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

[JackDaw]

While I believe you edited out something less welcoming, I'll take it in the spirit intended. Thank you!





Thanks guys!



If your stance is that the search function is so limited that it is useless, I disagree. Also with something that comes up often enough (Immigration/Border Policy, Abortion, Transgender Rights, etc) you won't have to deal with opinions that old. Especially as we are in a thread less than a year old

I never claimed it was perfect, just that you could get an idea of how they felt about something within 5 minutes. I assumed 2-3 for checking search terms to find one that gets results and the rest to peruse a few posts. Most replies on this forum don't come that quick. I also never mentioned that this was the only way someone should get information, but I will note that if someone isn't being forthcoming it can be a way to get the information you're after. Using the search in this way can also reveal things like posting habits, biases both political & not, and if they behave differently in regards to one subject/person than they do regarding another in the same circumstances. It all depends on how far you want to go to sate your curiosity. Mentioning how to use the Search Function shouldn't result in anyone circling their wagons.

BTW, unless your intention was to type "allow for the fact that views change" which I've been assuming in my reply, I didn't understand what you meant by "you'd have to allow for fact,".

Yes, I did mean “allow for the fact that views change”.

I’ll say a bit more about search function later. But before that let me admit to a “gut feeling”. It’s this: if I asked some one for their view on a subject and they replied “use the search function to find out” I’d regard that as a strange and defensive post. Or if some one repeatedly ducks a question, I’d regard it as defensive. (Usually, always exceptions!)

My experience of search function here is that it’s pretty hit and miss, certainly not completely useless, but not so good that I have any eagerness to use, or have any real confidence in. As an experiment when I’ve got more time I’ll use it to see what comes up on my own view on abortion (something I commented on a fair time ago, but not recently). I’ll report later, but might be days later.

[hyped78]

While I believe you edited out something less welcoming, I'll take it in the spirit intended. Thank you!

No, nothing unwelcoming at all. Initially I had also asked if someone politely asks for your opinion on topic X (and you’re the one who brought up/ referred to said topic!) if you reply or if you tell them to use the search function, like mr. Cranky is doing. It was just that, but then I thought it wasn’t even worth it.

[hyped78]

That people are killing themselves over such a horrid man and the lies he spreads is sickening. It would be a terrible thing for more people to set themselves on fire to make a political statement about something so farcical, and I think that's an easy statement to make.

I initially thought the same but it wasn’t Trump related, apparently.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-b2531705.html

“Police said that Mr Azzarello’s driver’s license showed he was born in 1987 and was a native of St Augustine, Florida. A registered Democrat, he attended the University of North Carolina from 2005 to 2009, according to public records and his LinkedIn page.”

“Mr Azzarello had a long history of posting conspiracy theories and railing against the rich and powerful, according to NYPD officials, who had begun to comb through his social media profiles.”

“His lengthy Substack post called out a string of people, social media companies and institutions. He also labelled the Covid-19 pandemic as an “economic doomsday device”.”

He stated that Biden and Trump are doing a fascist coup in America. Completely crazy stuff.

[hyped78]

But before that let me admit to a “gut feeling”. It’s this: if I asked some one for their view on a subject and they replied “use the search function to find out” I’d regard that as a strange and defensive post. Or if some one repeatedly ducks a question, I’d regard it as defensive. (Usually, always exceptions!)

Totally agree. I had the exact same feeling. Besides defensive, it also came across as unnecessarily hostile.

[Mister Mets]

Yes..agree.. the search facility here has severe limits. Not that unusual, it’s true on many sites.

In addition…if you were seeking some one views on something…you’d have to allow for fact, that views change over time, so a view expressed a year ago might not reflect a person’s current opinion.

True. In addition, facts can come out that can change the reasonable response to a story.

The reception to Michael Avenatti is different now than it was when he announced that he was representing a woman with serious allegations about Brett Kavanaugh, which turned out to be complete nonsense.

Responses to speculation that a noose was left as a threat to a black NASCAR driver are going to be different before it turns out it was a pull cord that had been there months earlier for a garage used by other drivers.

