The Seriously? Theatre of Absurdity, Ignorance, and Bad Posts V

[Figueira]

Let's be fair, Smith is probably a sock.

I thought it was pretty obvious from the beginning.

If so, who are likely suspects?

If smith didn't join AAD I'd say Hamilton.

FTR, I have sent PMs to some mods about whose sock I believe Smith is.

A lot of people on this site are overly obsessed with declaring people to be socks.

[Figueira]

Add this stipulation to the national GOP rules:

"In the week immediately preceding the Iowa Caucuses, the RNC chair may unilaterally demand that up to three non-suspended candidates being regularly included in the national polls leave the race immediately. If the candidate or candidates commanded to leave do not leave, they will be ineligible to receive any delegates, and any delegates they would have been otherwise eligible to receive will be reallocated to the other candidates or to uncommitted according to each state's delegate allocation rules."

The RNC chair could have used this to boot out TRUMP, Cruz, and Carson this year. The other 9 candidates who ran in the Iowa caucuses were either sensible republicans or hopeless candidates.

lololol the implications of this.

I mean, it's a terrible post, but what are the "implications" other than the destruction of democracy?

[Figueira]

Add this stipulation to the national GOP rules:

"In the week immediately preceding the Iowa Caucuses, the RNC chair may unilaterally demand that up to three non-suspended candidates being regularly included in the national polls leave the race immediately. If the candidate or candidates commanded to leave do not leave, they will be ineligible to receive any delegates, and any delegates they would have been otherwise eligible to receive will be reallocated to the other candidates or to uncommitted according to each state's delegate allocation rules."

The RNC chair could have used this to boot out TRUMP, Cruz, and Carson this year. The other 9 candidates who ran in the Iowa caucuses were either sensible republicans or hopeless candidates.

lololol the implications of this.

I mean, it's a terrible post, but what are the "implications" other than the destruction of democracy?

Does there need to be anything else?

No. It's just that I kind of got the impression that there was.

[Figueira]

Two quality posts in a row:

His people will support Gary Johnson.

Of course not. He's a raging misogynist. He'd much rather have Trump win than a woman like Clinton.

You say this like it's a joke, but it's probably true.

JCL's reasoning is even better:

His people will support Gary Johnson.

That's a funny way to spell Jill Stein.

Bernie's base has a big thing in common with Gary Johnson. They all want weed legalized.  The democrat establishment won't give Bernie and his base anything. They won't vote for the Green Party.

[Figueira]

Too bad it's only a temporary stay.

[Figueira]

STOP ARGUING

And I'm sorry to say this, but RI is right. That post didn't belong here.

Blatant transphobia is OK in your book now?

[Figueira]

STOP ARGUING

And I'm sorry to say this, but RI is right. That post didn't belong here.

Blatant transphobia is OK in your book now?

Your definition of "blatant" is a bit off, and I say that as someone who actually for the most part is on your side of this politically.

He did say that people should be permanently barred from entering bathrooms of their gender identity.

Also, it might help to be more aware of realisticidealist's posting history.

[Figueira]

STOP ARGUING

And I'm sorry to say this, but RI is right. That post didn't belong here.

Blatant transphobia is OK in your book now?

Your definition of "blatant" is a bit off, and I say that as someone who actually for the most part is on your side of this politically.

He did say that people should be permanently barred from entering bathrooms of their gender identity.

Also, it might help to be more aware of realisticidealist's posting history.

I completely agree with you on this issue, but it may serve you some good to think of other people's perspectives on the issue and realize it isn't always as black and white as you think it is. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they're a bigot/_____phobe. You don't know his reasoning, so you can't make that judgement. Also, do you really think you're going to convince anyone or win the debate by calling the opposing side trans phobic? That's not helping our side, you're only hurting us.

Given the user in question's posting history, it's pretty clear that he would agree with the idea that he posts transgender rights. And no, I'm not going to mince words just to protect the feelings of religious fundamentalists.

[Figueira]

Wow, people are still talking about his. Okay. Let's get some things straight:

I vehemently disagree with the medical establishment concerning the diagnosis and treatment of gender dysphoria. I further vehemently disagree with the linguistic distinction, categorization, and protection of gender as an individual trait that is not either subsumed by sex or personality. I further believe that sex is an immutable chromosomal fact that can not be changed by hormones or surgery. I acknowledge the existence of norms prescribed by society with regard to sexual distinction and believe them to have some basis in underlying trends but that they should not be forced upon an individual, nor should an individual should feel strictly beholden to them. I do not believe a disconnect between someone's personality and the societal norms of their sex comprise a valid basis for "transition" through hormones and surgery.

