The Wall

[Gun Nut]

I think it's almost time to go back to calling subscribers of conspiracy theories stupid. Enough with the kid gloves...

Flat Earth - you are stupid.
~10,000 year old Earth - you are stupid.
Birther - you are stupid.
It's snowing somewhere in the world, therefore global warming is a hoax by the illuminati - you are fucking stupid.

I was talking to a coworker the other day... sitting right in front of his computer... He mentioned TDS and asked me why I thought the Left was mad at Trump. I told him that in my experience here, the majority of their issues was with his rampant dishonesty. My coworker said that he never told a single lie... at least, no more than any other politician. I said that was completely indefensible, since there are thousands of pages of well referenced examples, easily found on the first page of Google.. Just look. He didn't... I said, "you are sitting right in front of a computer, go ahead and look it up right now". He refused. He changed the subject to "Fake News". I left it at, "There are links to him actually saying the thing, and links to the source of facts that contradict what he said, many times it is himself contradicting himself. If you can't believe your own eyes, then how are you able to even feed yourself?" I continued to press, "look at you refusing to even look... the information from many many different sources is a click away, but instead you hear some idea, like it, and then shut out the rest of the world to bask in your favorite fantasies. You are afraid of knowing the truth" I backed down a little after that... he was getting mad. I should have probably added something like, ".. and the Left is mad at the effect it is having on good people like you, who just want security and satisfaction, but are being sold lies".... that would have been better... oh well.

This is all the stuff of Conspiracy Theories... "I believe because I want to, and I will actively avoid any contradictory information". This must be combated with fury. Call it stupid. "I'm not stupid" is exactly what a stupid person would say. Once facts are pointed out, we can say they are not stupid anymore, but if they continue with their particular conspiracy, then they have gone from "willfully stupid" to "dishonest and immoral"... and we should remind them of that every second of every day.

 

[Politesse]

[YOUTUBE]37y34f5xOxE[/YOUTUBE]

Hadestown about sums it up.

 

[angelo]

many high ranking islamics were recruited into the White House itself.

Can you name a few, and give us their "ranks"?
Didn't think so.
Why do you hate Obama so much? Don't you miss the days when a "scandal" was wearing a tan suit?

If you remove the blindfold you may be able to see it!

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/radical-islamist-officials-find-home-in-white-house/

 

[angelo]

I think it's almost time to go back to calling subscribers of conspiracy theories stupid. Enough with the kid gloves...

Flat Earth - you are stupid.
~10,000 year old Earth - you are stupid.
Birther - you are stupid.
It's snowing somewhere in the world, therefore global warming is a hoax by the illuminati - you are fucking stupid.

I was talking to a coworker the other day... sitting right in front of his computer... He mentioned TDS and asked me why I thought the Left was mad at Trump. I told him that in my experience here, the majority of their issues was with his rampant dishonesty. My coworker said that he never told a single lie... at least, no more than any other politician. I said that was completely indefensible, since there are thousands of pages of well referenced examples, easily found on the first page of Google.. Just look. He didn't... I said, "you are sitting right in front of a computer, go ahead and look it up right now". He refused. He changed the subject to "Fake News". I left it at, "There are links to him actually saying the thing, and links to the source of facts that contradict what he said, many times it is himself contradicting himself. If you can't believe your own eyes, then how are you able to even feed yourself?" I continued to press, "look at you refusing to even look... the information from many many different sources is a click away, but instead you hear some idea, like it, and then shut out the rest of the world to bask in your favorite fantasies. You are afraid of knowing the truth" I backed down a little after that... he was getting mad. I should have probably added something like, ".. and the Left is mad at the effect it is having on good people like you, who just want security and satisfaction, but are being sold lies".... that would have been better... oh well.

