elpablo21
Supporter
- 105,461
- 193,120
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2008
Here's the full article
https://www.axios.com/house-leaders...utm_medium=twsocialshare&utm_campaign=organic
***Official Political Discussion Thread***
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by rico x hood,
- Start date
https://www.axios.com/house-leaders...utm_medium=twsocialshare&utm_campaign=organic
Mr.Guy
formerly timidtebow
- 23,944
- 8,608
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2013
Chuck Schumer should run for president in 2020.
- 33,592
- 28,900
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2006
- 26,623
- 38,178
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2013
Good luck with that
Mr.Guy
formerly timidtebow
- 23,944
- 8,608
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2013
I like Chuck.
- 70,049
- 24,223
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2004
The author of your link agrees with "most or all of" the other author's assertions that Trump is mentally unfit for the presidency.thats a Op-Ed piece
here's da retort.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corne...s-grapple-consequences-his-25th-amendent-idea
editorial navel gazing.
Thoughts?
da 25th amendment has never been used.
which is da point of da op-ed, u wanna see polarization? play with that 25th amendment
you can't even diagnosed someone from media clips, way to completely politicize mental illness.
- 7,364
- 28,988
- Joined
- Dec 8, 1999
A couple quick points:
1. This thread is sort of a microcosm of American politics in that many of you allow yourselves to get sidetracked by sensationalist nonsense and it diverts focus from matters of substance.
Case in point: the argument that one or two random rappers represent the "hip hop intelligentsia*", which represents hip hop culture collectively, which represents Black Americans or people of color collectively, which decides whether or not someone is "racist" as a matter of taxonomic class is patently absurd and unworthy of discussion. I don't understand why any of you devote pages to disputing claims that make "flat Earthers" seem logical. ("Shaquille O'Neal has a doctorate in education from Barry University, qualifying him as a member of the scientific intelligentsia. He believes the world is flat. Therefore, the world is flat.")
As a matter of policy, I can't sit here and say, "you're not allowed to have ridiculous arguments on our forums." Were that the case, it would be the end of the Music and S&T forums.
However, at a certain point there is a credibility issue when it comes to "crying wolf." If you make a habit of posting fatuous comments on the forums with the likely goal of irritating people, that, by definition, is trolling. There's a significant difference between presenting an unpopular viewpoint in a respectful way and acting as an irritant for its own sake.
2. The use of racial slurs is not acceptable on our forums. You can insult a public figure. You can NOT use racial slurs to describe anyone. That is inherently disrespectful.
Some of you are getting way too comfortable using racial slurs on here. The raccoon pictures stop now.
If you want to say that a public figure is being an "Uncle Tom," self-hating, etc. you can. It's not the opinion that is unacceptable, it is the use of racial slurs.
*The word is 'intelligentsia.' If you've only heard a word spoken, look it up. You obviously have access to the Internet.
1. There have been a LOT of insults directed towards ninjahood in this thread. It's a regular occurrence. Rather than argue the point, you say "ha ha, you're poor." And you can't very well claim to care about poverty or the impoverished in the abstract when it makes you feel good, and then use someone's economic status as a weapon when it serves your purposes. Either demonizing the poor, for that sake alone, is wrong or it isn't.
It's a prejudice that, I believe, everyone should check themselves on. If we don't believe that America is truly an egalitarian meritocracy, that it's possible to for someone to be lazy and affluent and for a person to be hardworking and poor, someone's reliance on public housing programs seems like rather cruel grounds for a character attack.
I understand the temptation. Ninjahood echoes the likes of Bill O'Reilly, whose criticism of commercial hip hop could certainly lead you to believe that he wouldn't think terribly highly of someone who spends money on gold jewelry while living in a family member's rent controlled apartment. But it doesn't stop with "you're arguing against interest." You're not insulting him for being "a hypocrite." You're insulting him because he lives in his mother's apartment. That's obviously not in the spirit of NikeTalk's rules.
Enforcement in this thread has, unfortunately, not been as consistent as I'd like, in part because it's a VERY fast moving thread and the few reports that do come in often seem retaliatory rather than substantive. If we're going to call things tightly, a LOT of people would be banned from the thread over this.