The irony of this conversation taking place because the issue of bigotry and homophobia has yet to be addressed within the Republican party (specifically the Parents Rights Movement) shouldn't be lost on anyone.

Granted, some people feel they will be treated "ungenerously" for expressing views supportive of homophobic and racist sentiment, so the silence is understandable -- if not the moral and ethical hypocrisy.



It's a waste of time to repeatedly discuss the border "problem" yet not analyze the bigotry, lies and racism that manufacture issues where there are none and impede solutions where they are apparent.

If you're talking about me, I've definitely discussed examples of bigotry and racism among Republicans and parent activists.

In this thread, I wasn't responding to a point about the Parental Rights Movement, but about a policy view that parents do not have any rights. Among other things this would mean that parents have no more right to choose to send their kids to a private school than someone has a right to drive through city streets at 30 MPH; these would both be laws that elected officials or bureaucrats can change.

The "parental rights movement" seems to be a vague term. This isn't like the Ku Klux Klan or the Green party where people can be card-carrying members and there are clear policy goals where everyone is aligned. There are some times parents are pissed off at schools and I'll think they're wrong, and other times parents are pissed off at schools and I'll think they're right. The term doesn't seem to exclusively apply to the most unreasonable parents.

[Mister Mets]

I initially thought the same but it wasn’t Trump related, apparently.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-b2531705.html

“Police said that Mr Azzarello’s driver’s license showed he was born in 1987 and was a native of St Augustine, Florida. A registered Democrat, he attended the University of North Carolina from 2005 to 2009, according to public records and his LinkedIn page.”

“Mr Azzarello had a long history of posting conspiracy theories and railing against the rich and powerful, according to NYPD officials, who had begun to comb through his social media profiles.”

“His lengthy Substack post called out a string of people, social media companies and institutions. He also labelled the Covid-19 pandemic as an “economic doomsday device”.”

He stated that Biden and Trump are doing a fascist coup in America. Completely crazy stuff.

Looking into this, I discovered some things about the internet that are admirable and some that are not.

The guy's substack post is available online, but the major media is not linking to it, which seems to be the best way to handle it. I was trying to see what his views were, and he suggested that the political parties are the same and it's a con involving the writers of the Simpsons.

The bad stuff is some crypto bros suggesting he had important points. Autoplay is atrocious in a situation where there are videos of a man lighting himself on fire.

[Dalak]

Yes, I did mean “allow for the fact that views change”.

I’ll say a bit more about search function later. But before that let me admit to a “gut feeling”. It’s this: if I asked some one for their view on a subject and they replied “use the search function to find out” I’d regard that as a strange and defensive post. Or if some one repeatedly ducks a question, I’d regard it as defensive. (Usually, always exceptions!)

My experience of search function here is that it’s pretty hit and miss, certainly not completely useless, but not so good that I have any eagerness to use, or have any real confidence in. As an experiment when I’ve got more time I’ll use it to see what comes up on my own view on abortion (something I commented on a fair time ago, but not recently). I’ll report later, but might be days later.

I agree with your gut feeling, and if circumstances weren't what they are I could comment further. That aside I often use the search function to support my arguments so it might seem easier to me than others who haven't used it as often, but using the Advanced Search Thread (In the right thread) as I described seems to do the trick more often than not.

No, nothing unwelcoming at all. Initially I had also asked if someone politely asks for your opinion on topic X, if you reply or if you tell them to use the search function, like mr. Cranky is doing. It was just that, but then I thought it wasn’t even worth it.

As stated I often use the Search to support my arguments, so it's second nature to use it instead of asking a question to someone I believe is evasive as that means I can answer things for myself in a shorter period and use what I've found in my reply if necessary. I wouldn't suggest someone do something I do not do myself, as hypocrisy/double standards are one of my pet peeves.


Generally if it's not something I've repeated ad-nauseam I usually give a basic reply. I realize not everyone is me though, hence the advice to use the Search if someone won't say and you're genuinely curious.

