They can't all be wrong, can they ???

I DO feel sorry now for being so blunt, but she disrupts good convos and annoys and potstirs sincere forummers on purpose, not just silly or nasty ones or trolls (the only valid reason to troll. Yes, it can be arguable sometimes. It's subjective to certain extent. But not in this instance).
So she accomplished her mission and triggered my (and several others. She does this often in science or immigrant related threads) annoyance bone and now got an honest straightforward reaction. I hope she gets this is not about shaming or any other kind of personal silliness.
It just gets to me (and others i see) how she blames others for how they regard her and her posts (of which many, when they're not made out of boredom or a lack of interest or care, or made just out an urge to provoke, are very interesting and worthwile!), when its really not on us we can't detect when she's serious or not. Hey, and we obviously can be both! Almost everyone here charges their posts or arguments on topical matters.... or insert humour in a serious post. That's not the issue.
Claiming none of your posts are taken serious or valued for the wrong reasons is imo.
But what mainly triggered my reaction is that i see many good convos are disrupted or even ruined by people who basically seem to take pride in doing so. Then try to make it look its because of the 'libtard' thread starter or convo partners. No, you just don't like or care about it. Which is ok, you just state that one time max and leave it be then.

Ok, rant/explanation over Too freaking hot here anyways

 

Think you need to wipe your chin bro, you're dribbling shit.

 

Don't feel bad about what you say to me or think about me Asmo, it doesn't bother me. I've known for some time and felt the rift between us and though I admit I don't get it, I know that I can't do anything about it either without making changes and to be quite honest, I'm not ready for that so I'll take whatever you got on the chin and keep moving on. If having a dummy spit at me makes your day better, I'm glad I can help.

 

It sometimes seems you want special treatment. Like, you have a problem with people circle jerking but you're one of the biggest circle jerkers around here. I just feel like calling you out on that stuff. If I wouldn't I would give you some kind of special treatment, you see. I feel like treating you like every other fellow forummer on here (that's actually out of respect. I can see how it seems otherwise at times But blunt honesty is a good thing imo)

 

I see it different. I see it as one group of people who will not open their minds to new evidence and circumstances ardently attacking and trying to belittle the other group of people who do ask the questions. So while we circle jerk, we are still asking questions and bringing new evidence to the table while you guys are literally just in a circle jerking on to each other and all you've got are theories and opinions. That's the difference.

And it's funny because it's usually the two gay people on the opposite side of the cliche stereotypical homosexual circle jerk that you guys are into.

 

Well, whatever makes sense to you i guess. Leaves us no other option than just pointing it out to eachother.
Hope you don't troll, potstir and circle jerk too much in a bothersome way. At least people like VG actually read other peoples posts and makes actual on topic arguments.
It's better to share your views than just hint at having some or provoke with some thought while you might have much more to say.
You're also not fooling anyone here that you don't care about anything we think of you. Maybe at times (probably after some bongrips) but certainly not at other times. Peace out

 

What the thread is actually about, Vlads original post:

Trump was at a rally, actually called Omar guilty of anti-semetic (something, I couldnt make out the next word). It was then his supporters that started chanting "send her back" "send her back"

The video of it is in that link that Vlad provided

Same article contains:

"Almost 150 British MPs and peers have condemned Donald Trump's racist comments and expressed their support for the Democrat congresswomen who were the subject of his attack"

The subject of "his" attack.
The article itself is worded to make it seem like Trump himself made racist comments

150 UK MPs condemed the atrack, what ever that actually means, whether its 3 MPs and 147 "peers" or whatever. You can bet most of them didnt even bother trying to find out what he actually said

You can also bet most here wont care about the pesky details, will just froth at the mouth at the chance to take a swipe at Trump

Now his supporters chanting no doubt have fascist tendencies.

But Trump calls someone anti-semetic and then somehow gets labelled as having fascist tendencies. Bizarre

 

Trying to sift through your muddled musings, you seem perplexed about a couple of things: (1) that the MPs seem to be holding Trump responsible for his followers' chant and (2) that he's being labelled a fascist when he denounced anti-Semitism. Let me try to clear that up. We need to take a look at the context in which the chant "send them back" arose. On the previous day, Trump fired off a treat attacking the four congresswomen and “Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came.”.All of them are U.S citizens and three of the four were born here. The next day, he started off his speech at a rally in Greenville N.C. by attacking said congresswomen, thereby eliciting the "spontaneous" chant "send them back". Contrary to his later assertion, he did nothing to correct that response. So I think the MPs were on solid ground to hold him responsible.

As for the fascist-nazi thing, fascism is a somewhat elusive term referring to a particular kind of authoritarian political system and movement that began in the Italy and Germany in the aftermath of World War I. While we might associate it with Hitler, it was Mussolini and the Italians who pioneered the movement, drawing inspiration from the fascis (bundle) of rods surrounding an axe that symbolized the power of Roman imperium. Fascism =populism+nativism+nationalism+scapegoating+leadership principle+statism. Fascism is populist in gearing its messaging to the little guy who feels left out of the distribution of wealth, status and power in society. It is nativist in being against foreign influence and immigration, It is nationalist in stressing national glory and superiority (for Mussolini, restoring the glory of the Roman Empire; for Hitler, fulfilling the destiny of the Aryan Master Race embodied in the Third Reich). It scapegoats out groups (for Mussolini, socialists and communists, who were beaten up by his blackshirts;, and Abyssinia and Greece for Hitler, Jews, gypsies and homosexuals, who were beaten up by his brownshirts). as the source of society's evils It puts it's faith primarily in a Leader instead of policies or institutions (IL Duce, for Mussolini's followers; Der Furher, for Hitler's). And it advocates Statism, in which the government is given totalitarian control over people's lives. I n sum, Fascism is demagoguery at its most extreme form. To any but the most obtuse observer, Trump's movement has the earmarks of fascism. How could that be, if Trump denounces Anti-Semitism. In fact, not only some of his best friends but his own son-in-law are Jewish! But Anti-Semitism is a Nazi thing, not necessarily required for all Fascists. Trump has plenty of his own racial scapegoats: Muslims, Hispanics, & African-Americans being high on the list (send 'em back). Capeesh?

