Kavanaugh hearing

[Forty Two]

Yeah OK man.

Let's take this one step at a time.

I suggested that Antifa also whip their 'knuckledraggers' into a frenzy using bigotry and hatred. You accused me of committing a 'false-equivalancy.'

Explicate.

You have to pick a side that you think is the "real" problem. They can't both be a problem where one side is worse than the other. You're only supposed to talk about one problem. No matter how many piss bottles and molotov cocktails are thrown, no matter how many bike locks are swung, no matter how many Trump supporters are beaten, no matter how many riots occur, no matter how many fires set, no matter how many stores looted and damaged, no matter how much traffic is blocked, no matter how many innocent people harassed, antifa is always doing it for a good cause. Therefore saying they are using bigotry and hatred to whip their douchebag supporters into a frenzy is a false equivalency.

Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

[Sean Hayden]

What did you think stopping republicans was going to look like? Are you even paying attention to what Trump is saying in the news? I don't see how this ends peacefully. I don't have the faith in our institutions the feds seem to have.

[Sean Hayden]

The rest of us are just going to sit back and watch you turn us into a fucking theocracy, that worships a crazy rich and hateful Jesus, and is lead by a narcissistic atheist?

Fuck you man.

[Forty Two]

I am paying attention to what he's saying in the news. What concerns you?

Aren't you paying attention to the economic, political, and trade successes Trump is having? He's doing a fantastic job.

[Sean Hayden]

Shove it up your ass. If you don't respect me enough to assume I know that presidents aren't responsible for half the shit you're trying to give to Trump then fuck you man. I'm tired of playing politics with you. I never said Trump would kill our economy, I never gave credit to Democrats for a better one.

He's just the president. But he's the head of an ugly ass side of America. I think it's dangerous, and that you're possibly still acting like it's business as usual and it's all essentially politics.

[Forty Two]

Shove it up your ass. If you don't respect me enough to assume I know that presidents aren't responsible for half the shit you're trying to give to Trump then fuck you man. I'm tired of playing politics with you. I never said Trump would kill our economy, I never gave credit to Democrats for a better one.

I never said you did. But, killing 20 regulations for every new one is Trump's doing, and has saved many billions of dollars and helped the economy. The tax cut was Trump's doing, and has helped the economy. Pulling out the bad trade deals, the Iran deal, the Paris Climate boondoggle - all Trump's policies, all boons to the economy. The new replacement for NAFTA - a benefit to the economy, and Trump's policy.

Trump's economic program was very simple: an attack on taxes and regulations with an extra dose of spending on infrastructure and the military that would create a supply shock to a moribund economy.

On the tax side, the White House pushed through a massive $1.5 trillion reform plan that sliced the highest-in-the-world corporate tax from 35 percent to 21 percent and lowered rates for millions of taxpayers, though the cuts for individuals will expire in 2025.

On deregulation, Trump ordered that rules be pared back or eliminated across the board. During his time in office, Congress has cut back on the Dodd-Frank banking reforms, particularly in areas affecting regional and community institutions, rolled back a multitude of environmental protections that he said were killing jobs and took a hatchet to dozens of other rules. (The left-leaning Brookings Institution think tank has a rolling deregulation tracker that can be viewed here.)

During the first year of his administration, "significant regulatory activity" had declined 74 percent from where it was in the same period of the Obama administration, according to data collected by Bridget Dooling, research professor at GW's Regulatory Studies Center.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/07/how-tru ... -fire.html

His actions have been direct and meaningful -- targeted to get the job done. Results oriented, pragmatic actions to achieve goals.

The new North Korea approach - that's Trump.

Of the things he has control over, he's done a great job.

He's just the president. But he's the head of an ugly ass side of America. I think it's dangerous, and that you're possibly still acting like it's business as usual and it's all essentially politics.

This is all just the anti-Trump political spin. The head of an ugly ass side of America? Dangerous, how so? Because he's crude? Because he's petulant? Because his words aren't delivered in a flowery fashion? He gets into the gutter when having spats with his opponents?

He's got his opponents snookered. They're approaching this like the important thing is the Twitter wars. Ermergerd! Like, did you see what Trump said!! Oh, he's such a jerk! He can't say that about her! He was rude to her! He was rude to him! He's unpresidential!