I initially thought the same but it wasn’t Trump related, apparently.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-b2531705.html

“Police said that Mr Azzarello’s driver’s license showed he was born in 1987 and was a native of St Augustine, Florida. A registered Democrat, he attended the University of North Carolina from 2005 to 2009, according to public records and his LinkedIn page.”

“Mr Azzarello had a long history of posting conspiracy theories and railing against the rich and powerful, according to NYPD officials, who had begun to comb through his social media profiles.”

“His lengthy Substack post called out a string of people, social media companies and institutions. He also labelled the Covid-19 pandemic as an “economic doomsday device”.”

He stated that Biden and Trump are doing a fascist coup in America. Completely crazy stuff.

I don't understand why this needed a second reply, but that's why I included "the lies he spreads" as I assume someone into conspiracies about the rich and who clearly detested Left & Right at the end would buy into things like Pizzagate and at least some of the innumerable conspiracies spread by Trump & Co. I get the feeling of being disheartened looking at how no punishment is allowed to stick to Trump, but this is leagues beyond that. I admit I have had times that put together sets of facts with motives that are outrageous but 'compared to reality it COULD be true' but after being suckered a few times back in my early days on the internet I learned to reign in those impulses a bit and learn some more before going off. It still doesn't stop me from occasionally getting fooled, which is why I try to cut people some slack with it unless it's a repeated thing. We're all human afterall . . . right?

[aja_christopher]

TIn this thread, I wasn't responding to a point about the Parental Rights Movement, but about a policy view that parents do not have any rights. Among other things this would mean that parents have no more right to choose to send their kids to a private school than someone has a right to drive through city streets at 30 MPH; these would both be laws that elected officials or bureaucrats can change.

The "parental rights movement" seems to be a vague term. This isn't like the Ku Klux Klan or the Green party where people can be card-carrying members and there are clear policy goals where everyone is aligned. There are some times parents are pissed off at schools and I'll think they're wrong, and other times parents are pissed off at schools and I'll think they're right. The term doesn't seem to exclusively apply to the most unreasonable parents.

You've been given many different specific examples of where the Parents Rights Movement and organizations such as Libs of TikTok have engaged in openly homophobic behavior. You've been given many examples where Republicans have engaged in overtly racist behavior against black and brown voters. You've been given numerous examples of sexism within the Republican party with regards to women's rights -- up to and including the loss of abortion rights in numeous states -- all against the majority of public opinion.

You've also been shown numerous examples of how this behavior relates directly to white Christian nationalism and white supremacy both within America and abroad, with Republicans idolizing known white supremacists such as Viktor Orban and Tucker Carlson while turning a blind eye to the white nationalists both within their ranks and the one currently running the Republican party.

To try to argue that conservatives bigotry is "vague" at this point is little more than an excuse not to address it directly.

I’ll say a bit more about search function later. But before that let me admit to a “gut feeling”. It’s this: if I asked some one for their view on a subject and they replied “use the search function to find out” I’d regard that as a strange and defensive post. Or if some one repeatedly ducks a question, I’d regard it as defensive. (Usually, always exceptions!)

So when the issue of Republican bigotry is repeatedly "ducked" then you should apply that logic evenly.

Immigration has been discussed repeatedly and objectively on this forum to the point where even Mets had to admit that Republicans are lying about Democratic "open borders".

Republican bigotry -- which is at the root of many of these issues -- has not.

As stated at the beginning of the thread however -- there's no point in expecting any better this time around and that has proven to be true.

[hyped78]

I agree with your gut feeling, and if circumstances weren't what they are I could comment further. That aside I often use the search function to support my arguments so it might seem easier to me than others who haven't used it as often, but using the Advanced Search Thread (In the right thread) as I described seems to do the trick more often than not.

As stated I often use the Search to support my arguments, so it's second nature to use it instead of asking a question to someone I believe is evasive as that means I can answer things for myself in a shorter period and use what I've found in my reply if necessary. I wouldn't suggest someone do something I do not do myself, as hypocrisy/double standards are one of my pet peeves.

Generally if it's not something I've repeated ad-nauseam I usually give a basic reply. I realize not everyone is me though, hence the advice to use the Search if someone won't say and you're genuinely curious.

