Soxbadger

QUOTE (JenksIsMyHero @ Jun 7, 2017 -> 04:19 PM) Let the record reflect that Reddy thinks a rich white male (gasp!) is the "perfect" candidate because of his marketability. Are jews white people?

Here is a link that isnt behind a pay wall: https://www.yahoo.com/news/james-comeys-sta...-185629653.html

He just bought another home in Chicago too.

Not sure what time you guys are talking about, but back in the late 90s people were doing heroin in HS. It was a small subset, but things like Ketamine/Heroin were definitely around. Heroin is something that I have always told anyone I know never to try. Just not worth it, and from what I hear its not even a fun drug. It would be nice of the US government would change its drug policies so that kids could actually understand what drugs are really "dangerous" and what drugs are not.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jun 5, 2017 -> 05:24 PM) Likewise. This is the perfect summation of your posting on this board. You have been posting in the filibuster for at least a year (give or take) and you have absolutely no idea what my worldview is. The only reason I even respond is to try and correct your misleading posts, in hopes that one day you will attempt to argue more honestly. I know that is difficult for you, but that is the baseline for having real discussion on an issue.

QUOTE (JenksIsMyHero @ Jun 5, 2017 -> 05:12 PM) It's breaking down any sense of trust we have in our government. It's breaking down trust between those in the government itself. How can the CIA or NSA function if a rogue federal contractor can obtain top secret clearance and then print docs off and send them to media outlet? And there's no backlash to it? I suppose it's semantics a bit here, whether it's undermining our democracy or a major security threat, in either case, this is an ongoing problem i'm more concerned about. Its a real problem, but no one wants to combat it because both sides want to use it to their advantage. With a normal President I think youd get a lot more backlash, but I think many feel Trump gave it a green light when he said "I hope the Russians hack" or was praising Wikileaks. That is why Trump's ideas are so dangerous, he encouraged this type of behavior and now wonders why its happening.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jun 5, 2017 -> 12:36 PM) It's a video. The account made no opinion or commentary and is totally irrelevant. I scrolled up and down twitter to find a poster of the video where I wouldn't get this response but I guess it doesn't really matter. QUOTE (raBBit @ Jun 5, 2017 -> 05:02 PM) What statement? I posted the video of CNN staging the set but shocker that you disagree with me and are just going to say I am wrong with some irrelevant hypothetical. If the mainstream media is so unbiased (according to the ones who make up most of the posts here), why do the consistent posters in this sub-forum (proud lefties) go to war for them without pause? The uniform and overwhelming response of jokes, elitist handwaving, distractors and outright dismissal would make it seem as if an implicit bias exists. Bringing up Lebron, O'Keefe and all of the snarl words instead of addressing the video of a bystander taping something real unfold seems like a cop out. Regardless, don't understand why most on left feel exactly the same on the issue but no one can address it - a video of CNN creating news - without pointing fingers, name calling, facetious jokes, snarl words, etc. That's why I at least respect the takes of 'illinilaw' on here and try to integrate pieces of his insight into my line of thinking even if we usually disagree. He addresses the topic at hand and is respectful. He doesn't distract. He doesn't hand wave. He doesn't use snarl words. He doesn't create imaginary scenarios that convince him of his agenda-fueled points. He just gives analysis. Before DA comes in and calls me a hypocrite - and brings up some topic from March that is so long ago away that he can intentionally mischaracterize without me being able to pull up the posts - I definitely get disrespectful at times in here but I come in with the intention of talking about the issue. Then everyone in the groupthink just makes fun of it (and me) and then employs all the tactics listed above. Youre statement is the first quote. The account you linked did have an opinion/commentary. For someone who is seems to be so obsessed with "truthful" reporting, almost every one of your posts includes at best misleading information. I have no idea why you do it, it really is strange. As for whether the mainstream media is biased or unbiased, I have no idea. I dont get into arguments that are that imprecise and are too generalized in nature. If you want to argue a single outlet, single reporter, etc are biased, that is something that could be argued. But I dont even know how to define Mainstream Media, is Fox mainstream? Are media outside the US mainstream? As its an impossible to define subset, I cant begin to respond to the allegation. I cant help the fact that you gnore anything that doesnt fit into your worldview.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jun 5, 2017 -> 04:15 PM) Unbelievable. Video evidence of something taking place and it still doesn't matter. For someone who has a connection to media, it sure is surprising that you arent familiar with what CNN allegedly did. They took people from a crowd and put them in an area where they would film better. It would be like showing a clip of Lebron James after the game wearing a suit and reaching a conclusion "LeBron didnt play in the game earlier because he wasnt in uniform." The video has 0 context, it doesnt pan to the right or left. That being said, maybe she is right, I have no clue of knowing, but what I do know is your statement was false.

