• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Derpy Donny's tariffs save the American consumer

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
According to tests, she has Native American ancestry, though she played it up as being more significant than it appears. I don't know the rules and latitude around the issue and if her ancestry is at an acceptable level. Though it sounds like it is much too thin for qualification as near as I do understand, but not so thin to say it is pretense.
Ref...
https://nypost.com/2018/10/15/heres-what-elizabeth-warrens-dna-test-shows/
All I can say is that when you associate something as an insult that something isn't being praised as I see it. If you associate someone with dung, dung is not being glorified in the exchange. Neither is the person so associated.
Another analogy....
If I claimed to be British royalty, & you called me Prince Charles,
it would be about mocking my claim....not that Prince Charles
is dung-like.
This is why Trump's insult is so clever...he's insulting Warren for
her pretense....not Pocahontas for being a real indian.

Oooooh, a better analogy.....
When someone deduces something blindingly obvious, one would
criticise them by saying, "No shirt, Sherlock". Mr Holmes is widely
revered as a brilliant intellect. The insult is about making the contrast
between the dim bulb & the brainiac....not dissing the latter.

Finally, I invoke the argument from authority. Who on RF is more
experienced at being insulting than I? Case closed.
.
 
Last edited:

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
Oh, I do praise Trump... But where did I point to derogatory names applied to Trump as examples of flawed behavior though?

...That's what you said I did..!!!
...Post 43, bud.
So you do not consider derogatory names applied to Trump as flawed behavior. My mistake.
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
Ref...
https://nypost.com/2018/10/15/heres-what-elizabeth-warrens-dna-test-shows/

Another analogy....
If I claimed to be British royalty, & you called me Prince Charles,
it would be about mocking my claim....not that Prince Charles
is dung-like.
This is why Trump's insult is so clever...he's insulting Warren for
her pretense....not Pocahontas.

Oooooh, a better analogy.....
When someone deduces something blindingly obvious, one would
criticise them by saying, "No shirt, Sherlock". Mr Holmes is widely
revered as a brilliant intellect. The insult is about making the contrast
between the dim bulb & the brainiac....not dissing the latter.

Finally, I invoke the argument from authority. Who on RF is more
experienced at being insulting than I? Case closed.
.
I have to concede to your last point even though I have never found you insulting. May I refer to this as the Revoltistanian Paradox?

I t does seem that there are some good points to your view, but I am not sold on the validity of the Prince Charles analogy. I'll have to think about that one. Sherlock Holmes being fictional, it would be hard to see how he could be offended or any real person for that...no, there are probably people somewhere that could find offense. We are good at being differentially thin-skinned and capricious about it.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I have to concede to your last point even though I have never found you insulting. May I refer to this as the Revoltistanian Paradox?
You've utterly failed to be insult-worthy.
I t does seem that there are some good points to your view, but I am not sold on the validity of the Prince Charles analogy. I'll have to think about that one. Sherlock Holmes being fictional, it would be hard to see how he could be offended or any real person for that...no, there are probably people somewhere that could find offense. We are good at being differentially thin-skinned and capricious about it.
Close enuf to say semi-detente.
 

Kangaroo Feathers

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
It was offered as an insult, making it difficult to ignore the derogatory assumptions about Native Americans implied by its condition as an insult. It certainly is what I have come to expect from a threatened Trump.

Whether Trump can be said to have opened the door to personal name calling or not, he crosses that threshold so frequently as an example to all that it is unreasonable to call out one or a body of people for doing it also.
images
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
You've utterly failed to be insult-worthy.

Close enuf to say semi-detente.
I don't know, that first statement might be insulting. It could also be seen as a challenge.

I read the link you provided. It was pretty much what I remember reading about the testing Warren had undergone. I thought Trumps shutdown in response was pretty funny. Classic. I didn't remember that.

Suffice it to say, that despite my shifting position around the center with regards to varying issues, and ventures into libertareanism, I do not care for our president. I find the names applied to him to be amusing and often acutely descriptive as well as richly earned. I know others disagree. Welcome to America.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I don't know, that first statement might be insulting. It could also be seen as a challenge.

