Board index › General Discussion › News and Current Events

Trump profiled as Pathological Liar

Page 5 of 12 [ 188 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 12  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,794
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

18 Dec 2017, 12:00 am

cyberdad wrote:
EzraS wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
EzraS wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Nothing. Why are you so desperate to label people?


Liberalism it seems is all about labeling people.

Tell that to a black person, LBGT person or disabled person who tries to move into an all white, straight, normal neighborhood or an all-white workforce

Right wing conservative folks pretty much label everyone who don't "fit in" in as much as we know the sun will rise and the sky is blue.


So liberalism is about doing what's wrong because that's what the bad guys do.

That's not how I see it. It's about identifying who is vulnerable and protecting them.
Conservative Americans want to return to the wild west cowboy days where if you are strong enough to survive on your own (they even have a name for it - rugged individualism) then you are a true American patriot. If you require any form of welfare i.e. disability and you can't make it on your own then ask your own family - don't be a parasite on the taxpayer- easily explains why conservatives like John Alexander think that people who are on disability have no pride


And the truth is, there were more than a few social justice movements in the old west pushing back against that "rugged individualism" myth. Such as the Granger movement which fought for the rights of farmers, the Populist Party, which rivaled both the Democrats and the Republicans for a time (not to be confused with the right wing loons using that name today), and various radical organized labor unions, the most famous of them being the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), popularly known as the Wobblies. Plenty of people who faced the harsh reality of life on the western frontier knew where rugged individualism reached it's limits.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

18 Dec 2017, 1:38 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
EzraS wrote:
By using the same tactics as their oppressors. Turning the tables and using wrongdoing agaist the wrongdoers.

Not really Ezra, it's about compassion for the oppressed


In other words the end justifies the means.


Then just how would you right wrongs and injustices? Or would you?


I would start out by realizing that two wrongs don't make a right.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,284

18 Dec 2017, 2:21 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
EzraS wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
EzraS wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Nothing. Why are you so desperate to label people?


Liberalism it seems is all about labeling people.

Tell that to a black person, LBGT person or disabled person who tries to move into an all white, straight, normal neighborhood or an all-white workforce

Right wing conservative folks pretty much label everyone who don't "fit in" in as much as we know the sun will rise and the sky is blue.


So liberalism is about doing what's wrong because that's what the bad guys do.

That's not how I see it. It's about identifying who is vulnerable and protecting them.
Conservative Americans want to return to the wild west cowboy days where if you are strong enough to survive on your own (they even have a name for it - rugged individualism) then you are a true American patriot. If you require any form of welfare i.e. disability and you can't make it on your own then ask your own family - don't be a parasite on the taxpayer- easily explains why conservatives like John Alexander think that people who are on disability have no pride


And the truth is, there were more than a few social justice movements in the old west pushing back against that "rugged individualism" myth. Such as the Granger movement which fought for the rights of farmers, the Populist Party, which rivaled both the Democrats and the Republicans for a time (not to be confused with the right wing loons using that name today), and various radical organized labor unions, the most famous of them being the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), popularly known as the Wobblies. Plenty of people who faced the harsh reality of life on the western frontier knew where rugged individualism reached it's limits.

Certainly the guns have remained



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,794
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

18 Dec 2017, 2:22 am

EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
EzraS wrote:
By using the same tactics as their oppressors. Turning the tables and using wrongdoing agaist the wrongdoers.

Not really Ezra, it's about compassion for the oppressed


In other words the end justifies the means.


Then just how would you right wrongs and injustices? Or would you?


I would start out by realizing that two wrongs don't make a right.


And what constitutes a wrong in bringing equality and justice to people who haven't had it?


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,794
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

18 Dec 2017, 2:44 am

cyberdad wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
EzraS wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
EzraS wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Nothing. Why are you so desperate to label people?


Liberalism it seems is all about labeling people.

Tell that to a black person, LBGT person or disabled person who tries to move into an all white, straight, normal neighborhood or an all-white workforce

Right wing conservative folks pretty much label everyone who don't "fit in" in as much as we know the sun will rise and the sky is blue.


So liberalism is about doing what's wrong because that's what the bad guys do.

That's not how I see it. It's about identifying who is vulnerable and protecting them.
Conservative Americans want to return to the wild west cowboy days where if you are strong enough to survive on your own (they even have a name for it - rugged individualism) then you are a true American patriot. If you require any form of welfare i.e. disability and you can't make it on your own then ask your own family - don't be a parasite on the taxpayer- easily explains why conservatives like John Alexander think that people who are on disability have no pride


And the truth is, there were more than a few social justice movements in the old west pushing back against that "rugged individualism" myth. Such as the Granger movement which fought for the rights of farmers, the Populist Party, which rivaled both the Democrats and the Republicans for a time (not to be confused with the right wing loons using that name today), and various radical organized labor unions, the most famous of them being the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), popularly known as the Wobblies. Plenty of people who faced the harsh reality of life on the western frontier knew where rugged individualism reached it's limits.