Are most people using strategy guide for Breath of Wild? I have been going no strategy guide/no looking up, and I keep wasting time fighting things that are way above my level. The only reason I know is that one time I looked up the fight after I beat it and the weapons they were suggesting were like 10-15 higher than what I had lol.

Matta always seemed like a good guy so good luck to him. Not sure what OSU is doing with the timing.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jun 5, 2017 -> 12:36 PM) It's a video. The account made no opinion or commentary and is totally irrelevant. I scrolled up and down twitter to find a poster of the video where I wouldn't get this response but I guess it doesn't really matter. Is it hard to always just make s*** up? Because that seems pretty time consuming. The account stated: That is both opinion and commentary.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jun 1, 2017 -> 10:35 PM) Really, you read Ayn Rand and now you understand why a specfic group of individuals think the way they do. I really hate to break this to you but not all Republicans are rich tyrants who idolize Warren Buffet and the all mighy dollar. Most Republicans aren't rich.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jun 1, 2017 -> 04:54 PM) I think we're also going to see the US facing quasi sanctions from the global community over actions like this. Nothing officially called that, but watch out for less favorable trade deals or even fewer deals at all. We're giving up American leadership globally and running away from a growing tech field others are going all in on in order to pander to 50k coal jobs and boost oil company revenues The damage to the rest of our economy due to lost opportunities (not to even get into the damage from agw itself) will far out weigh whatever the costs are. hahahahahaa Trump is the best deal maker in the world, best deal maker in history. He built a wall using Mexico's money. He saved 1 trillion jobs and has gotten the US out of every bad deal that every other bad President ever signed. When he is done German cars are going to cost $1mil so that every American is forced to buy only American cars and then he is going to ban all renewable energy and every hybrid car, so that we can use our huge amount of oil. Dont worry, Trump is already negotiating with the environment and he is going to strike a great great deal, one of the greatest deals of all time. What a time to be alive, woooooo!

Dont worry guys Trump's got this. Thankfully Trump will put a handful of jobs that are going extinct anyway, over every American that has plans of living in the future. Such a winning deal!

QUOTE (JenksIsMyHero @ Jun 1, 2017 -> 11:25 AM) I found it interesting that he blamed prescription meds vs. alcohol. Is it really any better? He's been on those drugs for nearly 10 years now. He should know better. And what drives me nuts about these morons is, call a f***ing uber. You're tiger woods. You could get anyone in the world to drive you home. But I guess that's part of the sad story here - despite being Tiger Woods, he doesn't have anyone. I actually dont think he had the mental faculties to make that decision. He seemed really out of it, like he didnt really understand how he got there. Maybe a mix of painkillers and sleeping pills.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jun 1, 2017 -> 09:17 AM) At first I thought "who would be the male equivalent of doing this be?" I first thought Adam Sandler but then realized, he was at least relevant before while Kathy Griffin isn't even a has been. More like a "never was." Carrot Top

Man that b**** called Jerry the devil. BOOOO

Things can change as the votes today will be the last ones counted but as of now the expecation is Quist will lose but do better than previous democrats.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ May 25, 2017 -> 05:38 PM) Wow, see that shows, I was not aware of such old children for sitting presidents. That does make things a bit unusual. I actually didnt know about Jack Carter or Maureen Reagan until I looked it up earlier. Was looking to see Ron Jr.'s age and found out about Maureen. I could have also added Michael Reagan (adopted) as well, but I wanted to keep the comparisons as close as possible.