I'm trying to take the high road here and just appeal to everyone as an adult to approach this thread, and this forum, with respect.
2. Our community's diversity is one of its greatest strengths. If recent politics suggests nothing else, it's that (fake news aside) we are less prepared and informed when we only listen to those with whom we have the most in common.
We all stand to benefit when we listen to each other and attempt to synthesize rather than invalidate each other's perspectives.
If you see something differently than I do, it could be because you're looking at it from a different angle - not because you're lying. The parable of the blind men and the elephant applies here.
It shouldn't be against the rules to identify as a conservative on our forums. I think there's a point of distinction between "you said something racist, that's clearly against our policies and you will NOT use our forums as a vector for hate speech" and "you support Donald Trump, who is racist. Therefore, you should be banned."
At that point, the connection becomes a bit more arbitrary, and someone else could argue, "What about everyone who supported Hillary Clinton? She doesn't exactly have the cleanest record on that front, either." Then what's the standard? You can support someone who's advocated racist policies or run a campaign tinged by racism, but only if you aren't supporting them for those reasons?
We banned quite a few people for racism in this thread - and that's not a coincidence. Racists were emboldened by the outcome of this election. But I'm making an effort to uphold the rules and punish those who violate those rules, not those who are "suspected racists."
I would hope that you'd appreciate the difficulty in trying to be as fair as possible to everyone, even those with whom we might personally disagree. It's easy to say "majority rule, minority rights" as a matter of principle, but when you are in the majority in some way, you'd better make damned sure you're not abusing that status.
The idea that it's okay to personally attack someone who "deserves it" isn't acceptable. "Wrong is wrong. No matter who does it or says it."
That doesn't mean ninjahood is bulletproof because we're over-correcting so as not to bully self-identified Trump supporters. It means I'm trying to be fair and treat others as I'd like to be treated (not "treat them as they'd treat you), while, at the same time, upholding our longstanding policies as written.
1. This thread is sort of a microcosm of American politics in that many of you allow yourselves to get sidetracked by sensationalist nonsense and it diverts focus from matters of substance.
Case in point: the argument that one or two random rappers represent the "hip hop intelligentsia*", which represents hip hop culture collectively, which represents Black Americans or people of color collectively, which decides whether or not someone is "racist" as a matter of taxonomic class is patently absurd and unworthy of discussion. I don't understand why any of you devote pages to disputing claims that make "flat Earthers" seem logical. ("Shaquille O'Neal has a doctorate in education from Barry University, qualifying him as a member of the scientific intelligentsia. He believes the world is flat. Therefore, the world is flat.")
As a matter of policy, I can't sit here and say, "you're not allowed to have ridiculous arguments on our forums." Were that the case, it would be the end of the Music and S&T forums.
However, at a certain point there is a credibility issue when it comes to "crying wolf." If you make a habit of posting fatuous comments on the forums with the likely goal of irritating people, that, by definition, is trolling. There's a significant difference between presenting an unpopular viewpoint in a respectful way and acting as an irritant for its own sake.
2. The use of racial slurs is not acceptable on our forums. You can insult a public figure. You can NOT use racial slurs to describe anyone. That is inherently disrespectful.
Some of you are getting way too comfortable using racial slurs on here. The raccoon pictures stop now.
If you want to say that a public figure is being an "Uncle Tom," self-hating, etc. you can. It's not the opinion that is unacceptable, it is the use of racial slurs.
*The word is 'intelligentsia.' If you've only heard a word spoken, look it up. You obviously have access to the Internet.
I've banned ninjahood in the past myself, and would have absolutely no problems doing so again as the situation warrants. That said, I think it's important to bear a couple of things in mind:
1. There have been a LOT of insults directed towards ninjahood in this thread. It's a regular occurrence. Rather than argue the point, you say "ha ha, you're poor." And you can't very well claim to care about poverty or the impoverished in the abstract when it makes you feel good, and then use someone's economic status as a weapon when it serves your purposes. Either demonizing the poor, for that sake alone, is wrong or it isn't.
