That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons bring us some web forums whereupon we can gather
http://garbi.online/forum/
It took me awhile to digest this today and I think he is on the right track. His rational, nuanced approach to answering all these questions generally seems wholly fair but it was hard to make it through that article; and I was breaking it up and reading it over time. One of the many enemies of reasonable politics in this country (and others I'm sure) is attention span. Getting to this level of nuance in all these positions is on the whole impossible to achieve. There might be a lot of crying wolf but it is on the whole more effective at driving attention than a nuanced, balanced approach but at the same time it polarizes. Is a middle ground possible? It sure doesn't feel like it right now.Moliere wrote:YOU ARE STILL CRYING WOLF
What difference, at this point, does it make?hepcat wrote:...or watching Trump supporters buy into every conspiracy theory and fake news article they hear/read/are fed.Rip wrote:
Who is up in arms? I think it is cute, like watching a goldfish try to swim out of the bowl when you flush it.
ImLawBoy wrote:Excuse me, but it says right there that True the Vote is "the nation's leading voters’ rights and election integrity organization". They couldn't say that if it weren't true, and this is obviously a very legitimate organization.pr0ner wrote:You can't actually believe this nonsense, can you?Rip wrote:HOUSTON, TX. – November 27, 2016: True the Vote (TTV), the nation's leading voters’ rights and election integrity organization, today released a statement with respect to President-Elect Donald Trump’s claim that “millions” of individuals illegally voted in the 2016 Election.
“True the Vote absolutely supports President-elect Trump’s recent comment about the impact of illegal voting, as reflected in the national popular vote. We are still collecting data and will be for several months, but our intent is to publish a comprehensive study on the significant impact of illegal voting in all of its many forms and begin a national discussion on how voters, states, and the Trump Administration can best address this growing problem.”
True the Vote (TTV) is an IRS-designated 501(c)(3) voters’ rights organization, founded to inspire and equip voters for involvement at every stage of our electoral process. TTV empowers organizations and individuals across the nation to actively protect the rights of legitimate voters, regardless of their political party affiliation. For more information, please visit
It's not irrelevant. The President Elect is tweeting lies and falsehoods, and making unsubstantiated claims of fraud.Rip wrote:What difference, at this point, does it make?hepcat wrote:...or watching Trump supporters buy into every conspiracy theory and fake news article they hear/read/are fed.Rip wrote:
Who is up in arms? I think it is cute, like watching a goldfish try to swim out of the bowl when you flush it.
He won, what they believe or don't is largely irrelevant. At least for four years.
Defend what? I haven't stated anything that requires defending.malchior wrote:Oh stop with this conversative pile on cross bearing. Prove me wrong then - you've been challenged time and time again on your sources. And when challenged you vanish/shut up/post more garbage. Defend it with actual facts or anything approaching logic and I'll happy engage otherwise it just reinforces you are full of shit.Rip wrote:Honest discussion? Don't flatter yourself. A bunch of like minded individuals slowly nodding in unison does not a discussion make.
Yes you have. Today, even.Rip wrote:Defend what? I haven't stated anything that requires defending.malchior wrote:Oh stop with this conversative pile on cross bearing. Prove me wrong then - you've been challenged time and time again on your sources. And when challenged you vanish/shut up/post more garbage. Defend it with actual facts or anything approaching logic and I'll happy engage otherwise it just reinforces you are full of shit.Rip wrote:Honest discussion? Don't flatter yourself. A bunch of like minded individuals slowly nodding in unison does not a discussion make.
About as much as I believe the Russians hacked voting machines in multiple states and gave Trump the votes he needed to win.pr0ner wrote:You can't actually believe this nonsense, can you?Rip wrote:HOUSTON, TX. – November 27, 2016: True the Vote (TTV), the nation's leading voters’ rights and election integrity organization, today released a statement with respect to President-Elect Donald Trump’s claim that “millions” of individuals illegally voted in the 2016 Election.
“True the Vote absolutely supports President-elect Trump’s recent comment about the impact of illegal voting, as reflected in the national popular vote. We are still collecting data and will be for several months, but our intent is to publish a comprehensive study on the significant impact of illegal voting in all of its many forms and begin a national discussion on how voters, states, and the Trump Administration can best address this growing problem.”
True the Vote (TTV) is an IRS-designated 501(c)(3) voters’ rights organization, founded to inspire and equip voters for involvement at every stage of our electoral process. TTV empowers organizations and individuals across the nation to actively protect the rights of legitimate voters, regardless of their political party affiliation. For more information, please visit
Why should it? It isn't as though there was an option for a POTUS who wouldn't be doing those things. But if it turns into a problem we can always pass the baton to Pence.pr0ner wrote:It's not irrelevant. The President Elect is tweeting lies and falsehoods, and making unsubstantiated claims of fraud.Rip wrote:What difference, at this point, does it make?hepcat wrote:...or watching Trump supporters buy into every conspiracy theory and fake news article they hear/read/are fed.Rip wrote:
Who is up in arms? I think it is cute, like watching a goldfish try to swim out of the bowl when you flush it.