Ill go on record saying Im not a fan of nepotism. As to answer the question Presidents with older children most recently were Carter (Jack 30), Reagan (Maureen 41) and Bush (George 43). All of those ages are approximate because I didnt want to do the exact math. Also any President prior to Kennedy doesnt count because the nepotism laws were changed after Robert Kennedy was appointed AG.

QUOTE (raBBit @ May 25, 2017 -> 04:51 PM) God you really think you know everything don't you. My point was who Pres Obama brought on his trips and who he didn't bring on his trips was never be reported. And it shouldn't have been. Posting a picture of him with the pope doesn't nullify that point. Obviously the media covers everything the president does. It's a matter of how they cover it. s***, if I am Trump's administration and watching how everything is covered so differently. I'd be tempted to mimic the same Obama administration opacity in an attempt to stifle some of this stuff. Let's see if Trump's administration could use the Espionage Act more than every administration before him combined like Obama's admin did. According to you, opposing opinions disregard facts. Badgers opinions are fact. Im going to try this one more time. This sentence is contradictory. You say on one hand it was "never reported" and then in the next sentence "obviously the media covers everything." Those statements cannot coexist. The problem is that you are not using precise statements. The pictures of Obama's staff with the Pope are absolutely a report. Now the second part of that sentence is the crux of your argument, that the media did not cover Obama the same way that they cover Trump. The problem is that in this specific example there is no way to compare. Obama did not have a Catholic press secretary who went with on the trip who was not allowed to meet the Pope. He did not have a Press Secretary who was allegedly upset about that treatment. I cannot speculate whether or not the media would have covered it the same, just like I cant predict the future. It is merely opinion. You could theoretically find an analogous situation, but to the best of my knowledge one does not exist. As for the espionage act comment, this is exactly what I am talking about. It has no relevance whatsoever to the current topic. I have no way of knowing what Trump will do, nor whether he will use the espionage act more than Obama. I have no way of predicting how the media will react. What I do know is that a simple search of "Obama Espionage Act" comes up with a CNN article by Jake Tapper about how Obama has used it more times than anyone, a NYT article that states if Trump uses it to thank Obama, an article by the Guardian etc. I do not know how you quantify "so differently" to me that seems based in opinion not fact. It is your opinion Trump is covered so differently/unfairly. It was others opinions that Obama was.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ May 25, 2017 -> 04:15 PM) The Montana story is a perfect example. You've got a Fox news crew saying it happened, you have an audio recording confirming it to the extent that can... and yet the first reaction for some people is to believe that it didn't happen or is made up. Scary stuff. People are so, so stuck in the way they want the truth to be that they will act like toddlers. And by fact, I don't mean anything subjective. I mean actual events or data. The obfuscation of the concept of fact and embracing of ignorance happens all over the political spectrum, and it's not that the Republican Party is somehow unique in it. But Trump and his arm of the party have certainly taken it to a much more dramatic level then I've ever seen. It's one thing to look at, say, tax policy, and think that one party or the other is ignorant of how it works. That's a complicated subject with no objectively obvious best practice. But people are literally denying per se factual information and data. That's where it gets really, really scary to me. NSS, And I agree. Which is why I always say things like taxes, health care, whatever, can be reasonably argued. The thing that infuriates me, is that people take facts, "Spicer wasnt allowed to see Trump" and then try and direct the narrative into speculation or even worse, falsehoods. Case and point is today with Rabbit. I pretty much know that he is likely going to pop out of the wood work with some argument about how unfair the media is, how Obama was treated differently, whatever. Whether what happened with Spicer is newsworthy or not is opinion, and I feel that I could make a compelling argument (and most likely winning argument) as to why it was newsworthy enough to comment on. But instead of discussing the actual topic, it goes tangentially into "the media never covered Obama's trip." Which is false, a simple search online shows that there are pictures of Obama and his staff with the Pope. The reason why there was "no story" wasnt because the newspapers didnt cover it, it was because Obama didnt purposefully snub a Catholic on his staff. Instead of owning up and admitting that maybe the news did cover Obama, we spend the rest of the afternoon going down Rabbit's hole of media coverage conspiracy theories about how if they didnt report this that somehow people would be more focused on other issues. That isnt the problem. The problem is the purposeful and blatant disregard for facts that dont fit people like Rabbit's narrative. His narrative is that Trump is covered unfairly. I could be wrong (and im not willing to read every post hes made), but I dont remember one time Rabbit actually saying something like "Obama was treated unfairly too." And honestly, I think you could argue that Obama was treated worse than Trump, but again, that is an argument that is in the eye of the beholder. I dont know what has happened that made people this way. I have a job where you win some arguments and you lose some arguments. Sometimes youre right, sometimes youre wrong. My life doesnt end because I concede a point, my world doesnt end because maybe someone else came up with a better idea than me. Either way, I know I personally will never be able to combat fake news. That ship has sailed because there is a certain part of society who wants to be willfully ignorant, who doesnt want to believe the facts that dont fit into their narrative. The only thing that may change that is if someone like Trump really destroys things so bad that people have to take their heads out of the sand. But I deal with that everyday, their are certain people when bad things happen use the Ostrich approach, if they stick their head in the sand, the bad things just disappear.