I don't understand why this needed a second reply, but that's why I included "the lies he spreads" as I assume someone into conspiracies about the rich and who clearly detested Left & Right at the end would buy into things like Pizzagate and at least some of the innumerable conspiracies spread by Trump & Co. I get the feeling of being disheartened looking at how no punishment is allowed to stick to Trump, but this is leagues beyond that. I admit I have had times that put together sets of facts with motives that are outrageous but 'compared to reality it COULD be true' but after being suckered a few times back in my early days on the internet I learned to reign in those impulses a bit and learn some more before going off. It still doesn't stop me from occasionally getting fooled, which is why I try to cut people some slack with it unless it's a repeated thing. We're all human afterall . . . right?

I didn’t know he was going to be evasive or even hostile. And, again, he was the one who mentioned the border (and shared some incomplete figures on that, so “objectivity” might be an issue).
To your point, I agree that repeating things ad nauseum doesn’t make sense/ has its limits. But Mr. Cranky is literally the person who has written hundreds of posts always with the same talking points, so he’s kinda used to repeating things over and over again (see the post above this for a further round of repetition).

I think 50% of that GIF might be Cylon

[hyped78]

Looking into this, I discovered some things about the internet that are admirable and some that are not.

The guy's substack post is available online, but the major media is not linking to it, which seems to be the best way to handle it. I was trying to see what his views were, and he suggested that the political parties are the same and it's a con involving the writers of the Simpsons.

The bad stuff is some crypto bros suggesting he had important points. Autoplay is atrocious in a situation where there are videos of a man lighting himself on fire.

I think major media should refrain from sharing his conspiracy theories. From what I’ve read, I don’t know how this isn’t a case of mental illness, diagnosed or not. Quite sad.

[Dalak]

I didn’t know he was going to be evasive or even hostile. And, again, he was the one who mentioned the border (and shared some incomplete figures on that, so “objectivity” might be an issue).
To your point, I agree that repeating things ad nauseum doesn’t make sense/ has its limits. But Mr. Cranky is literally the person who has written hundreds of posts always with the same talking points, so he’s kinda used to repeating things over and over again (see the post above this for a further round of repetition).

I think 50% of that GIF might be Cylon

If you have nicknames for someone and are talking about their history, this isn't your first go-around.

As for the bolded:

[hyped78]

If you have nicknames for someone and are talking about their history, this isn't your first go-around.

As for the bolded:

It's a new nickname! Made its debut today! And yes, I know his "history" (part of it, as I don't come to the forum everyday and sometimes I'm out for weeks/months) but I don't know/knew his opinion about the border, hence the question. Again - he brought up the border in his post (and made a false statement).

If someone doesn't want to reply to something, it's as easy as saying "Sorry, I'm not interested in having a debate on that", instead of calling someone else a liar and going on a bizarre, bizarre rant spilling over to other posters as well.
(note: I get zero results for user aja_christopher and keyword "border" on advanced search, which shows how bad it works because he's clearly mentioned the border in the last few days, so at least that should've shown up in results)

Anyways, this is all off-topic at this point.

[Tami]

Greene tries to get funding to Ukraine scrapped

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) introduced an amendment to bring Ukraine funding to zero.

Greene said on the House floor that the United States shouldn’t spend another dollar on helping Ukraine, lambasting foreign aid as a “sick business model” that distracts from domestic issues, such as protecting the southern border. Earlier this year, however, far-right Republicans blocked a bipartisan border deal after former president Donald Trump came out against it.

She added that Congress should be more concerned with taming inflation. “America last,” she said. “That’s all this is. America last.”

Greene has threatened to oust Rep. Mike Johnson as House speaker. After leaving the House floor, Greene declined to comment to reporters on whether she’d introduce a motion to vacate, the first step in ousting Johnson as speaker.

[hyped78]

Taylor Swift breaks Spotify record with new album

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-68863614

[hyped78]

Greene tries to get funding to Ukraine scrapped

Next up she's gonna propose funding to Russia...