Most people don't care about that crap. They want the economy to be doing what it's doing. They want the military strong. They want the borders secure. And, they want the law to be enforced, as fairly as possible. Whether Trump said a cuss word or made a sexist comment is down on the list of things most people care about.

People want the steak, even if the sizzle comes with some grease spatter.

[Jason]

I prefer to grill my steaks.

[Sean Hayden]

It's like you believe that you just take the guy out and put another in and we've got a clean slate. You're not in the finance world, are you? You talk like I imagine guys Buffett calls shortsighted must think.

People are worried because they are looking at trends and about where the power is headed. It isn't that Trump is crude, people don't like that for sure, but I'm crude, it's that he is working in conjunction with long-standing attempts to undermine public confidence in our institutions, in science, in the media etc.

That's dangerous.

There's more of course, but I'm not going to allow you to use me to keep campaigning for Trump. I'm tired of playing politics with you.

[Forty Two]

It's like you believe that you just take the guy out and put another in and we've got a clean slate. You're not in the finance world, are you? You talk like I imagine guys Buffett calls shortsighted must think.

People are worried because they are looking at trends and about where the power is headed. It isn't that Trump is crude, people don't like that for sure, but I'm crude, it's that he is working in conjunction with long-standing attempts to undermine public confidence in our institutions, in science, in the media etc.

That's dangerous.

There's more of course, but I'm not going to allow you to use me to keep campaigning for Trump. I'm tired of playing politics with you.

Look, the media has undermined itself. I can't watch CNN, FoxNews or MSNBC without them embellishing or even outright making things up. They are political spinmasters, and hardly can be called news sources, and unfortunately, the same goes for NBC, ABC, CBS and almost every other source we have these days. They aren't even reporting the weather fairly anymore. And, their approach to Trump? It's 24-7 bashing, and they hardly report anything that isn't negative.

The institutions themselves deserve a fair bit of criticism. The Senate embarrassed itself with the Kavanaugh hearings. The FBI showed significant issues with bias in their investigations of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. The CIA and the NSA have run amok, and are hardly accountable anymore, as Snowden and others have shown us. They deserve a little bit of reduced confidence until they earn it back.

The public doesn't understand enough of science to have its confidence in it reduced. That's the fault of our deficient science education in schools. The public opinion on science is all a public relations battle, as the race to accuse each other of being liars and conspiracy theorists on climate change shows. Once side calls the other "climate denier" and the other side says the non-deniers are gullible folks perpetuating a hoax. There is no middle ground.

On the science thing - I once participated in a climate change discussion wherein I quoted the UN IPCC's position on climate change verbatim. Since the UN IPCC does not officially take an alarmist and approach to the issue, I was called a "denier" by the true believers who pretty much told me that anything short humans being 100% responsible for 100% of climate change which will 100% result in catastrophic and calamitous sea level rises of several feet and mass extinction in the next 10-20 years is denial.

The Democrats deny science as much as Republicans - https://nypost.com/2017/09/20/liberals- ... lly-study/ and https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... 67934b23c0

This whole idea of people being "deniers" of science is really overall a bad way to approach it. Fred Hoyle was once one of the preeminent scientists on the planet, and he held on to his Steady State theory of the universe well into the Big Bang Era, and originally the Big Bang theory was rather denigrated by the scientific community (the name itself was adopted after it was originally a term to mock the theory). Was Fred Hoyle a "Big Ban Denier?" Were the Big Bang proponents the "Steady State Deniers?" Was one or the other a "hoax" created to scam everyone? Of course not.

As religiously as some people are taking the climate science of the day - it's been an ever changing and developing area of science for the past century, and its change and development has accellerated exponentially over the last 50 years. Climate science has been wrong. Climate science may be entirely wrong. It's science. I read some articles recently that the Big Bang theory may be wrong and new physics theories are bouncing around. So what?

Also, even if two people agree on the basic science and even if they agree on a predictive model -- that doesn't mean they have to agree on the solution or the politics involved. And climate science doesn't have to be either a hoax or absolutely true along with its proposed solutions -- it can be true AND being used to advance certain political and economic platforms.

