mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Extra Stuff > Blogorrhea > chalsall

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2022-05-10, 05:27   #12
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2

27·7·11 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chalsall View Post
I am always told to "speak truth to power". But it seems like every time I do those in power freak out.
I don't think you really get it. What happened was only that a bouncer told you to go and do your best impression of Walter Sobchak ranting about the U.S.of A. someplace else - other than the place where real people bereave the loss of their. real. dead. humans.

This rant was moved out of the "R.I.P." thread.
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-05-10, 16:33   #13
storm5510
Random Account
 
storm5510's Avatar
 
Aug 2009
Not U. + S.A.

3·719 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chalsall View Post
It's a bit like watching a train wreck in slow motion.
Basically, it's FUBAR, and I don't think this needs any translation. So, when did it start? January 20, 2016. Where did it start? Washington, D.C. Who started it? The Orange Man from Mar-A-Lago.

He set out to change this country from a democracy to a dictatorship. He was following the example being made in Moscow. All of his lies, hate, racism, and narcissism, led to a near total division among the people. One side thinks he can do no wrong, and the other thinks he is the devil incarnate. He only served himself, and a few others in his little circle. Of course, all of this came to a head on January 6, 2021.

The January 6th Committee claims to have something which will "blow" this wide open for all to see. His defense secretary cut on him hard yesterday. "Can we just shoot them?" was a question posed in the WH in response to a group of protesters Trump found annoying. "Can we shoot them, like in the leg?" was a follow-up. Trump wanted to use the military to attack the group of protesters. It was him that asked the questions.

IMHO, the SCOTUS has lost all credibility and respect. It is reported that 70% of the population is against their plan to overturn Roe v. Wade. What a can-of-worms this will become if they actually do overturn it, and they probably will, based on what I have heard recently.

I could go on with this, but I don't need to. Folks like using the term "dumpster fire." It's not a fire yet, but the kerosene soaking has been plentiful. All that is required now is the match to light it with.
storm5510 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-05-10, 17:47   #14
rogue
 
rogue's Avatar
 
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the

11001111101012 Posts
Default

SCOTUS has gone far into the "if it isn't a right explicitly stated in the constitution, the states can take it away from you". This means that only a national law or new amendment can give you new rights. Kind of scary of one thinks about it. It wouldn't take much for some states to outlaw gay marriage and SCOTUS to go thru mental gymnastics to agree with them. Note it was 5-4 in 2015 to require states to recognize it. Since then SCOTUS has gone far to the right. Next to fall will be the right to privacy because it doesn't exist in the constitution. This means that governments can legislate contraception and put people in jail just for using birth control. Note that only women are impacted by this as it would prevent use of IUDs. SCOTUS has already attacked the Voter Rights Act and it won't take much for them to scuttle what is left of it. Consider how states are writing laws that make it nearly impossible for people who are impacted by those laws to go to court. Environmental legislation is a good example. They want to argue that only the US government can take a business to court for breaking pollution laws, but if the US government doesn't care, then nobody else can anything about it. Another example is the anti-abortion law in Texas. The state cannot be taken to court to fight the law because the state is not enforcing the law. It is only enforced by citizens.
rogue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-05-10, 18:44   #15
Prime95
P90 years forever!
 
Prime95's Avatar
 
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL

2·59·67 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by storm5510 View Post
So, when did it start? January 20, 2016.
I respectfully disagree. That was the culmination of a process that has been ongoing for decades. Both parties have been electing fewer and fewer moderates, more and more ideologues.

Both parties are guilty of "if the other party is for it, we're against it", "if this is a good issue for our base at the polls, don't find a middle ground solution, demagogue and campaign on it instead". The internet and cable news outlets provide echo chambers to amplify the rhetoric.

Remember the days of Blue Dog democrats, members voting their conscience instead of the what their party leaders dictate, dinners with Tip O'neill after a legislative session, the white house having informal lunches/dinners with opposition members on a semi-regular basis? For the most part that's all gone.