Certainly the guns have remained


I'll let you in on something the NRA doesn't want you to know about guns in the American old west. Most western towns of that time enforced some sort of gun control, as violence was so epidemic with rootless, footloose young men flooding into town from ranches, farms, logging camps, mines, and other frontier sources of labor eager to spend their hard earned wages on alcohol, gambling, and prostitution - a potential explosive situation when fire arms are thrown into the mix. Men were required to hand their guns over to the sheriff or town marshal, or the bartender of the saloon they were patronizing. The gunfight at the OK Coral, probably the most famous gun battle of that era, happened because some local low ranking outlaws of the Cowboy Gang, the Clanton and McClauery brothers, figured they could ignore the gun ordinance, and could threaten the lives of Town Marshal Virgil Earp and his brothers (which included Wyatt Earp, who wasn't town marshal till Virgil was seriously wounded as a retaliatory measure by the Cowboy Gang).


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

18 Dec 2017, 3:03 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
EzraS wrote:
By using the same tactics as their oppressors. Turning the tables and using wrongdoing agaist the wrongdoers.

Not really Ezra, it's about compassion for the oppressed


In other words the end justifies the means.


Then just how would you right wrongs and injustices? Or would you?


I would start out by realizing that two wrongs don't make a right.


And what constitutes a wrong in bringing equality and justice to people who haven't had it?


Like I already said, by using the same tactics as their oppressors. Turning the tables and using wrongdoing agaist the wrongdoers. That's not going to create unity, it's just going to perpetuate division.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,794
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

18 Dec 2017, 6:16 am

EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
EzraS wrote:
By using the same tactics as their oppressors. Turning the tables and using wrongdoing agaist the wrongdoers.

Not really Ezra, it's about compassion for the oppressed


In other words the end justifies the means.


Then just how would you right wrongs and injustices? Or would you?


I would start out by realizing that two wrongs don't make a right.


And what constitutes a wrong in bringing equality and justice to people who haven't had it?


Like I already said, by using the same tactics as their oppressors. Turning the tables and using wrongdoing agaist the wrongdoers. That's not going to create unity, it's just going to perpetuate division.


Just how is bringing justice and equality to those denied it doing wrong to wrongdoers? Examples.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

18 Dec 2017, 7:47 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
EzraS wrote:
By using the same tactics as their oppressors. Turning the tables and using wrongdoing agaist the wrongdoers.

Not really Ezra, it's about compassion for the oppressed


In other words the end justifies the means.


Then just how would you right wrongs and injustices? Or would you?


I would start out by realizing that two wrongs don't make a right.


And what constitutes a wrong in bringing equality and justice to people who haven't had it?


Like I already said, by using the same tactics as their oppressors. Turning the tables and using wrongdoing agaist the wrongdoers. That's not going to create unity, it's just going to perpetuate division.


Just how is bringing justice and equality to those denied it doing wrong to wrongdoers? Examples.


That's the desired result, but the means used include, name calling, labeling, stereotyping, marginalizing and seeking complte control. Liberaism doing all the things it claims to be fighting against. The end justifying the means. And agian, it doesn't bring equality ie unity, it just perpetuates division.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,794
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

18 Dec 2017, 11:18 am

EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
EzraS wrote:
By using the same tactics as their oppressors. Turning the tables and using wrongdoing agaist the wrongdoers.

Not really Ezra, it's about compassion for the oppressed


In other words the end justifies the means.


Then just how would you right wrongs and injustices? Or would you?


I would start out by realizing that two wrongs don't make a right.


And what constitutes a wrong in bringing equality and justice to people who haven't had it?


Like I already said, by using the same tactics as their oppressors. Turning the tables and using wrongdoing agaist the wrongdoers. That's not going to create unity, it's just going to perpetuate division.


Just how is bringing justice and equality to those denied it doing wrong to wrongdoers? Examples.


That's the desired result, but the means used include, name calling, labeling, stereotyping, marginalizing and seeking complte control. Liberaism doing all the things it claims to be fighting against. The end justifying the means. And agian, it doesn't bring equality ie unity, it just perpetuates division.


If there's any division, it comes from the resentment felt by the formerly privileged group who now has to treat the group that hadn't been privileged as equals. It's this former group that needs to correct their thinking and conduct.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

18 Dec 2017, 1:03 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
EzraS wrote:
By using the same tactics as their oppressors. Turning the tables and using wrongdoing agaist the wrongdoers.

Not really Ezra, it's about compassion for the oppressed


In other words the end justifies the means.


Then just how would you right wrongs and injustices? Or would you?


I would start out by realizing that two wrongs don't make a right.


And what constitutes a wrong in bringing equality and justice to people who haven't had it?


Like I already said, by using the same tactics as their oppressors. Turning the tables and using wrongdoing agaist the wrongdoers. That's not going to create unity, it's just going to perpetuate division.