Lots of political ideas are "dangerous", to use your word. When I hear socialists and other left wingers discuss what they want, my reaction is that they're wrong, and their theories and policy platforms are damaging and injurious to a lot of people. I oppose them because I think they are dead wrong, and will do a good deal of ill.

[Sean Hayden]

Fox is not news, and you know your likening of it to other outlets like CNN is just baaaaad. Trump undermines the media by using Fox rhetoric. That's a terrible idea, and completely at odds with you supposedly being okay with undermining the media because hey, they are all that bad. In other words, you want me to believe Trump undermining the media is okay because they are bad, while at the same time ignoring that Trump is only really undermining one side. You're just playing politics. You like a lot of Fox rhetoric. You're perfectly at home there. --deny away bud


Criticism is good. I hate most of the system. I don't, however, want to lead people to believe that it has been rigged by and for leftists and their evil socialist ideas! That's a fucking lie. But that's the lie your president is pushing.


Science educators are constantly fighting your right-wing idiots. Why do you deny this? It's everywhere you look.

Why the fuck wouldn't certain politics and economies be better or worse for the planet?

[Forty Two]

Fox is not news, and you know your likening of it to other outlets like CNN is just baaaaad.

I disagree - CNN is in the tank for the Democrats. They are rabidly anti-Trump, and second to that, anti-Republican, and they are not news any more than Fox is. Both have some news on their channels. But they have clear, unambiguous biases.

Trump undermines the media by using Fox rhetoric. That's a terrible idea, and completely at odds with you supposedly being okay with undermining the media because hey, they are all that bad.

I'm o.k. with criticizing the media. They're too centralized - too centrally controlled. They parrot political talking points, they cheerlead us into wars. "Undermine?" Have you seen the Don Lemon show recently that came out after the Kanye West appearance with Trump? Watch it - the "this is what happens when Negroes don't read" show.... tell me CNN's programming is not just as biased as Fox News.

In other words, you want me to believe Trump undermining the media is okay because they are bad, while at the same time ignoring that Trump is only really undermining one side. You're just playing politics. You like a lot of Fox rhetoric. You're perfectly at home there. --deny away bud

I don't care what you believe. But criticizing the media when they are acting like Acosta from CNN and playing games is justified.

I'm not at home there with Fox rhetoric. Don't mistake my support for Trump for support for Fox's biased reporting.

Criticism is good. I hate most of the system. I don't, however, want to lead people to believe that it has been rigged by and for leftists and their evil socialist ideas! That's a fucking lie. But that's the lie your president is pushing.

He hasn't said it's rigged for the leftists and their evil socialist ideas. He said there was rigging going on for Hillary, and there was. Look at the primaries and what they did to Bernie Sanders. CNN gave debate questions to Hillary Clinton in advance of the debates. CNN faked news to support Black Lives Matter, publishing a call to violence as a call to peace. It faked a satellite feed, when reporters were reporting from the same parking lot. CNN created a racist image that nobody was using (a version of Pepe) and then blamed white people, all to stoke the fires. CNN faked crowd sizes to bolster Hillary Clinton - http://i.magaimg.net/img/36l.png CNN reported that Anthony Scaramucci was under investigation by Congress, when he wasn't. CNN reported that Trump got early access to wikileaks documents, claiming it read the proof of that fact, when it was false. CNN reported the "17 intelligence agencies agree" story over and over, when it was false - total nonsense. CNN reported that Trump lied about being told by Comey that he wasn't under investigation - and Comey confirmed that CNN was wrong.

Every fucking thing about Trump that's reported -- not everything - but so much of it - is just embellished and twisted to make him look bad. Remember when he was feeding fish with Shinzo Abe in Japan, and they made it look like Trump committed a major etiquette breach by dumping his fish food in the koi pond? And, it turned out he did exactly what Abe did and had done nothing wrong? CNN reported it to make Trump look bad.

CNN reported that Trump wanted to make rape and sexual assault "preexisting conditions" under the affordable care act. That was a lie, to make Trump look bad.

CNN anchor Chris Cuomo declared that possessing "stolen" wikileaks documents was illegal for everyone, exept the media (himself included), who were then the ones that would tell us what we need to think about them. LOL.

