely downplaying a known dangerous situation for political reasons.

Trump didn't make a mistake of fact. He took actions that he absolutely knew would result in the deaths of American citizens and he did so for no reason beyond a desire to boost his own image and/or reelection chances.

Unless you believe that Obama and Clinton failed to act regarding Benghazi because they believed that sacrificing those lives would be profitable to them personally, the two situations are not in any way comparable.
Nobody said the two situations were comparable.

What Trump did is not prosecutable, even as manslaughter, according to Andrew Torrez.

This is a good thing because if the president could be criminally prosecuted for actions taken in their capacity as president, then the Republicans would be using that as a weapon against anything that a Democratic president did.

Or, to put it another way, saying that Trump's impeachment was led by Democrats and Clinton's impeachment was led by Republicans doesn't imply that the two situations were the same. What it means is that the Republicans have a habit of trying to abuse the law and find any loophole they can in order to further their agenda and attack their opponents.

So ask yourself this - if it were possible to criminally prosecute the president for murder or manslaughter for political actions they took which resulted in death, do you honestly believe that the Republicans wouldn't have tried it with someone they loathed as much as Obama? Do you think they'd have held back out of a sense of common decency? Or because they would have known it wasn't honest? Or because they'd be worried about setting a precedent that could be turned around on them? Because if you believe any of those things I'd love you to explain what in the last few years has led you to that conclusion.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th September 2020, 04:07 AM   #498
rockysmith76
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 1,854
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
So ask yourself this - if it were possible to criminally prosecute the president for murder or manslaughter for political actions they took which resulted in death, do you honestly believe that the Republicans wouldn't have tried it with someone they loathed as much as Obama? Do you think they'd have held back out of a sense of common decency? Or because they would have known it wasn't honest? Or because they'd be worried about setting a precedent that could be turned around on them? Because if you believe any of those things I'd love you to explain what in the last few years has led you to that conclusion.
No, because it wasnt murder or manslaughter while it was unconscionable, so no prosecution.
rockysmith76 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:20 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.