It culminated in 2016 when both parties managed to nominate the two worst candidates possible from within their ranks. The voters thought process had to be "the other party's candidate is so bad, our terrible candidate is a shoo-in for the general election" -- a hell of a way to run a country, we got what we deserved. The only long term solution is a viable three/multi-party system. Alas, what may be the ONLY issue the two parties agree on is sharing the political cash and power with a third party must be avoided at ALL costs.

Can the U.S. recover before its too late? Perhaps. I did read an article recently that the political divisions were even worse in the late-1800s and early-1900s. Unfortunately, I suspect there is nothing but further polarization coming for the rest of my lifetime.


....and then there is the whole Wall Street's gutting of American industry for short-term personal gains dilemma...

Last fiddled with by Prime95 on 2022-05-10 at 18:46
Prime95 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-05-10, 19:00   #16
rogue
 
rogue's Avatar
 
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the

147658 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prime95 View Post
I respectfully disagree. That was the culmination of a process that has been ongoing for decades. Both parties have been electing fewer and fewer moderates, more and more ideologues.

Both parties are guilty of "if the other party is for it, we're against it", "if this is a good issue for our base at the polls, don't find a middle ground solution, demagogue and campaign on it instead". The internet and cable news outlets provide echo chambers to amplify the rhetoric.

Remember the days of Blue Dog democrats, members voting their conscience instead of the what their party leaders dictate, dinners with Tip O'neill after a legislative session, the white house having informal lunches/dinners with opposition members on a semi-regular basis? For the most part that's all gone.

It culminated in 2016 when both parties managed to nominate the two worst candidates possible from within their ranks. The voters thought process had to be "the other party's candidate is so bad, our terrible candidate is a shoo-in for the general election" -- a hell of a way to run a country, we got what we deserved. The only long term solution is a viable three/multi-party system. Alas, what may be the ONLY issue the two parties agree on is sharing the political cash and power with a third party must be avoided at ALL costs.

Can the U.S. recover before its too late? Perhaps. I did read an article recently that the political divisions were even worse in the late-1800s and early-1900s. Unfortunately, I suspect there is nothing but further polarization coming for the rest of my lifetime.


....and then there is the whole Wall Street's gutting of American industry for short-term personal gains dilemma...
I fully agree on all points.

I think that one potential solution is weighted voting. I think that has a chance of moderating the battlefield between the two parties as each side will need to make an effort to appeal to the opposing side. This would work well in primaries as one could place a weighted vote across members of all parties. Right now it feels like a "race to the bottom".

I hate the idea that humility or accepting that one has made a mistake is somehow viewed as a weakness. Honesty and integrity are not important.
rogue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-05-10, 19:45   #17
chalsall
If I May
 
chalsall's Avatar
 
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados

22×5×17×31 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batalov View Post
I don't think you really get it.
I do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batalov View Post
This rant was moved out of the "R.I.P." thread.
Correct. And, the post was meant to be serious. To generate some serious debate. Which, clearly, it has. Not that it's actually going to make much difference on the grand scale.

I understand all too well that the United States of America is still a serious player. And a large amount of the World's economy still depends on the "Greenback". Not to mention its serious military, able to project force literally anywhere.

The point I was /trying/ to make is those who rely on the USA for stability have been a bit unsettled by the instability demonstrated internally recently. To the USA's credit, this has been fully documented by the Free Press.
chalsall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-05-10, 21:51   #18
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

3·3,533 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chalsall View Post
Correct. And, the post was meant to be serious.
It was not on topic for that thread. You would not expect a serious post about gun control in the GPU72 status thread. The post about the Sinking Russian warship was also moved out of the RIP thread to a more appropriate location (the one about the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Last fiddled with by Uncwilly on 2022-05-10 at 21:52
Uncwilly is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-05-10, 23:20   #19
jwaltos
 
jwaltos's Avatar
 
Apr 2012
Oh oh.

7158 Posts
Default

No one is perfect and the one that supposedly was, was killed. Recalling the play "Hamilton", there will always be intrigue and injustice, Otzi was taken down with arrows..politics or religion or crime?..or all of the former? It doesn't matter what "normal" is because situations like the Inquisition and Salem witch trials speak volumes about that. Who among the current crop of world leaders would the populace trust to craft an enlightened constitution? I don't see a Hammurabi anywhere. ..won't get fooled again? ..don't bet on it!