 

Look, I get some of that

(Although could have done without the long winded definition of fascism)

The original tweet, not too diplomatic or accurate.

But no one really has to keep reminding us three of them were born in the US, we get the idea of what he meant. Its not like when we are told some of them were born in the US that suddenly no one has any understanding of which countries he is referring to they should go back and fix

His supporters, he is not responsible for all his supporters, we know he has some supporters that act more like football fans

And as soon as you hear him accuse Omar of anti-semiticism bamn it becomes a whole different argument

But ugh, screaming fascism again, just over some tweet thats getting so old

And 150 UK MPs and their peers, how many UK MPs that actually means....oh, who gives a shit

 

Irm

If its shit it should be easy to counter – but surprise surprise, you can’t.

The point was that like many others you don’t have a clue what the policies, positions or arguments are you give your support on ‘feelings’ or on who you like. I meet someone whose views were basically left of centre but she voted for the Conservatives in an election because she thought David Cameron was handsome. I can guess that someone voted for Hitler because they liked his ‘Chaplin’ moustache.

VG

Yes and some of Trumps supporters are openly white supremacists - but it does beg the question why are they supporting him?

Maybe they just like his hair?

 

Yes, yes they can.......

 

Dude, no point arguing with something I said like a weekend ago. this is weekday Irm, if you got a problem with weekend Irm you need to take it up with her.

 

I don't think he's arguing with you. He's just telling you something/setting you straight.

If this is all you have to say..:

You could just say nothing, or take the criticism.
It seems it was made on a thursday btw (but that's when my weekend usually starts too so i'll give you that one )

 

You're not my real dad.

 

Well, Im glad I finally got this out of you
.

Whether it was you and your family personally or that the area you grew up in that got wiped out because of the end of protectionism

You might not technically blame Thatcher out loud or Reagan for that matter, but obviously you still blame that era, those policy shifts. And obviously still bitter about it


That somehow steel, coal, manufacturing, another dozen industries got wiped out in the UK because the government didnt throw enough money at them

....and not because a whole bunch of countries around the world produced often better quality products, often far, far cheaper....you know, competition

Just saying "neoliberalism" doesnt mean anything, its too vague a concept. And you cant claim neoliberalism if you never privatized your healthcare.

UK members whining about the NHS, well adopt the american system, see how much you whine when you are paying 20,000 pounds for a dislocated shoulder

And you should know enough to know, you shouldnt even mention Keynes, for anyone that has studied economics will just roll their eyes and prepare for a high school level essay from you. The world moved on from that kind of over simplified thinking 5 decades ago

You are just one of those guys, forever stuck in 1980s politics and economics.


Amazon, Tesco, China nowadays, your bizarre population spread within the UK, near zero inflation across the EU.......but you will still blame 1980s supposed "neoliberalism"

But feel free to go another couple pages with posts that contain a couple paragraphs telling me I should read more

 

I think you may have finally said something that makes sense.

 

VG

LOL – well reading your ill-informed post I can only comment that you clearly need to do a lot more studying.

Actually I didn’t grow up there we moved to the area not the town but in the countryside which wasn’t ‘wiped’ out by the steel works closures but suddenly putting thousands on the dole did have an effect on the local job market, so I moved on quicker than I was excepting to.

LOL but of course I blame Thatcher’s neoliberalism, normal people learn from their experiences and back that up with study (are you saying you don’t?).

Yes the neoliberal policies were flawed but also they were badly and often cruelly executed in an offhand manor with no plan for what would come next. It’s not a matter of been ‘bitter’ but of been informed.

Sorry mate but I don’t know what has happened in your life but you come across as a lot more bitter and angry than me on top of been ill informed.

Wow what an extremely simplistic view of a complex situation.

Have you read anything about this, anything?

I mean wow where to start –

What do you mean –throw money at?

I mean places like Germany for example the government (federal and local) work together with the banks and industry and in that way make German companies competitive and it means they have a strong manufacturing base.

The neoliberal approach is to step back and let the ‘market’ work things out in the manufacturing sector, although it did encourage the financial services. This has resulted in a rather weak British manufacturing sector or one owned by foreign companies for example we now have German companies owning ‘British’ car makers.

The point been that the ‘wiping out’ of British manufacturing wasn’t inevitable it was down to neoliberal ideology.

Again this makes me think you don’t actually know what neoliberalism is.

What is your point here?

This makes me think you don’t actually know very much about Keynesianism.

LOL sorry you think neoliberalist ideas and policies only existed in the 1980’s again I can only marvel at your ignorance of the subject and your arrogance in believing you can lectures other on it.

Sorry a D- needs to read more.

 

Dice

Can you explain what makes sense?

 

Ohh wellllll

If someone nobodies never heard of said it then it must be true.