It's a prejudice that, I believe, everyone should check themselves on. If we don't believe that America is truly an egalitarian meritocracy, that it's possible to for someone to be lazy and affluent and for a person to be hardworking and poor, someone's reliance on public housing programs seems like rather cruel grounds for a character attack.
I understand the temptation. Ninjahood echoes the likes of Bill O'Reilly, whose criticism of commercial hip hop could certainly lead you to believe that he wouldn't think terribly highly of someone who spends money on gold jewelry while living in a family member's rent controlled apartment. But it doesn't stop with "you're arguing against interest." You're not insulting him for being "a hypocrite." You're insulting him because he lives in his mother's apartment. That's obviously not in the spirit of NikeTalk's rules.
Enforcement in this thread has, unfortunately, not been as consistent as I'd like, in part because it's a VERY fast moving thread and the few reports that do come in often seem retaliatory rather than substantive. If we're going to call things tightly, a LOT of people would be banned from the thread over this.
I'm trying to take the high road here and just appeal to everyone as an adult to approach this thread, and this forum, with respect.
2. Our community's diversity is one of its greatest strengths. If recent politics suggests nothing else, it's that (fake news aside) we are less prepared and informed when we only listen to those with whom we have the most in common.
We all stand to benefit when we listen to each other and attempt to synthesize rather than invalidate each other's perspectives.
If you see something differently than I do, it could be because you're looking at it from a different angle - not because you're lying. The parable of the blind men and the elephant applies here.
It shouldn't be against the rules to identify as a conservative on our forums. I think there's a point of distinction between "you said something racist, that's clearly against our policies and you will NOT use our forums as a vector for hate speech" and "you support Donald Trump, who is racist. Therefore, you should be banned."
At that point, the connection becomes a bit more arbitrary, and someone else could argue, "What about everyone who supported Hillary Clinton? She doesn't exactly have the cleanest record on that front, either." Then what's the standard? You can support someone who's advocated racist policies or run a campaign tinged by racism, but only if you aren't supporting them for those reasons?
We banned quite a few people for racism in this thread - and that's not a coincidence. Racists were emboldened by the outcome of this election. But I'm making an effort to uphold the rules and punish those who violate those rules, not those who are "suspected racists."
I would hope that you'd appreciate the difficulty in trying to be as fair as possible to everyone, even those with whom we might personally disagree. It's easy to say "majority rule, minority rights" as a matter of principle, but when you are in the majority in some way, you'd better make damned sure you're not abusing that status.
The idea that it's okay to personally attack someone who "deserves it" isn't acceptable. "Wrong is wrong. No matter who does it or says it."
That doesn't mean ninjahood is bulletproof because we're over-correcting so as not to bully self-identified Trump supporters. It means I'm trying to be fair and treat others as I'd like to be treated (not "treat them as they'd treat you), while, at the same time, upholding our longstanding policies as written.
- 70,049
- 24,223
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2004
its borrowed from Spanish, da S is English localization pronunciation, im using subtitle Spanglish... [emoji]128516[/emoji]
EddieDoyers
formerly eddiengambino
- 46,208
- 23,878
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2012
Yet the lady from faux news apologized for it. You're making an excuse for that poor behavior?
- 70,049
- 24,223
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2004
I don't even know bout that story to make a excuse for her
i watch alot of news, im not watching everything though..
relaxmy point stands, you can't diagnose people from television clips.
- 64,964
- 196,091
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2009
That is enough internet for you today famb
EddieDoyers
formerly eddiengambino
- 46,208
- 23,878
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2012
- 26,623
- 38,178
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2013
So mocking a 10 year old for political points is fine as long as he doesn't have a mental condition? And of course you would try to defend the mocking of an autistic 10 year old.you can't even diagnosed someone from media clips, way to completely politicize mental illness.
The point is attacking 10 year olds for political points is disgusting. Even more so when that child turns out to have a mental condition and he and his family are facing abuse because of that Fox contributor's actions.