Additionally, I believe that this Balkanistic "essentialism" displayed by the modern left wherein an individual only amounts to the sum of their inherent labels and categories (cis/trans, gay/straight, abled/disabled, and the infinite progression of "genders" to describe every flavor of preference under the sun) is highly dangerous and self-destructive. This overcategorization denies the inherent dignity of each person as a unique individual and divides people unnecessarily. When we entrench the idea that people are only special if they have a unique skin color or sexual preference or mental disorder and only outside recognition of this label will fulfill them, we reject that truth that people are already special and unique regardless of category or label and that fulfillment only arrives through ourselves, not from others.

I believe these things independent of any religious basis.

I do not wish harm on any person. I harbor no hatred toward people who believe themselves to be transgender. In fact, I greatly pity the vast majority of them. I can only imagine the mental anguish they experience. However, I do not believe the "cure" society has proscribed is the best solution to their problem, and it represents an affront to what I understand to be the purpose of medicine and mental health and the nature of any objective reality.

If you wish to define this attitude as "transphobic" and use it as a bludgeon, that is your prerogative. I believe that doing so does not add to dialogue between opposing viewpoints and offers nothing of substance, but, then again, that does seem to be the point. It's far easier to just be outraged at everything and play martyr, after all. Know that in doing so, you accomplish nothing aside from patting yourself on the back and generating a roll of my eyes.

Regarding the nature of this thread, I believe it should be reserved for arguments made in bad faith, made with clear logical fallacies, which wish a direct and malicious harm on others. I believe this has historically been the purpose of this thread. If you wish for this to change, so be it, but the precedent for deeming a post "absurd or ignorant" based on individual disagreement poses a danger to open discourse and civility. If that is your desire, then I feel nothing but pity for the depth of your insecurity.

All I have to say is, you're a terrible, ignorant, and by your own admission anti-modern-medicine person just like the leader of the country whose flag is in your avatar, and you want to bully innocent, oppressed children into using bathrooms that are the opposite of their gender identity. If that isn't wishing harm on people, I don't know what is. Also if we're talking about logical fallacies, your entire second paragraph is a straw man.

Also I love how people have been using this thread to call out bigotry since day one, but as soon as I try to call out transphobia people lash out at me.

[Figueira]

I'm not a doctor or a medical expert, but I'll do my best:

Biology is complicated. There are mammals that can fly. There are salamanders that are neotenic. There are people who are born with the wrong number of body parts. Based on all the complicated things that can happen in nature, it's pretty naive to think that sex and gender are a synonymous and immutable concept that can never ever ever be changed.

Also, who are you exactly to tell people that their gender identity is wrong? If someone feels they're a woman, it's pretty awful to tell them that they're wrong just because some guy on the Internet can't stand the idea that rules have exceptions and takes it out on people who don't fit into his simplistic understanding of biology.

[Figueira]

Powell

Johnson might tempt me a bit, but I would never feel comfortable voting for an atheist VP.

Tolerant, open-minded independent.

It would surprise me if there was a Wulfric post that didn't belong here.

Here:

I could be persuaded to endorse Flake or Kirkpatrick depending on what happens in the next 2 years.

Annoying? Yes. Absurd, ignorant, or bad? Not really.

I love how he acts like his endorsements carry so much weight.

To be fair, if I somehow found myself in between two major parties ideologically, I would have find "endorsing" people from both parties very fun.

[Figueira]

Roll call predicts Begich will enter. D+2

I didn't know a party could make 2 pickups in a single Senate race with only one seat up for grabs.

He'll win so badly that Dan Sullivan #1 will resign in terror and Bill Walker will appoint a Democrat.

[Figueira]

Hopefully greitiens can catch up and win.

lol

Is that a bad post because Greitens is a uniquely awful person, or because he can't win?

[Figueira]

California is just wannabe New York, but at least it's got its priorities straight

Decent jokes don't belong here.

East Coast supremacism is a vile, hateful ideology that deserves to be fully condemned.

Come on, it's a harmless joke.

[Figueira]

Someone does not understand how racism works...

Don't be racist, bro.

Uh if I was I would support Trump.

Nothing wrong with the post.  Most racists support Trump.

In context there is. BRTD is being racist in that thread, and he does not in fact support Trump.

[Figueira]

Ron Paul is a known, rabid anti-semite. As he gets older it seems to be his only consistent policy platform. Of course he's voting for the BDSer with the friend of Holocaust deniers on her ticket.

It's probably true that Paul is antisemitic, but not for that reason.

[Figueira]

If I was DNC chair, I would make getting back WV a top priority. Make it very clear that anti-coal democrats are in the wrong, in fact, kick them out of the party if they won't change their views. Make being pro-coal one of the first things the democratic platform lists, and stress its importance. Apologize over and over again in TV ads for your pure stupidity, recklessness, and destruction of jobs in being anti-coal. Say that you are thankful for the punishment the state gave the democratic party, and have learned from it.

The National Democratic party's coal position is WRONG! JOBS, JOBS, JOBS!

Thank you for posting this directly into this thread.

Yes, we need jobs, but coal is simply unsustainable.