This is all the stuff of Conspiracy Theories... "I believe because I want to, and I will actively avoid any contradictory information". This must be combated with fury. Call it stupid. "I'm not stupid" is exactly what a stupid person would say. Once facts are pointed out, we can say they are not stupid anymore, but if they continue with their particular conspiracy, then they have gone from "willfully stupid" to "dishonest and immoral"... and we should remind them of that every second of every day.

Obongo never told any lies did he? Well, here are a few whoppers the left has brushed under the carpet!

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/365393-how-quickly-ny-times-forgets-obamas-lies-and-frauds

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I think it's almost time to go back to calling subscribers of conspiracy theories stupid. Enough with the kid gloves...

Flat Earth - you are stupid.
~10,000 year old Earth - you are stupid.
Birther - you are stupid.
It's snowing somewhere in the world, therefore global warming is a hoax by the illuminati - you are fucking stupid.

I was talking to a coworker the other day... sitting right in front of his computer... He mentioned TDS and asked me why I thought the Left was mad at Trump. I told him that in my experience here, the majority of their issues was with his rampant dishonesty. My coworker said that he never told a single lie... at least, no more than any other politician. I said that was completely indefensible, since there are thousands of pages of well referenced examples, easily found on the first page of Google.. Just look. He didn't... I said, "you are sitting right in front of a computer, go ahead and look it up right now". He refused. He changed the subject to "Fake News". I left it at, "There are links to him actually saying the thing, and links to the source of facts that contradict what he said, many times it is himself contradicting himself. If you can't believe your own eyes, then how are you able to even feed yourself?" I continued to press, "look at you refusing to even look... the information from many many different sources is a click away, but instead you hear some idea, like it, and then shut out the rest of the world to bask in your favorite fantasies. You are afraid of knowing the truth" I backed down a little after that... he was getting mad. I should have probably added something like, ".. and the Left is mad at the effect it is having on good people like you, who just want security and satisfaction, but are being sold lies".... that would have been better... oh well.

This is all the stuff of Conspiracy Theories... "I believe because I want to, and I will actively avoid any contradictory information". This must be combated with fury. Call it stupid. "I'm not stupid" is exactly what a stupid person would say. Once facts are pointed out, we can say they are not stupid anymore, but if they continue with their particular conspiracy, then they have gone from "willfully stupid" to "dishonest and immoral"... and we should remind them of that every second of every day.

Obongo never told any lies did he? Well, here are a few whoppers the left has brushed under the carpet!

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/365393-how-quickly-ny-times-forgets-obamas-lies-and-frauds

The bongo originated in Cuba, not Africa.

 

[Elixir]

The bongo originated in Cuba, not Africa.

Yabut I doubt that the poster has the same animus toward latinos that he shows toward blacks... just a suspicion, mind you.

 

[blastula]

I though Obongo was a genius, cutting insult about Obama's nefarious criminal past of smoking weed.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So you know financial news better than the guy who writes for Forbes, Fortune, and Wall Street Journal? Or is it possibly he is debunking a claim that you prefer to believe? Possible you are right, but unless you back up your assertions I’m not buying it.

Government to banks: (CRA) Write more loans to minorities!
Banks: We can't find enough qualified minorities.
Government: (Relaxes standards for buying mortgages so the banks can find enough "qualified" borrowers.)
Banks and other lenders: (Rushes to write a bunch of crap that meets the new standards.)

Can you show any part of the CRA that requires banks to lend to anyone even though they are not qualified? Any kind of quota they had to meet or something, a rule to force acceptance that overrides if they are qualified? Any evidence of your assertion at all?

My problem with the article is that it doesn't address the actual issue.

They showed that it wasn't CRA loans that caused the crash. The problem is that the actual problem was the CRA causing a relaxation of standards and then a rush to take advantage of the situation with non-CRA loans. Being an illustrious source doesn't change this.

