All purpose news and politics thread part VII: News & Politics Total Landscaping

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Oh wow!!! MAGA, Qanon, conspiracy theorist, that type of stuff, some of it, all of it

It's better that he did this over deciding to shoot or stab someone else, though...

https://www.newsweek.com/read-max-az...-trial-1892368

Just heard about this. Guy was definitely disturbed, having gone down so deep a conspiracy rabbit hole, there just was no way out.

[Tami]

Just heard about this. Guy was definitely disturbed, having gone down so deep a conspiracy rabbit hole, there just was no way out.

At the park on Thursday, Mr. Azzarello had held up various signs and at one point shouted toward a group of reporters gathered there: “Biggest scoop of your life or your money back!” One of his signs claimed that Mr. Trump and President Biden were “about to fascist coup us.”

NYT

I think this guy was his own brand of conspiracy quackers.

[hyped78]

NYT

I think this guy was his own brand of conspiracy quackers.

RFK Jr supporter? :P

[aja_christopher]

Oh, so it's not a temper tantrum? It's your everyday attitude?!?!?!?!?! :O

I tried having a polite discussion. That's what a forum is for... I simply asked about your opinion on a topic. If you don't want to discuss the topic because of whatever reason that's totally fine, no problem

Again -- unlike Republican bigotry, said topic has already been discussed repeatedly and you are more than welcome to catch up.

Conversely, don't expect others to spend their time retreading old ground just because you don't want to do your own research.

Regardless, you got your response -- the issue would be have already been addressed if not for Republican obstruction.

Which is exactly the same conclusion that was reached during the discussion of Obama's "open border" policies with Mets.

Clearly, Qpublicans dismissed the border issue, mainly because Trump told them to so he'd have something to campaign against Biden on.

Exactly this -- they can't run on racism and white nationalism if they actually resolve the issues at the border.

They keep talking around the real problem as if everyone can't see the obvious.

[hyped78]

Again -- the topic has already been discussed and you are more than welcome to catch up.

Read the room. We've moved on.

[aja_christopher]

Read the room. We've moved on.

Accountability has nothing to do with you "moving on".

[aja_christopher]

[Dalak]

I'm not sure if it's good or not, but things haven't changed much while I've been gone. I'd like to thank those who fought against misinformation while I was away, regardless of whether I agree with them normally. I won't be able to do so as I have in the past, so I'll leave it to others.

I'm a fan of all the Sleepy Don jokes

BTW If anyone genuinely wants to know any poster's opinion on an easily searchable keyword there is an Advanced Search option under the Search Thread link in the upper right of the thread, where you can search posts by a specific poster containing specific words. It's pretty easy to get an idea of where they stand within 5 minutes of starting your search, with more detail granted the more you go down the rabbit hole.

[Mister Mets]

It's not my "responsibility" (and how would I even know where to start, there are 314 pages of posts on this thread alone, not to mention previous version threads). It's my choice - and obviously at this point I choose not to. I asked in good faith and politely, you didn't want to type even a single line about it and just went on a bizarre rant making weird accusations, so that's that. You have terrible attitude.

EDIT: You've added "If the argument is in good faith then that won’t be an issue." - if you would've pointed me to page XX or to date YY, I would've gone back to read, obviously, but without any clue this is like trying to find a needle in a haystack, also because the search function on this forum isn't great

I agree with reading the room, so I'm not going to relitigate an argument with someone else- It doesn't seem pleasant for most people here.

I do want to note there are two potential issues with trying to discern what someone has said based on search terms.

One issue is that a post might use slightly different terminology. If you're curious what someone thinks about racism and the terms they used were "racial animus," "bigotry" or "racists," you're not going to get those posts in the search results.

The second problem is that you're going to find a lot of comments that don't feature a poster's opinion. For example, if anyone is curious what I think about Matt Gaetz, and looks it up on this thread or the previous one, it seems there are a total of 66 (mostly in the previous thread- in fairness I've got more than ten times the posts there.) In some comments, it'll be clear I don't like the guy, but others are more neutral. The search results can include posts in which I'm responding to someone else who mentioned him, even if my response is about a different aspect of the post (IE- slagging Marjorie Taylor Greene or something.)

[aja_christopher]

If not for Democrats one can only imagine the result.

[aja_christopher]

[hyped78]

I'm not sure if it's good or not, but things haven't changed much while I've been gone. I'd like to thank those who fought against misinformation while I was away, regardless of whether I agree with them normally. I won't be able to do so as I have in the past, so I'll leave it to others.

I'm a fan of all the Sleepy Don jokes

BTW If anyone genuinely wants to know any poster's opinion on an easily searchable keyword there is an Advanced Search option under the Search Thread link in the upper right of the thread, where you can search posts by a specific poster containing specific words. It's pretty easy to get an idea of where they stand within 5 minutes of starting your search, with more detail granted the more you go down the rabbit hole.

Welcome back

[hyped78]

I agree with reading the room, so I'm not going to relitigate an argument with someone else- It doesn't seem pleasant for most people here.

I do want to note there are two potential issues with trying to discern what someone has said based on search terms.

One issue is that a post might use slightly different terminology. If you're curious what someone thinks about racism and the terms they used were "racial animus," "bigotry" or "racists," you're not going to get those posts in the search results.

The second problem is that you're going to find a lot of comments that don't feature a poster's opinion. For example, if anyone is curious what I think about Matt Gaetz, and looks it up on this thread or the previous one, it seems there are a total of 66 (mostly in the previous thread- in fairness I've got more than ten times the posts there.) In some comments, it'll be clear I don't like the guy, but others are more neutral. The search results can include posts in which I'm responding to someone else who mentioned him, even if my response is about a different aspect of the post (IE- slagging Marjorie Taylor Greene or something.)

I think your friend over there has bizarrely tried to extend the grudge (to use Tuck's expression) he has with you to me. Twilight Zone stuff

Plus he routinely goes back and edits his posts after seeing that someone else has already quoted and replied to the original post, leaving the reply moot/ without context, e.g. post 4729.

[hyped78]

Just heard about this. Guy was definitely disturbed, having gone down so deep a conspiracy rabbit hole, there just was no way out.

NYT

I think this guy was his own brand of conspiracy quackers.

Revolution anthem...
https://www.tmz.com/2024/04/19/polit...al-identified/

[hyped78]

Explosion at Iraqi military base in Babylon

https://news.sky.com/story/injuries-...-base-13118972