d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Trump Admin Spies On Congressional Dems
Prev1121314151620Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 53,368
Joined: Sep 2 2004
Gold: 57.00
Jun 14 2021 09:43pm
Quote (NetflixAdaptationWidow @ 14 Jun 2021 21:29)
This is what you're doing, and it's pathetic.

theres attacking a strawman and then theres outright faking posts. youre a pathetic petri-dish licking subsidy addict lmfao

Quote (NetflixAdaptationWidow @ 14 Jun 2021 21:35)
:rofl:

Order does matter, which is why the legislative achievements were listed first. You are cherry picking.

Obamacare was a major legislative achievement, as was the stimulus and bailouts, and they were the first 2 items on the list you quoted, and Obamacare would have been far better if Republicans hadn't actively stopped the recept of federal funds to cover the gap in coverage between zero and 20k/year income.
Obama didn't do shit to inflame race relations, that was literally Donald Trump who actively worked to keep the Obama is a Kenyan Muslim idea alive.
Being black in America means that to achieve something, you were at a significant disadvantage compared to an equivilant white person. This is not something you can contest, as the data has been clear and abundant on this for literally our entire nation's history.

You are incredibly dishonest.

says the privileged lefty who still thinks russia hacked the election

Quote (IceMage @ 14 Jun 2021 19:50)
You focused on the least consequential thing in my list of three, and pretended thatwas my standard of historical ranking, or even a conception of the historians standard of historical ranking.

I don't think it's unhealthy to consider the characteristics of individuals. Different groups in America have different experiences. And Obama happens to be a member of the group that was enslaved and oppressed in our country. So from a historical perspective, I'm not sure how a major historical event, namely a black president being elected in a country that enslaved blacks and oppressed them, wouldn't be considered in the realm of ranking presidents. I already conceded that historians heavily lean progressive, and they also lean towards events that make history in a progressive direction.



you hated obama and wanted him and the country to fail during his Presidency. you dont fool anyone here

can we rid ourselves of pale pasty privileged lefty net negative to society like these two? they provide no value to Earth
Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Jun 4 2021
Gold: 0.00
Jun 14 2021 10:20pm
Quote (Santara @ Jun 11 2021 07:10am)
Persecuting/prosecuting leakers is not new (Valerie Jarrett, anyone?). Can't read the story though, cuz trash NYT paywall.


Fun fact: The New York Times' paywall loads slightly after the article loads, so you can click the X on your browser where the refresh button is after the article loads but before the paywall does and just read NYT at any time.
Member
Posts: 4,802
Joined: Feb 6 2020
Gold: 347.20
Jun 14 2021 11:25pm
Quote (bogie160 @ Jun 14 2021 10:30pm)
Trump can be wrong and his critics don't have to be right. Try to think beyond a black and white spectrum.


Good luck with that. Dude prob have 200 posters of Trump in his room yelling at them all day long that he hate Trump.
Member
Posts: 49,289
Joined: Jun 18 2006
Gold: 11.77
Jun 15 2021 05:26am
Quote (bogie160 @ Jun 14 2021 10:16pm)
What you said is that Obama will be considered a top tier president, in part, because of the fact that he is black. What order they come in is irrelevant, the question of his race doesn't belong in the top one hundred.

It is unhealthy to assign characteristics to people based on their race. Obama is a biracial man who was raised by white grandparents in Hawaii and took advantage of every advantage that upbringing afforded him. He deserves to be judged according to the success he achieved, which is outstanding considering that he achieved a position in our society that the vast majority of people will never come close to realizing. His success in that role, however, has nothing to do with whether he was black or white, no more than FDR can be considered a great president given the fact that he could barely walk for a few meters unaided. Whether FDR could walk or not is irrelevant, he achieved a political dominance unmatched since at least Washington, and led the United States successfully through a World War. It is completely demeaning to what they've achieved as individuals. Obama is a great man for his time. He achieved far more than the vast majority of men in his position could dream of achieving. But ranked against Presidents? He's lacking. He didn't lead a major legislative achievement. He exacerbated political and racial polarization in the United States. He did not resolve any of the foreign conflicts afflicting the United States at the time. He did nothing to rectify the fiscally insolvent social programs threatening to bankrupt the country.