As for lending to those who aren't "qualified" the problem is the law required to contradictory things--write more loans, don't write trash. When you get such a situation the result will be people will obey the more easily measured portion of the law--the number of loans written is easy to measure, whether they are "qualified" is subjective. The fuzzy one is just a fig-leaf for the fact they know the measure is requiring improper behavior.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

During Obongos administration, many high ranking islamics were recruited into the White House itself. While the word Islamic terrorism was taken off the American vocabulary completely. Google CAIR, Along with Muslim Brotherhood organasations labeled terrorists by many Arab countries themselves, and they were advising and helping Obongo himself.

So yes, you do watch Alex Jones, or follow some equivalent conspiracy nutcase outlet. Unless you can actually provide any evidence yourself, which I doubt.

While he's followed some questionable sources he's not wrong about those organizations.

The Muslim Brotherhood is the parent organization to an awful lot of clearly terrorist organizations and CAIR has considerable ties to terrorist organizations.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

During Obongos administration, many high ranking islamics were recruited into the White House itself. While the word Islamic terrorism was taken off the American vocabulary completely. Google CAIR, Along with Muslim Brotherhood organasations labeled terrorists by many Arab countries themselves, and they were advising and helping Obongo himself.

Yes... the administration that ordered the capture/killing of bin Laden is in with the terrorists.

The problem is Obama was determined to treat terrorism as the acts of individual criminals and unwilling to understand that it was part of a covert war. Thus he considered Islamists who weren't caught with a smoking gun as uninvolved.

 

[zorq]

During Obongos administration, many high ranking islamics were recruited into the White House itself. While the word Islamic terrorism was taken off the American vocabulary completely. Google CAIR, Along with Muslim Brotherhood organasations labeled terrorists by many Arab countries themselves, and they were advising and helping Obongo himself.

Yes... the administration that ordered the capture/killing of bin Laden is in with the terrorists.

The problem is Obama was determined to treat terrorism as the acts of individual criminals and unwilling to understand that it was part of a covert war. Thus he considered Islamists who weren't caught with a smoking gun as uninvolved.

To be fair here, the US Constituition wasn't written to handle "covert wars." And when Obama DID transgress beyond the constituition, like when he started drone striking American citizens, he started losing support from his base.

IMO, Obama should have pushed for an amendment to the US constituition that handles modern terrorism instead of just hiding under the "commander in chief, executive order" umbrella. But of course, the Republicans had so much Obama derangement syndrome at the time, they probably would have opposed it.

 

[marc]

They showed that it wasn't CRA loans that caused the crash. The problem is that the actual problem was the CRA causing a relaxation of standards and then a rush to take advantage of the situation with non-CRA loans. Being an illustrious source doesn't change this.

So weakening regulations on standards are the cause? Think that might anger the True Libertarians (tm) who argue against any kind of regulations.

As for lending to those who aren't "qualified" the problem is the law required to contradictory things--write more loans, don't write trash.

Not contradictory at all. The problem was minorities who did qualify were being denied, the rules were trying to encourage that lending, not the practice of giving bad lines gaurenteed to fail.

When you get such a situation the result will be people will obey the more easily measured portion of the law--the number of loans written is easy to measure, whether they are "qualified" is subjective. The fuzzy one is just a fig-leaf for the fact they know the measure is requiring improper behavior.

You have still not shown in any way that any bank was required to give any loan to someone who could not pay it back.

 

[angelo]

I was wondering. Isn't This the ultimate in hypocrisy! Why are so many Hollywood liberals opposed to the wall when many of them have 'walls' around their homes. Isn't this a double standard?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I was wondering. Isn't This the ultimate in hypocrisy! Why are so many Hollywood liberals opposed to the wall when many of them have 'walls' around their homes. Isn't this a double standard?

Umm... no.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The problem is Obama was determined to treat terrorism as the acts of individual criminals and unwilling to understand that it was part of a covert war. Thus he considered Islamists who weren't caught with a smoking gun as uninvolved.

To be fair here, the US Constituition wasn't written to handle "covert wars." And when Obama DID transgress beyond the constituition, like when he started drone striking American citizens, he started losing support from his base.

