Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
18 Comments
newtboysays...That’s why I voted for Pete in the primaries. He’s brilliant, thoughtful, and well spoken.
*promote
siftbotsays...Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Monday, May 9th, 2022 11:29pm PDT - promote requested by newtboy.
BSRsays...I voted for Biden just to fire Trump. I knew Pete couldn't do it. I agree with your profile of Pete though.
newtboysays...I don’t KNOW he couldn’t, but he did have “handicaps” that made it less likely….being incredibly smart and knowledgeable are two of those handicaps.
I voted for Biden in the election.
I KNEW Clinton couldn’t win…I only wish the DNC could have seen the writing on the wall back then. The world would be a very different place if we had had President Sanders.
I voted for Biden just to fire Trump. I knew Pete couldn't do it. I agree with your profile of Pete though.
eoesays...I appreciate the message. The cheesy music, not so much.
eoesays...He's also a bit smarmy having worked for McKinsey & Company. He never really answered any of those questions about ICE, bread price-fixing, massive layoffs, etc.
A fun video about all this: Former Mayor Pete Buttigieg - SOME MORE NEWS.
That’s why I voted for Pete in the primaries. He’s brilliant, thoughtful, and well spoken.
*promote
BSRsays...10-4 on the cheesy music.
I appreciate the message. The cheesy music, not so much.
luxintenebrissays...Less well known [than other paradoxes] is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.—In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.
- Karl Popper from The Open Society and Its Enemies [1945]
BSRsays...Paragraphs please. I can barely find the next line down. I'm old ya know. I can't hold my breath that long.
This is all I see:
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
Karl Popper from The Open Society and Its Enemies [1945]
I will not tolerate this.
Go back to your desk and bring it back when you're done and then I'll read it.
Less well known [than other paradoxes] is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.—In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.
Karl Popper from The Open Society and Its Enemies [1945]
newtboysays...I like a sesquipedalian soliloquy, but Matt and Trey were more intelligibly succinct when they wrote “your intolerance will not be tolerated!”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vTPjuT3rTA
Less well known [than other paradoxes] is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.—In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.
- Karl Popper from The Open Society and Its Enemies [1945]
bobknight33says...Democrats have all the control. Where are their solution?
And Biden and his party answer is?????????????
Utter lies and BS.
You say trans community which is fine.
but we say no to indoctrination.
Pete will never be POTUS - soft spoken but not leadership material.
newtboysays...If you want to convince me, you’re going to have to do one hell of a lot better than that silliness. He clearly went to the right wing propagandist school of YouTube even though he seems to imply he’s a liberal.
I’ll tackle one…the bread price fixing claim. He worked for a consulting company, the companies that are hired by failing and struggling businesses to suggest solutions and often that means cut their staffs in half to try to save the company…bad ones then sell all the assets, bankrupt the companies intentionally, and escape any obligations to the employees. There’s no indication the company he worked for did that (that I know of). They did apparently consult for a grocery store chain that, also apparently, was involved in bread price fixing at or near the same time his company was being consulted. It’s ridiculous to believe they REPORTED that crime to the outside consulting firm they hired.
Trying to tie one corporate customer’s unrelated crimes to Pete because you can string a tenuous thread between them (with many pegs between) is pretty damn dishonest. So is saying Pete never answered questions about it, he absolutely did…it was in the video.
Massive layoffs….I didn’t get that far, stopped around 7 min in…but that’s what consulting firms often do. If companies are failing because they’re way over staffed, they suggest layoffs to save at least 1/2 the jobs. Not always successfully.
I don’t know what ICE is if it’s not immigration cops, and I don’t know what he would have to do with it, but I’m not going to keep listening to these convenient edits and hyperbolic claims in the video. I can’t stand the narrator, nor can I trust him.
I’m not claiming Pete is perfection incarnate. I’m saying it would be nice to have a president who’s driven to public service, is insanely intelligent, is well spoken and polite, likeable, and young enough to have to live with the consequences of their own leadership, and that those are all positive traits we’ve been lacking of late.
He's also a bit smarmy having worked for McKinsey & Company. He never really answered any of those questions about ICE, bread price-fixing, massive layoffs, etc.
A fun video about all this: Former Mayor Pete Buttigieg - SOME MORE NEWS.
newtboysays...You know that’s not true. Democrats and independents have 48 seats, not 60(the number needed to pass any law now). Manchin and Senema are Republicans, not Democrats, and vote as such. That means there’s no chance of getting anything meaningful passed with the Republican platform being “don’t let the democrats get anything done”.