Last fiddled with by jwaltos on 2022-05-10 at 23:22
jwaltos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-05-10, 23:47   #20
storm5510
Random Account
 
storm5510's Avatar
 
Aug 2009
Not U. + S.A.

3×719 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prime95 View Post
...Both parties are guilty of "if the other party is for it, we're against it", "if this is a good issue for our base at the polls, don't find a middle ground solution, demagogue and campaign on it instead". The internet and cable news outlets provide echo chambers to amplify the rhetoric.
....

It culminated in 2016 when both parties managed to nominate the two worst candidates possible from within their ranks.
If one is for it and the other against, and vice versa, has been around for a long time. It's gotten far more noticeable in recent years. If one wants to whiz on a certain tree, the other will avoid it just from spite.

Two worst candidates. I had to think on this for a minute. The other was Hillary. It seems like ages ago.
storm5510 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-05-11, 00:28   #21
retina
Undefined
 
retina's Avatar
 
"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair

5×1,301 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prime95 View Post
Both parties ...

Both parties...

... both parties ...
There's your problem.
retina is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-05-11, 11:41   #22
Dr Sardonicus
 
Dr Sardonicus's Avatar
 
Feb 2017
Nowhere

22·31·47 Posts
Default

I have mentioned before, e.g. here that people have been getting brainwashed for decades. I would add Rush Limbaugh and other talk show hosts of his ilk to the list of brainwashers.
Dr Sardonicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Boy Scouts of America: who should be welcome? Brian-E Soap Box 99 2017-10-12 17:39
Is there any such theorem that states this? soumya Miscellaneous Math 17 2013-03-28 10:26
Why America Really Invaded Iraq Asian-American Soap Box 59 2007-12-17 17:08
Indian mathematicians discovered America first. mfgoode Lounge 5 2007-08-15 16:53
The United States of America is not a democracy. jasong Soap Box 8 2007-01-25 15:33

All times are UTC. The time now is 23:13.


Wed Jun 29 23:13:25 UTC 2022 up 76 days, 21:14, 0 users, load averages: 1.46, 1.60, 1.49

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.

≠ ± ∓ ÷ × · − √ ‰ ⊗ ⊕ ⊖ ⊘ ⊙ ≤ ≥ ≦ ≧ ≨ ≩ ≺ ≻ ≼ ≽ ⊏ ⊐ ⊑ ⊒ ² ³ °
∠ ∟ ° ≅ ~ ‖ ⟂ ⫛
≡ ≜ ≈ ∝ ∞ ≪ ≫ ⌊⌋ ⌈⌉ ∘ ∏ ∐ ∑ ∧ ∨ ∩ ∪ ⨀ ⊕ ⊗ 𝖕 𝖖 𝖗 ⊲ ⊳
∅ ∖ ∁ ↦ ↣ ∩ ∪ ⊆ ⊂ ⊄ ⊊ ⊇ ⊃ ⊅ ⊋ ⊖ ∈ ∉ ∋ ∌ ℕ ℤ ℚ ℝ ℂ ℵ ℶ ℷ ℸ 𝓟
¬ ∨ ∧ ⊕ → ← ⇒ ⇐ ⇔ ∀ ∃ ∄ ∴ ∵ ⊤ ⊥ ⊢ ⊨ ⫤ ⊣ … ⋯ ⋮ ⋰ ⋱
∫ ∬ ∭ ∮ ∯ ∰ ∇ ∆ δ ∂ ℱ ℒ ℓ
𝛢𝛼 𝛣𝛽 𝛤𝛾 𝛥𝛿 𝛦𝜀𝜖 𝛧𝜁 𝛨𝜂 𝛩𝜃𝜗 𝛪𝜄 𝛫𝜅 𝛬𝜆 𝛭𝜇 𝛮𝜈 𝛯𝜉 𝛰𝜊 𝛱𝜋 𝛲𝜌 𝛴𝜎𝜍 𝛵𝜏 𝛶𝜐 𝛷𝜙𝜑 𝛸𝜒 𝛹𝜓 𝛺𝜔