I read the link you provided. It was pretty much what I remember reading about the testing Warren had undergone. I thought Trumps shutdown in response was pretty funny. Classic. I didn't remember that.

Suffice it to say, that despite my shifting position around the center with regards to varying issues, and ventures into libertareanism, I do not care for our president. I find the names applied to him to be amusing and often acutely descriptive as well as richly earned. I know others disagree. Welcome to America.
We could use better quality presidents.
(I'm not holding my breath.)
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
We could use better quality presidents.
(I'm not holding my breath.)
I have often wondered if the best quality potential candidates are too intelligent to apply for the job. Looking at what a person has to go through, that doesn't sound that unrealistic as an explanation for why we get what we get.

Then it cannot be overlooked how easy it is to sway large portions of the electorate with little reason or evidence and massive appeals to emotion.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I have often wondered if the best quality potential candidates are too intelligent to apply for the job. Looking at what a person has to go through, that doesn't sound that unrealistic as an explanation for why we get what we get.

Then it cannot be overlooked how easy it is to sway large portions of the electorate with little reason or evidence and massive appeals to emotion.
That's how it's been, how it is, & how it will be.
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
I just like to bring it up whenever trumpettes start bleating about "respectful discourse".
It is notable that they seem to have forgotten their expressed feelings regarding previous presidencies.

The name calling comes from both sides, but I can understand the position you are taking in response to what is clearly hypocrisy and selective short term memory.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
It is notable that they seem to have forgotten their expressed feelings regarding previous presidencies.

The name calling comes from both sides, but I can understand the position you are taking in response to what is clearly hypocrisy and selective short term memory.
Be careful that you're not seeing hypocrisy because of things said
by different people in a shared group. Which particular person
said conflicting things? Call that person a hypocrite.
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
Be careful that you're not seeing hypocrisy because of things said
by different people in a shared group. Which particular person
said conflicting things? Call that person a hypocrite.
Not sure I am following you, unless you are saying that no group or person has a corner on hypocrisy. I agree with that, if it is the case. Sometimes we exercise it without intent or immediate realization.

I was agreeing to the idea of responding in kind to useful effect.

Fortunately, we live where politicians are fair game and usually kind enough to give us plenty of fodder for response. Some just produce so much fodder we are nearly choked. It is often enjoyable to point that out to those who were feeding so well off prior politicians.
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
I expect the 2020 election to be more of the same.
That is my expectation.

My take on Trump was that he ran for the attention, never expecting that he might actually win. Since then it has been about what he can gain. If it works out that the rest of us benefit of are at least not destroyed, he will accept credit for that too. I believe he is responsible for the drop in deaths due to cancer. Cancer fears his and skills.

I do not see him as a very ethical person or a man that drug himself up from nothing to billions. His leadership style is chaotic, capricious and too near dictatorial for my comfort. If he loses, we will not have lost as much as some people think and it may be for the greater good.
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
Be careful that you're not seeing hypocrisy because of things said
by different people in a shared group. Which particular person
said conflicting things? Call that person a hypocrite.
To clarify, I meant the general hypocrisy often widespread, but overlooked depending on the perspective of origin. Not an indictment of specific individuals. Surely individuals as learned as my fellow RF posters would recognize their own shortcomings and take action to manage them.

I should run for office. Too bad my skeletons are not that interesting.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Not sure I am following you, unless you are saying that no group or person has a corner on hypocrisy. I agree with that, if it is the case. Sometimes we exercise it without intent or immediate realization.

I was agreeing to the idea of responding in kind to useful effect.

Fortunately, we live where politicians are fair game and usually kind enough to give us plenty of fodder for response. Some just produce so much fodder we are nearly choked. It is often enjoyable to point that out to those who were feeding so well off prior politicians.
I'm saying that some posters here call all Pubs or all Dems or all
this or that group hypocrites because of hypocritical messages
coming from the group. But it might be that different people in
the group are saying different things. Individuals should be
treated as such, & not judged by everything said by everyone
in some group they're said to belong to.
 
Top