IMO, Obama should have pushed for an amendment to the US constituition that handles modern terrorism instead of just hiding under the "commander in chief, executive order" umbrella. But of course, the Republicans had so much Obama derangement syndrome at the time, they probably would have opposed it.

The problem with this is that while the Constitution doesn't recognize the sort of war we are facing that doesn't mean he needed to allow individuals with suspect ties into government. That was due to refusing to recognize organizations as terrorist frontpieces, a mistake the left is frequently guilty of.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So weakening regulations on standards are the cause? Think that might anger the True Libertarians (tm) who argue against any kind of regulations.

No--because the problem was the weakening of the standards of what the government would buy, not standards imposed on the banks. A true libertarian wouldn't want the government buying up mortgages in the first place.

Not contradictory at all. The problem was minorities who did qualify were being denied, the rules were trying to encourage that lending, not the practice of giving bad lines gaurenteed to fail.

What's the evidence of this? The local paper had a big discussion of this and I noticed a pattern:

If you figured that discrimination was a factor the results simply didn't make sense. However, if you assumed the lenders were looking at anticipated future price changes in the properties they were loaning against everything fit. They were perfectly willing to write 80/20 mortgages in the areas with stagnant house values, just not so willing to write low-down mortgages in such areas. (Note that the article provided the zip codes but failed to note the flat property values there.)

The discrimination warriors, however, didn't look at anything that couldn't be precisely measured and declared that the banks were redlining. They're much more interested in "proving" a problem (if they can't find problems they can't justify their jobs) than finding the truth.

When you get such a situation the result will be people will obey the more easily measured portion of the law--the number of loans written is easy to measure, whether they are "qualified" is subjective. The fuzzy one is just a fig-leaf for the fact they know the measure is requiring improper behavior.

You have still not shown in any way that any bank was required to give any loan to someone who could not pay it back.

The banks were required to write enough loans. If there aren't enough qualified borrowers that means they either cut back on writing to qualified whites, or it means they write to unqualified blacks.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I was wondering. Isn't This the ultimate in hypocrisy! Why are so many Hollywood liberals opposed to the wall when many of them have 'walls' around their homes. Isn't this a double standard?

What you fail to understand is we are objecting to the wall as overkill. Personally, I also feel it's intended as a symbol of racism and thus oppose it on those grounds also.

In areas near civilization a wall makes sense--but we pretty much have already built walls in those areas! The desert is extremely inhospitable, putting a wall there provides very little benefit. Furthermore, walls only slow people down, without forces deployed to catch those crossing it it isn't much of a barrier--but His Flatulence wants to cut down on the number of CBP people there.

 

[Opoponax]

I was wondering. Isn't This the ultimate in hypocrisy! Why are so many Hollywood liberals opposed to the wall when many of them have 'walls' around their homes. Isn't this a double standard?

I can't believe adults say things like this. It's the reasoning of a toddler--and a disingenuous toddler at that.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I was wondering. Isn't This the ultimate in hypocrisy! Why are so many Hollywood liberals opposed to the wall when many of them have 'walls' around their homes. Isn't this a double standard?

I can't believe adults say things like this. It's the reasoning of a toddler--and a disingenuous toddler at that.

Some people actually believe such things. Many say it because they think it's clever and also because it is emotionally satisfying. Ultimately I think it's the Dunning Kruger effect, that when you don't know what you don't know you think you know. It allows Trumpo to tell anyone that disagrees with his emotional position to go back to school.

 

[Keith&Co.]

I was wondering. Isn't This the ultimate in hypocrisy! Why are so many Hollywood liberals opposed to the wall when many of them have 'walls' around their homes. Isn't this a double standard?

I can't believe adults say things like this. It's the reasoning of a toddler--and a disingenuous toddler at that.

Well, there's this loud and bossy toddler insisting that one wall solves a litany of problems. Not helps with, but solves.
So anyone buying into that childish claim, and the associated tantrums, will be attracted to toddler supporting logic...