CNN reported that Trump had gone a week without taking questions from the press - but, he had done so the day prior.

CNN reported that Republicans paid for the Steele Dossier, too, when that is a complete falsehood.

CNN media reporter Brian Stelter accused Republican congressmen of being “scared” to come on the network to debate gun control. Anchor Chris Cuomo specifically accused Ted Cruz for not appearing. However, Cruz had done a 15 minute interview with CNN earlier that day and CNN chose not to air it, and had previously done 3 town hall debates on CNN.

CNN reported that Nancy Sinatra was unhappy with Trump using her father's song "My Way" in his events. “That’s not true. I never said that. Why do you lie, CNN?”

CNN exaggerated the number of school shootings that occurred.

CNN fomented conspiracy theories about "where is Melania?" when she was out of the spotlight for a few days recovering from kidney surgery.

CNN tried to make Trump look bad by claiming he did not know Japanese car companies build cars in the US. Again, unnecessary twisting and exaggerating to create a false picture.

Science educators are constantly fighting your right-wing idiots. Why do you deny this? It's everywhere you look.

I don't deny it. Science educators, also, are not a uniform group. Some science educators are full of shit. Others are good, smart, hard-working people. And, there are tons of right wing idiots. I oppose the right wing on most of their key issues. So, they're not "my" right wing idiots. You seem to be trying to pigeon-hole me into the right wing, when I'm not. I support Trump, not conservatives, and I support Trump, not the "right wing."

Why the fuck wouldn't certain politics and economies be better or worse for the planet?

They might be, but it sure isn't socialism or communism, in my opinion. And, that's really the point - people can differ on which ones they think are better or worse without descending into namecalling like "denier!" - that's getting into the realm of heresy, not political discourse.

You may well disagree with me - you may think socialism is a kind, compassionate economic and political ideology which would be great for the planet and improve humanity's overall lot in life. And, am happy to credit you with believing that honestly (if indeed, you do - which I don't know - I'm just using the word "you" in the sense of "one" may think that), and I'll credit you with genuinely wanting what is best for the world. I would hope people could at least recognize that someone with my political views could likewise honestly, and genuinely, believe that the things I believe in would make the world a better place, too.

What good comes of shutting down the climate debate by saying "the science is settled" (when science is never settled) and that those who oppose the political courses of action suggested by left wing factions are "deniers" who openly and knowingly want the destruction of the world? That's what gets bandied around - talk like that. All that accomplishes is to get people to align themselves with a team, and shout back.

The beginning of wisdom is the ability to entertain an idea without accepting it, said, I think Aristotle. I think part of that means that we can entertain an idea without getting all wildly upset and angry about it. But, alas, when the idea becomes a moral one, and not a scientific one, then it demands anger and upset - the opposition are advocating not just a different course of action, but IMMORALITY - BADNESS - EVIL. That's why if someone goes to a thread on climate change and says "hey, what about this article here which takes issue with this data....blah blah blah..." very often he's met with a bevy of screaming meemies who "go after" the guy. Why? Because the idea being expressed is a sin, and convincing others that a sin is good is the height of evil. Of course we go after that guy.

[Cunt]

Republican deniers are as believable as climate change deniers.

[Sean Hayden]

Would you like to address the point that matters regarding the media 42? Trump undermines the media using Fox rhetoric. Can you see why that's not the same as criticizing the media in general, and why it adds to the believability of the claim that he's dangerous? You can't substitute his insanity with your reasonableness, or you saying Fox and CNN are bad for his "only that media over there" --wink, wink, nudge, nudge, is bad. I know you can see the difference.


Public education and the sciences, in particular, are under attack and have been for some time now. Your denial is in presenting poor explanations for the public's abysmal scientific literacy besides the one that's right in front of you, and in your telling us it's okay to support the anti-science party while still being pro-science, or that we can have a government full of scientific ignoramuses who oppose funding public education and still achieve a scientifically literate population. That's denial or outright hostility to the welfare of the US.

[Cunt]

The media SHOULD be undermined. It isn't their lies that are harmful. It's the fact that they are believed.

[Sean Hayden]

No, the left-leaning socialist media conspiracy needs to be undermined. You leave my Fox news alone buddy!