Just how is bringing justice and equality to those denied it doing wrong to wrongdoers? Examples.


That's the desired result, but the means used include, name calling, labeling, stereotyping, marginalizing and seeking complte control. Liberaism doing all the things it claims to be fighting against. The end justifying the means. And agian, it doesn't bring equality ie unity, it just perpetuates division.


If there's any division, it comes from the resentment felt by the formerly privileged group who now has to treat the group that hadn't been privileged as equals. It's this former group that needs to correct their thinking and conduct.


And if they don't conform to satisfaction they'll be called names, given labels and stereotypes and be marginalized. And rather arbitrarily from what I've seen.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,284

18 Dec 2017, 4:30 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
I'll let you in on something the NRA doesn't want you to know about guns in the American old west. Most western towns of that time enforced some sort of gun control, as violence was so epidemic with rootless, footloose young men flooding into town from ranches, farms, logging camps, mines, and other frontier sources of labor eager to spend their hard earned wages on alcohol, gambling, and prostitution - a potential explosive situation when fire arms are thrown into the mix. Men were required to hand their guns over to the sheriff or town marshal, or the bartender of the saloon they were patronizing. The gunfight at the OK Coral, probably the most famous gun battle of that era, happened because some local low ranking outlaws of the Cowboy Gang, the Clanton and McClauery brothers, figured they could ignore the gun ordinance, and could threaten the lives of Town Marshal Virgil Earp and his brothers (which included Wyatt Earp, who wasn't town marshal till Virgil was seriously wounded as a retaliatory measure by the Cowboy Gang).

I was bought up on a diet of US cowboy movies so John Wayne, Chuck Connors, Clint Eastwood and Glenn Ford were all familiar to me. Real men smoked Marlbroughs and carried a six shooter, fitted in with the rugged individualism Americans were famous for...



JohnPowell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2016
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,806
Location: Palestine

18 Dec 2017, 6:06 pm

Labeling just plays into the victim culture.


_________________
"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,794
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

18 Dec 2017, 6:13 pm

EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
EzraS wrote:
By using the same tactics as their oppressors. Turning the tables and using wrongdoing agaist the wrongdoers.

Not really Ezra, it's about compassion for the oppressed


In other words the end justifies the means.


Then just how would you right wrongs and injustices? Or would you?


I would start out by realizing that two wrongs don't make a right.


And what constitutes a wrong in bringing equality and justice to people who haven't had it?


Like I already said, by using the same tactics as their oppressors. Turning the tables and using wrongdoing agaist the wrongdoers. That's not going to create unity, it's just going to perpetuate division.


Just how is bringing justice and equality to those denied it doing wrong to wrongdoers? Examples.


That's the desired result, but the means used include, name calling, labeling, stereotyping, marginalizing and seeking complte control. Liberaism doing all the things it claims to be fighting against. The end justifying the means. And agian, it doesn't bring equality ie unity, it just perpetuates division.


If there's any division, it comes from the resentment felt by the formerly privileged group who now has to treat the group that hadn't been privileged as equals. It's this former group that needs to correct their thinking and conduct.


And if they don't conform to satisfaction they'll be called names, given labels and stereotypes and be marginalized. And rather arbitrarily from what I've seen.


If someone's behaving like a racist reactionary, then they should be told that they are. Are we to spare their feelings from being hurt by allowing other people they've forced into a pariah class continue living in that kind of inequality? That way, absolutely nothing changes, and people will continue to be considered less than others for how they look, how they pray, and who they love.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,794
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

18 Dec 2017, 6:18 pm

JohnPowell wrote:
Labeling just plays into the victim culture.


That argument could be used by the Israelis you so despise in regard to the Palestinians. "Why, calling those people victimized refugees only encourages them to be downtrodden," they'd be able to say, from what your argument indicates.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


karathraceandherspecialdestiny
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Jan 2017
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,857

18 Dec 2017, 7:30 pm

I guess everyone on this site is an evil liberal because we all have labelled ourselves autistic. :roll:

Applying accurate labels to things is how our brains work, consciousness is impossible without naming objects and concepts. It's the function of language. The entire activity of accurately labelling people and phenomenon--in other words it's called "using language"--calling that evil or wrong is one of the most ridiculous hyperbolic things I have ever read online. You can't use language at all without labelling things.



karathraceandherspecialdestiny
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Jan 2017
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,857

18 Dec 2017, 7:34 pm

Am I wrongfully "labelling" when I call the object I'm sitting on a chair, or am I just using language as is inevitable?

Am I wrong to label myself a person? Am I wrong to label this planet Earth that I live on? No, this is just the application of language. There are lots of "labels" (a.k.a "words") that accurately apply to me: I'm human, I'm female, I'm Canadian, I'm autistic. According to some it's wrong for me to apply any descriptive words to myself, because they are "labels".

This entire conversation is absurd.