Yes, you can't diagnose someone from seeing them on tv. But how about we just don't attack 10 year olds for political points?
They called the kid a snowflake who was "stalking the VP" based on baseless conjecture and it backfired. Instead of condemning political attacks on children, especially those with mental conditions, you're defending that woman's actions by saying "but she couldn't have known he was autistic. As if attacking a 10 year old isn't reprehensible enough already.
That he turned out to be autistic is precisely one of the many reasons children should not be mocked on tv for political reasons.
And before you bring up "but Barron...", the same goes for anyone attacking and mocking Barron Trump, as I have said before in this thread.
Last edited:
- 43,203
- 28,377
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2003
Appreciate the response, and completely respect the perspective.
My issue with ninjahood is he has shown he is unwilling and incapable of having a mature discussion where ideas are exchanged. He's more interested in protecting his beliefs than he is honestly engaging.
He's regularly provoked members, reported those members for their reactions, then came back and boasted about it.
I'd have absolutely no problem discussing politics with the guy if he didn't regularly come off as pompous and engaged in a way that isn't completely dismissive of any thoughts that are not his own.
I suppose he is an accurate representation of the fervent Trump supporter who still won't acknowledge what all of us are actively watching. So if diversity is the goal, mission accomplished. In that, I think you may be overlooking some things, though. I've yet to see any real proof of him engaging in a fashion that isn't dismissive of others. Doesn't break the rules, but it definitely doesn't contribute to a mature and productive discussion about a topic that is extremely serious.
My issue with ninjahood is he has shown he is unwilling and incapable of having a mature discussion where ideas are exchanged. He's more interested in protecting his beliefs than he is honestly engaging.
He's regularly provoked members, reported those members for their reactions, then came back and boasted about it.
I'd have absolutely no problem discussing politics with the guy if he didn't regularly come off as pompous and engaged in a way that isn't completely dismissive of any thoughts that are not his own.
I suppose he is an accurate representation of the fervent Trump supporter who still won't acknowledge what all of us are actively watching. So if diversity is the goal, mission accomplished. In that, I think you may be overlooking some things, though. I've yet to see any real proof of him engaging in a fashion that isn't dismissive of others. Doesn't break the rules, but it definitely doesn't contribute to a mature and productive discussion about a topic that is extremely serious.
- 144,386
- 174,232
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2010
Of course 
lightweight champion
Banned
- 13,481
- 5,271
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2007
Do what others are doing now, don't get mad when the wind howls.
- 70,049
- 24,223
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2004
sounds like you got a problem with me being immutable in my views, last time i checked? I don't have agree with you same way you don't have to agree with me, doesn't give anyone da licence to get disrespectful, period, full stop.
that's in general, and da "maturity" of a conversation doesn't hinge on whether i agree with you or not.
EddieDoyers
formerly eddiengambino
- 46,208
- 23,878
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2012
Last edited:
- 14,689
- 35,469
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2011
The only thing you should expect from NH's interventions here is the lulz. Trying to have a productive discussion with him is a lost cause because he simply doesn't acknowledge realities that go against his opinion.
- 43,203
- 28,377
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2003
I don't condone personal attacks, and anytime I have brought up your living conditions it was to shed light on your hypocrisy. If I have lunged any personal attacks at you, I apologize.
And I have absolutely no issue with differing opinions. I take issue with your pomposity.
I wasn't trying to start a debate on the topic, though...just wanted to share my perspective with Meth.
Mr.Guy
formerly timidtebow
- 23,944
- 8,608
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2013
what's wrong with Chuck? He's better than Hillary.
- 43,203
- 28,377
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2003
I'm never sure, but I think Chuck is cool...I think.
- 9,091
- 13,907
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2014
Meh the rules obviously don't apply to ninja for whatever reason. Has nothing to do with ousting conservative thinkers. Everyone has been here long enough to know dudes history. If you're gonna give infractions to other users for the smallest things levy the infractions equally
- 64,964
- 196,091
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2009
If you are worried about Wall Street ties, no he is not
Hillary is way more liberal than Schumer