Solution to…what? Answer to….what? You can’t even form a cogent accusation.
What are utter lies and bs? Your attempts to attack Democrats?
Who says “trans community….”… what? Which is fine …how? Are you ok? Did you smoke crack recently? Meth?
You say YES to indoctrination of everyone with born again MAGA evangelical Christian doctrines and MAGA insanity, you liar. You people want prayers in preschools, bibles in schools, bans on non binary genders, bans on discussing any non “pure” monogamous heterosexual sexuality, bans on interracial relationships, and probably a ban on any mention of any other religion through high school….and you think that’s not indoctrination.
Right, because screaming insane ridiculousness at full rant like a raving crackhead (sometimes WITH a raving crackhead!) is what makes a leader. 🤦♂️
Pete’s been in leadership positions repeatedly…including as an officer in Afghanistan.
Now Trump, he’s never led anything that didn’t fall apart or go bankrupt or get closed for fraud while he led it….and is a blatant draft dodger.
Yelling isn’t leading. Dividing isn’t leading. Throwing tantrums isn’t leading. Attempting coups isn’t leading.
Democrats have all the control. Where are their solution?
And Biden and his party answer is?????????????
Utter lies and BS.
You say trans community which is fine.
but we say no to indoctrination.
Pete will never be POTUS - soft spoken but not leadership material.
luxintenebrissays...Want answers? Then LISTEN. Stop believing in your false Republican GODS and grant the possibility they don't know any more than the other party.
Saint Reagan once said he'd give up a dozen things to get one thing he thought was needed. Seemly that is now a sin in the eyes of the GOP. That's one major problem in our politics. No compromise or acknowledgment that any solution has to include both parties.
Can't tango if the Red only wants to sit on their asses.* Tell me I am wrong.
Your words are like sour milk. Uttered out, then left to spoil in the light of actuality.
* "It's true hard work never killed anybody, but I figure, why take the chance?" (Gridiron Dinner on April 22, 1987) Also Ronnie, so maybe that's the only message the GOP molasses asses listen to.
G in G out
WANT TO BET?
Pete will never be POTUS - soft-spoken but not leadership material. (had to fix ; spell-check was being belligerent)
He is the stuff of political campaign dreams.
Relatable, great communication skills, common sense answers - there was a BIG reason why a Fox audience gave him a standing ovation. (almost said 'standing O' but didn't want you to lose your gourd over the image - u kinky bug) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQAuuVBFi6I **
**BTW: there has been over 700 attempts to rid the US of the EC & we almost did https://www.history.com/news/electoral-college-nearly-abolished-thurmond
JiggaJonsonsays...They don't have all the control. You're just a fucking liar. You even lie to yourself. It's pathetic to witness.
Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema frequently don't vote on major pieces of legislation aimed at these problems. Even if they did, 60 votes are still needed in the senate and they don't have that.
But go on, keep lying to yourself you fucking troll. "Democrats have all the control." you know this isn't the case but you just can't help but repeat bullllllllllllllllllshit can you?
Democrats have all the control. Where are their solution?
And Biden and his party answer is?????????????
Utter lies and BS.
You say trans community which is fine.
but we say no to indoctrination.
Pete will never be POTUS - soft spoken but not leadership material.
surfingytsays...i personally enjoy watching him make a bigger and bigger moron of himself with each idiotic sentence littered with spelling mistakes. when he contradicts himself its especially fulfilling to me.
They don't have all the control. You're just a fucking liar. You even lie to yourself. It's pathetic to witness.
Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema frequently don't vote on major pieces of legislation aimed at these problems. Even if they did, 60 votes are still needed in the senate and they don't have that.
But go on, keep lying to yourself you fucking troll. "Democrats have all the control." you know this isn't the case but you just can't help but repeat bullllllllllllllllllshit can you?
BSRsays...Your worst fear: Education. Tear down your wall.
Democrats have all the control. Where are their solution?
luxintenebrisjokingly says...some days the coffee is good...
R E A L L Y GOOD!
Paragraphs please. I can barely find the next line down. I'm old ya know. I can't hold my breath that long.
This is all I see:
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
Karl Popper from The Open Society and Its Enemies [1945]
I will not tolerate this.
Go back to your desk and bring it back when you're done and then I'll read it.
Discuss...
Enable JavaScript to submit a comment.