QUOTE (bmags @ May 25, 2017 -> 04:08 PM) Bizarre to me it's based off of injury. Very NHL like Not as unusual as you think. A lot of times crimes are dependent on money (how much was stolen), weapons (were they used) and how bad someone was hurt.

QUOTE (raBBit @ May 25, 2017 -> 03:34 PM) And I am not moving the goalposts. I am giving my opinion. I know what SS, Badger and Reddy are going to militantly disagree with most of my stuff and if they do agree with me, they'll keep quiet. I'm not particularly concerned with their "arguments" just giving my piece. Thank you. That's my point in a nutshell. My biggest concern is we actually have a crisis under Trump and he flexes his power/ignorance and the everyday Joe will have no idea we actually have a significant issue because the media has been sounding the alarms daily for over a half a year now. I disagree with you because of the content of your posts, not because of who you are. Your "faux" concern about the everyday Joe is noted, but those people stuck their heads in the sand along time ago about the "important" issues. I cant compete with Fox News, Info Wars, Breitbart, when it comes to peddling conspiracies. I personally believe that your disingenuous posts are the exact type of behavior from "media" outlets that lead to the "problem" that you are concerned about.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ May 25, 2017 -> 03:47 PM) This is already true. There are all manner of articles out there you can read where Trump voters are literally saying they are intentionally avoiding news because they are convinced it's all made up. They apparently don't have the will or energy to sift through and determine what is actually a Big Deal, even though some of those Big Deals are going to directly effect them. It's a little frightening that way. But that's not just the fault of "the media", though their chase for every controversy means they are part of the problem (and by they, Imean some outlets far more than others). It's also the fault of people who are so mired in their own wishful thinking that they actively embrace ignorance. NSS, Today a Montana newspaper when covering the congressman attack had to actually combat the "myth of fake news": http://missoulian.com/opinion/editorial/mi...ae9ef03c60.html The irony of this whole argument is that the person who is yelling the most, is the person who has consistently supported and pushed stories that are less than reputable. I mean, I had never even heard of the Seth Rich conspiracy before he kept pushing the narrative this year. Yet in his world that is "newsworthy."