The order is relevant, and I think it's true historians would rank Obama higher because he's the first black president. I don't know how high he'll be ranked, but I've listed a few reasons that are more important than him being black(healthcare, stimulus, economic recovery, sandwiched between two horrible presidents).

What characteristics am I assigning? Being the first black president is historic. Being half-black qualifies as being black. Again, I think historians care about substance and narrative.
Member
Posts: 9,155
Joined: May 11 2009
Gold: 5.01
Jun 15 2021 05:35am
Quote (D_urRRR @ Jun 11 2021 03:20pm)
You are being spied on 24/7, so what's the big fucking difference?


This.
Member
Posts: 34,649
Joined: Jul 2 2007
Gold: 273.37
Jun 15 2021 09:04am
Quote (IceMage @ Jun 15 2021 07:26am)
The order is relevant, and I think it's true historians would rank Obama higher because he's the first black president. I don't know how high he'll be ranked, but I've listed a few reasons that are more important than him being black(healthcare, stimulus, economic recovery, sandwiched between two horrible presidents).

What characteristics am I assigning? Being the first black president is historic. Being half-black qualifies as being black. Again, I think historians care about substance andnarrative.


No one is accusing you of saying that historians will consider it the most important thing. You have reiterated that you agree with your original statement, so I'm not sure what you're arguing against. That it is mentioned at all is a mistake, not whether it's the most important or tenth most important factor.

As you said, the people doing the judging put stock in racial narratives and are predominately progressive. Why are you surprised that people discount the objectivity of their "expertise"?

Quote (Budgeting @ Jun 14 2021 10:36pm)
see his edit. this sums up what you do


I have criticized Trump for years on his temperament, disorganization, and policy. But what is important to me and what's important to you are different. I am going to focus on what it is important to me. The obsession with Trump on the left is toxic. It is impossible to suggest that Trump might be inadvertently correct on any subject without a raving crowd of, frankly unintelligent, liberals demanding that you support precisely the opposite.

This post was edited by bogie160 on Jun 15 2021 09:11am
Member
Posts: 49,289
Joined: Jun 18 2006
Gold: 11.77
Jun 15 2021 09:18am
Quote (bogie160 @ Jun 15 2021 11:04am)
No one is accusing you of saying that historians will consider it the most important thing. You have reiterated that you agree with your original statement, so I'm not sure what you're arguing against. That it is mentioned at all is a mistake, not whether it's the most important or tenth most important factor.

As you said, the people doing the judging put stock in racial narratives and are predominately progressive. Why are you surprised that people discount the objectivity of their "expertise"?


I've already articulated what I'm arguing against.

Do you think historians became progressive the last few years, or that they've been that way for decades? You're using something that's been true for quite a while, historians leaning progressive and judging presidents in a way that offends the conservative sensibility, as a justification for the right-wing effort to discredit any American institution it can. There's no institution you guys won't touch... even the military is getting attacked these days.
Member
Posts: 4,802
Joined: Feb 6 2020
Gold: 347.20
Jun 15 2021 09:21am
Quote (IceMage @ Jun 15 2021 11:18am)
I've already articulated what I'm arguing against.

Do you think historians became progressive the last few years, or that they've been that way for decades? You're using something that's been true for quite a while, historians leaning progressive and judging presidents in a way that offends the conservative sensibility, as a justification for the right-wing effort to discredit any American institution it can. There's no institution you guys won't touch... even the military is getting attacked these days.


*Act shocked*

With the amount of civilians you guys killed across the world for your own country greed, what do you expect people to do? You guys killed more people in the middle east than Talibans did against their own.