He won, what they believe or don't is largely irrelevant. At least for four years.
Do you not see how that is a huge problem?
Like what?pr0ner wrote:Yes you have. Today, even.Rip wrote:Defend what? I haven't stated anything that requires defending.malchior wrote:Oh stop with this conversative pile on cross bearing. Prove me wrong then - you've been challenged time and time again on your sources. And when challenged you vanish/shut up/post more garbage. Defend it with actual facts or anything approaching logic and I'll happy engage otherwise it just reinforces you are full of shit.Rip wrote:Honest discussion? Don't flatter yourself. A bunch of like minded individuals slowly nodding in unison does not a discussion make.
So... you don't believe it at all. Good, because it's nonsense. True the Vote is a right-wing outlet with a history of these bogus claims, all made in an effort to promote future voter suppression policy.Rip wrote:About as much as I believe the Russians hacked voting machines in multiple states and gave Trump the votes he needed to win.pr0ner wrote:You can't actually believe this nonsense, can you?Rip wrote:HOUSTON, TX. – November 27, 2016: True the Vote (TTV), the nation's leading voters’ rights and election integrity organization, today released a statement with respect to President-Elect Donald Trump’s claim that “millions” of individuals illegally voted in the 2016 Election.
“True the Vote absolutely supports President-elect Trump’s recent comment about the impact of illegal voting, as reflected in the national popular vote. We are still collecting data and will be for several months, but our intent is to publish a comprehensive study on the significant impact of illegal voting in all of its many forms and begin a national discussion on how voters, states, and the Trump Administration can best address this growing problem.”
True the Vote (TTV) is an IRS-designated 501(c)(3) voters’ rights organization, founded to inspire and equip voters for involvement at every stage of our electoral process. TTV empowers organizations and individuals across the nation to actively protect the rights of legitimate voters, regardless of their political party affiliation. For more information, please visit
That True the Vote stuff, as a start.Rip wrote:Like what?pr0ner wrote:Yes you have. Today, even.Rip wrote:Defend what? I haven't stated anything that requires defending.malchior wrote:Oh stop with this conversative pile on cross bearing. Prove me wrong then - you've been challenged time and time again on your sources. And when challenged you vanish/shut up/post more garbage. Defend it with actual facts or anything approaching logic and I'll happy engage otherwise it just reinforces you are full of shit.Rip wrote:Honest discussion? Don't flatter yourself. A bunch of like minded individuals slowly nodding in unison does not a discussion make.
If Hillary had won and we'd said her foibles and wrongdoings didn't matter anymore because she'd won, you'd have exploded in a red, white and blue fountain of fury and righteous indignation.Rip wrote:I believe it doesn't matter. He already won
You know how you avoid that?Rip wrote:I suspect the tweet was nothing more than throwing another dead dog on the table
Um, the house would be rearranged regardless. That's sort of a large part of the job of being President.Rip wrote:Amazing to me how successful he has been at getting his enemies to chase little red lights on the wall while he rearranges the house to his liking.
I guess those are all the Trump supporters who don't want Romney as Sec State we keep hearing about.hepcat wrote:And let's be honest, he's not rearranging it to his liking. He's rearranging it to his master Putin's liking.
That is for them to defend not me, I just quoted them, which in case you misunderstand isn't to say I agree or disagree with them. I only quote it to show it is no less possible than that the Russians hacked voting machines and determined the election. One conspiracy theory begat another. I think both are extremely unlikely. Both deserve to be mocked and ridiculed.pr0ner wrote:That True the Vote stuff, as a start.Rip wrote:Like what?pr0ner wrote:Yes you have. Today, even.Rip wrote:Defend what? I haven't stated anything that requires defending.malchior wrote:Oh stop with this conversative pile on cross bearing. Prove me wrong then - you've been challenged time and time again on your sources. And when challenged you vanish/shut up/post more garbage. Defend it with actual facts or anything approaching logic and I'll happy engage otherwise it just reinforces you are full of shit.Rip wrote:Honest discussion? Don't flatter yourself. A bunch of like minded individuals slowly nodding in unison does not a discussion make.
Or your most recent post, to continue on.
He doesn't care whether or not you can see through him. He just cares that you respond to him. And people keep doing it.hepcat wrote:He assumes no one here can see through him.
edit: aww.. you can't link an actual smiley. Too bad.Two high-level sources on Trump's transition team told MSNBC's "Morning Joe" that the president-elect was "furious" that Conway went rogue at Trump's expense "at the worst possible time." Aides are reportedly "baffled" by Conway's comments and concerned that "instead of driving Trump's message," Conway is "pushing her own agenda," according to the report, which was laid out on air by hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski...
...Conway responded to the MSNBC report by calling it "sexist" and saying she could have any job she wanted in a Trump administration.
FTFY...geezer wrote:
edit: aww.. you can't link an actual smiley. Too bad.Two high-level sources on Trump's transition team told MSNBC's "Morning Joe" that the president-elect was "furious" that Conway went rogue at Trump's expense "at the worst possible time." Aides are reportedly "baffled" by Conway's comments and concerned that "instead of driving Trump's message," Conway is "pushing her own agenda," according to the report, which was laid out on air by hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski...
...Conway responded to the MSNBC report by calling it "sexist" and saying she could have any job she wanted in a Trump administration.
Thanks for the assist!Max Peck wrote:FTFY...geezer wrote:edit: aww.. you can't link an actual smiley. Too bad.Two high-level sources on Trump's transition team told MSNBC's "Morning Joe" that the president-elect was "furious" that Conway went rogue at Trump's expense "at the worst possible time." Aides are reportedly "baffled" by Conway's comments and concerned that "instead of driving Trump's message," Conway is "pushing her own agenda," according to the report, which was laid out on air by hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski...
...Conway responded to the MSNBC report by calling it "sexist" and saying she could have any job she wanted in a Trump administration.
With respect, I almost never respond. And when I do it's in the context of someone else responding (since that's the only way I see his stupidity).hepcat wrote:At some point you should probably just throw up your hands and give up on the whole "don't respond to him!" line of reasoning. We're not going to do it. And let's face it, you aren't exactly Switzerland in that endeavor either.
One of Donald Trump’s latest picks for his administration outed her gay brother to her parents before he died of AIDS in 1995, refusing to see him in his dying days and blaming his condition on paternal abuse her family said never happened.
On Friday, President-elect Trump announced he has selected as his deputy national security adviser Kathleen Troia “KT” McFarland, who works as a Fox News commentator and unsuccessfully sought the Republican nomination in New York to challenge Hillary Clinton for her U.S. Senate seat in 2006.
linkAs a Defense Department official, McFarland also was accused of exaggerating her contribution to President Reagan’s “Star Wars” speech and her claims of being the highest-ranking woman in Reagan’s Pentagon. The latter was demonstrably not true because there were two other women with ranks higher than hers.
According to Media Matters, McFarland as a Fox News commentator made dubious claims, such as saying the Benghazi CIA compound under attack in 2012 didn’t receive additional security because Chris Stevens couldn’t contact Clinton via a State Department email address. Requests for security do “not rise to the level of the secretary of state” and it’s not unusual for ambassadors to not have the email address of a secretary of state, according to the Council for Foreign Relations.
In a discussion about the Iran nuclear deal, McFarland made a racially tinged comment, suggesting Saudi Arabia is dishonest about supporting the agreement because “they’re Arabs” and “not going to say to your face something that they know is going to upset you.”
Not really, but at least a few people on the left are smart enough to see through the dog and keep their eye on the ball.Zarathud wrote:The Republican strategy for 8 years was to propagandize and fight Obama in every little thing to undermine his administration. And it worked -- at least in the Electoral College. Did you think the Democrats wouldn't eventually respond in kind?
Trump will never be able to claim a "winning" administration if he's dogged by scandal. What Rip sees as brilliant strategy killing dead dogs, most will see as incompetence. Eventually the dog lovers will join the liberal radicals on the streets demanding change.
Live by the Tweet, Die by the Tweet.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/h ... ein-231897Hillary Clinton’s closest allies are irritated with Jill Stein.
Most of the small circle of operatives and friends surrounding the vanquished Democratic nominee have no illusions that the former Green Party candidate’s recount pushes in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and maybe Michigan, will even come close to flipping the result of the presidential election. And they have no interest in handing Donald Trump another political victory when Stein’s efforts fall short.
Indeed, there’s no push to have Clinton say anything public about the recount — or even for anyone on the campaign side to weigh in beyond occasional blog posts and tweets from campaign lawyer Marc Elias.
The election, they know, is over.
“Recounting votes is as American as apple pie. There’s nothing wrong with the effort, but it’s not somewhere where I would put the political energy of my groups, and I’m not,” said David Brock, a Clinton ally whose network of Democratic political firms supported the nominee's White House bid.
Brock said top party donors were asking him whether they should contribute to Stein’s effort, but he said he was already focused on the incoming Republican administration. “We’re focused on watch-dogging the Trump transition."
Dammit. 12 years later, we're definitely in Bizzaro World. I would have loved to see a real debate in 2016.Fireball wrote:Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:17 am
Zarathud: The sad thing is that Barak Obama is a very intelligent and articulate person, even when you disagree with his views it's clear that he's very thoughtful. I would have loved to see Obama in a real debate.
Me: Wait 12 years, when he runs for president.
This man is going to be President.Donald Trump says that anyone who burns an American flag should face unspecified "consequences," such as jail or a loss of citizenship.
The president-elect's tweet is a direct conflict with free speech rights guaranteed by the First Amendment to the Constitution. It comes as he struggles to name a secretary of state.
He tweets: "Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag - if they do, there must be consequences - perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail!" It was not clear what prompted the tweet Tuesday morning.