That's just the middle East.

Your military are made of killers and you guys vouch for that.

Well you guys bout to taste your own medicine considering Canada is uniting with Russia, China....
Member
Posts: 92,993
Joined: Dec 31 2007
Gold: 2,299.94
Jun 15 2021 09:28am
Quote (bogie160 @ Jun 15 2021 10:04am)
No one is accusing you of saying that historians will consider it the most important thing. You have reiterated that you agree with your original statement, so I'm not sure what you're arguing against. That it is mentioned at all is a mistake, not whether it's the most important or tenth most important factor.

As you said, the people doing the judging put stock in racial narratives and are predominately progressive. Why are you surprised that people discount the objectivity of their "expertise"?



I have criticized Trump for years on his temperament, disorganization, and policy. But what is important to me and what's important to you are different. I am going to focus on what it is important to me. The obsession with Trump on the left is toxic. It is impossible to suggest that Trump might be inadvertently correct on any subject without a raving crowd of, frankly unintelligent, liberals demanding that you support precisely the opposite.


the simple fact is that the only reason progressive ideology isnt just unarguably and objectively better of a path is because they tend to go too far with their called for action. conservativism by nature is simply a skeptical and scared ideology that is only useful as a check on power of progressive ideas, that at their core are largely the right direction for society and the country. it is only due to the binary political meta that conservatism is allowed to persist, as they have almost zero useful ideas for the direction of the country beyond 5 years in the future. it's the party of the now, with ideas for the now, and shooting down moon shot ideas for the then. the fact that its been infiltrated with identity politics gives them even less use for america. they'll persist all the same, as an anchor persists on any boat.
Member
Posts: 34,649
Joined: Jul 2 2007
Gold: 273.37
Jun 15 2021 09:57am
Quote (thesnipa @ Jun 15 2021 11:28am)
the simple fact is that the only reason progressive ideology isnt just unarguably and objectively better of a path is because they tend to go too far with their called for action. conservativism by nature is simply a skeptical and scared ideology that is only useful as a check on power of progressive ideas, that at their core are largely the right direction for society and the country. it is only due to the binary political meta that conservatism is allowed to persist, as they have almost zero useful ideas for the direction of the country beyond 5 years in the future. it's the party of the now, with ideas for the now, and shooting down moon shot ideas for the then. the fact that its been infiltrated with identity politics gives them even less use for america. they'll persist all the same, as an anchor persists on any boat.


Whether you think Reaganism was positive or negative, it had a clear objective and direction for the country. A strong military, a robust economy unencumbered by regulation, and a government in support of traditional, decentralized social power structures. That has been the conservative party within American politics for a generation.

Identity politics has entered center stage because the American left has abandoned the principles of bipartisan American liberalism. They are at war with the foundations of American and European civilization. I don't find comparisons, drawn by Chinese immigrants, to the Cultural Revolution all that dramatic anymore. The American right is only now waking up to the threat. It's unfortunate that there is no political talent at present to shape that burgeoning awareness in a productive direction.

Quote (IceMage @ Jun 15 2021 11:18am)
I've already articulated what I'm arguing against.

Do you think historians became progressive the last few years, or that they've been that way for decades? You're using something that's been true for quite a while, historians leaning progressive and judging presidents in a way that offends the conservative sensibility, as a justification for the right-wing effort to discredit any American institution it can. There's no institution you guys won't touch... even the military is getting attacked these days.


As I said in a different thread, these institutional biases have existed for decades, but they've become significantly more overt in the past ten years, and kicked into overdrive with Trump's election. We are entering uncharted territory where universities are establishing committees to police academic research and journalists proudly proclaim themselves ideological advocates rather than arbiters of fact. Personally, I think it goes along with the decline of religion. We are trying to substitute one Truth for another. The last time we tried this was in the 1910s with Communism and the 1930s with Fascism, and I'm sure we all remember how that turned out.
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1121314151620Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll