The delusion and willful ignorance is absolutely disturbing.

@newtboy

now don't be confusing bob with your "facts" and "logic".allow the man his delusions please.

i think the most telling of this man's incredibly cherry picked diatribe is how he declares that republicans want smaller government,while at the VERY same time applauds corporations and the military!!!

where one has totally infiltrated,purchased and now controls our legislature and the other is literally..L.I.T.E.R.A.L.L.Y..a branch of the behemoth government republicans are said to despise.

a real,classic,republican is against money in politics in the form of a multi-national corporation,because that corporation was given it's privileges FROM the government.which in theory,is representative of the people.a classic republican is also against a free-standing army that just chews up money and resources and is an utter waste in regards to it's affects to the average citizen.the military should be for defense only.

but let us remember,this is bill whittle.a master in the art of sophistry.

I can listen to anything but "hardcore gangsta rap". I feel it was created to test huge car stereo systems and developed delusions of grandeur.

I tend to view most religion as being a socially acceptable form of delusions... but they are mostly benign, some are even caring and empathetic people.

The ones that use their religion as a hammer to marginalize or harm others, I would rather they were put on a rocket and flown into the sun.

I think it depends on how you define "worse". I believe that Hillary is capable of being the shadowy, sleazy politician that knows the corrupt system, knows how to use/abuse it, and is 100% willing to bend it to her own goals.

Trump is a largely incompetent blowhard. He, like Hillary, says what he thinks he has to say to get the support of his base, and then flip-flops to suit his purposes. He isn't a Washington insider, he doesn't have the network of connections that Hillary does.

If Trump could be another Bush, Hillary could be another Nixon. I'm not convinced that Hillary is the lesser of two evils here.

And that's still working under the assumption that Trump would be as bad as Bush. Bush was bad, but without Dick Cheney and Karl Rove whispering in his ear, maybe he'd have been a merely incompetent president instead of a terrible one. For all the negative things that I think can fairly be said of Trump, I don't think that he's very likely to become someone's sock puppet like Bush.

I'm definitely not sure that Trump would be better than Hillary (for whatever definition of "better" one chooses), but I don't think it is cut and dry to the point of delusion for someone to see either of them as the bigger threat.

I'm not quite sure what is"vegan food" but from experience if you give yourself two to three weeks to adjust to a plant based diet you will do yourself a world of good and salads taste amazing after you make the adjustment.

Personally i base my eating habits on my personal health and thus believe a plant based diet is the best way to go (as personal experience has shown me)

However i eat meat these days cuz its what's prepared around the house. However im in poorer health since (cholesterol shot through the roof and i gained back a ton of weight i had lost) ive went from plant based to animal products and more processed foods.

For me diet is all about my health. A friend said the vegans he knows have the worst most unhealthy diets hes ever seen.

I guess being vegan is all about "animal cruelty". I had been under the delusion it was about ones personal health.

Warning, this is long. It's a general reply to bob, but really it's a rant about the reality of this country, origins, issue, and where we are headed... Like they say in Horace and Pete, at this point we just might deserve a president like Trump (especially because we are stupid enough to vote for HIM, and for so many Senators AND Congressmen like him or even far worse)...

Reply to bob at the top...


I hate to tell you, but "SHALL", according to the times in which the founding fathers wrote this IS indeed the utmost highest form of that period meaning that you "HAVE TO" do something.

Go ahead and let your own party change what grammar and vocabulary meant from that period--or simply not have enough brains to know what it really means (though most of us know by now their assistants have let them know what it means, they just refuse to believe reality and instead insert their own collective psychotic delusion).

Typically when it says SHALL (BTW, NOT doing that job should be getting them in HUGE amounts of trouble as well), they should be doing everything they can TO nominate a new judge into the open position in their next open session (not a session one year away, so Trump or Hillary has to do it).

If they want to complain about the nominee they CAN, just while they are under scrutiny to go up for the vote. But, they simply are NOT supposed to do nothing and furthermore say they WON'T do anything...

I'll have to look up what the penalty is for not doing this, but it could be a full "boot" from their job. Simply what has been referred to by Republicans in the past as Impeachment. But, then the Senate has to start that (I'm not sure if anyone else can; hence, this is why I said I'd try to see if there is anything else that can be done)

I believe they can also do it at the state level... BUT ALL of this requires for our government officials to do their fucking jobs! PLUS, the citizens that voted them in to give a shit!
----------


We REALLY, REALLY, do not deserve a country like this...it is BARELY alive and well. We are just a few presidential terms away (plus senators and congressmen) before we grind to a complete halt.

Then we can finally watch everything implode on CNN and FOX while REAL extremists take over and then the real fun starts. True extremists taking control with minimal bloodshed and shouting matches, civil war with outcomes that grant us either the NEO-United States (the U.S.A. V:2.0, which might be good), to the Neo-Confederacy (since that is what it all amounts to on the FAR right's spectrum). OR we simply just dissolve and become something entirely new.

Hey, bob did you know that your party used to be JUST like the Democrats of Lincoln's age. The Republican's were more like the Democrat's of our age. Weird right. THAT conservative party died out with Teddy Roosevelt's Bull Moose party; then all of the citizens decided that they simply liked the name "Republican" more (since they'd always voted for that name, right...it'd be weird to change it). That is where the Republican's became a FAR different party than they had been (though they still had a few more GREAT leaders before their schism drove them all, sadly, into madness ). The "Democrat's", they thought slavery was just peachy at first, and now they vote for gay-rights. NEITHER party remembers it's roots and the citizens of the United States have had their idiotic teachers and parents tell them all sorts of stories about how great either party WAS, but never telling them what they are like NOW. We all need to vote for our president, nowadays, without even LOOKING at their part's affiliation. It doesn't do any of us any good. Because none of them have ANY real lineage or links to the old presidents of these United States--they're full of shit.

Just remember, Republicans and their party were formed basically to try and abolish slavery--now they are more likely to put it back into action; a complete reversal of their direction, progressive and liberal!

Democrats tried to keep things the same as it was and to even expand slavery--now they want to allow marijuana to be legal, allow gays to have rights, and essentially pick up many progressive and liberal causes... They too have utterly reversed the direction they were at and taking during Abraham Lincoln's time. Conservative on many topics and wanting to expand the states' rights and abilities. Now they are the ones that would abolish slavery and even have Lincoln on their ticket if he ran...

Our parties in these United States are abysmal, a joke, a farce, and shouldn't even be used... The Founding Fathers would be dismayed over so many issues it wouldn't be even funny. They would more than likely throw OUT the Constitution and start a new draft, simply due to the amount of changes we've made in the WRONG direction and the fact that they weren't able to see the future far enough ahead to imagine gigantic empires made only of Business (with a mere handful of people, not hundreds, thousands, and many more like it was in their times) and how News would become so powerful it is essentially as powerful as the president of the United States--and if watched by enough people it is even FAR more powerful than him/her (like in Russia; The Internet being the ONE thing the Founding Fathers would pat our country on the back over and it's what can restore balance to the people who watch or only can gain information from these entities; a new type of "University" where anything can be shared; truth and facts obtained at every man's fingertips nearly instantly at any point on this planet; it IS the world's greatest WONDER ever made).

Lastly, they would absolutely abhor our parties and how they are used--internally and externally (how our politicians...how all the issues interconnect together; all politicians that receive outside money, they would likely want to have them all impeached, same with those that USE the media; they would HATE parties--but they know they'll always exist, you just have to get rid of the things that LET parties abuse we the people and also the government, and those things are: money and media...).


/length

binary worldviews attached to identity politics or nationalism or religion is a dangerous policy to adhere to,because it leaves us all vulnerable to manipulation and exploitation.

it limits discussion and discourse and creates an atmosphere of self-righteous delusion and breaks complex dynamics down to an overly-simplified worldview:

"if you are not with us..you are against us".

this is...something people want to see?

I don't get it. is this part of the not so secret delusion that some people seem to have that they will convert a lesbian if they're with the right guy or something?

@Babymech
jesus holy christ...

were you truly unable to discern my tongue firmly planted in cheek?

and then take issue with pay gap discrimination?
ok-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Pay_Act_of_1963

/cue rainbow

which you may take issue that i used wiki as a reference,which is pretty much your counter-position to my links.

which is just utter weak sauce.

oh that study was by a conservative think tank and therefore they have an "agenda".nevermind that christina hoff sommers is a feminist,nevermind that you didnt refute the numbers..lets just stick with "agenda" to refute any and all statistics that do not coincide with your narrative.

should i gather by implication that christian hoff sommers is not a feminsist?even though she identifies as one? or is she just the "wrong" kind of feminist?

come on man,are you really that blinded by your own bullshit?

and then you proudly attempted to dissect the rest of my comment taking positions i never took,but was rather using to express that in much of our dialogue..i was fucking agreeing with you.

you literally wrote one big,massive and utterly useless straw man.while i was actually trying to have a conversation.i may have indulged in some smart assery but that is mainly due to my perception of you.that i respected you enough not to treat you like a precious little flower or some fragile snowflake.

maybe you see this is as a right/wrong dynamic.

but here is the cold,hard truth:context matters.
and if you insist on viewing this situation in such a narrow and myopic way,the larger context will ALWAYS be unavailable to you.

so until you are ready to evaluate,without bias,new information.that may possibly contradict your current narrative,then you will always be stuck in your own self-delusion.

you were challenged.
your response was lack luster and a straw man.
and i can only assume by your words that any contrary evidence or contradictory opinions that may conflict with your own will be met with similar straw men,presumptions,deflecting and goal post moving.

because if ya cant beat em,
berate and belittle them.

I think I can see where he's coming from with this, and the more open forms of racism there is an honesty that does seem less insidious. Open racism, like a fire in your house is not something you want, but at least you can see the problem right away and begin to address it (get the fuck out of the house!). But that more subtle form of racism is more like radon gas, can't see it, can't smell it, but it's slowly killing your ass (I feel terrible, I think I'll lie down and take a nap).

In America I think we've been living under the delusion that racism is a thing of the past, especially after electing a black President, but then we see how most of the racism has simply gone underground. And so, all that outwardly PC behavior is just for show, you can change how people act on the outside, but they're still the same on the inside and quietly act on those impulses, the rot is still there.

His examples of dirty jokes weren't even really genuine racism, amongst certain groups (guys in particular) razzing, busting your balls and such is usually a sign of acceptance and sometimes it takes on racial or ethnic tones, but with no real malice.

The decision not to show Carmen at the Sydney Opera House sounds like a classic case of PC overreach, how does not showing Carmen actually serve the anti-smoking cause? Let's ask how many kids started smoking because they saw that scene in Carmen? It's an absolutely useless and pointless gesture.

Nah, prolly not. The self delusion is strong in these ones.

His tone makes me think of this vid by Veritasium...

http://videosift.com/video/Our-Greatest-Delusion-As-Us-Veritasium

*promote

Wow, I really wonder what was going on in that woman's head.

Even the article didn't help very much; and it even brought up more questions related to her arrest/charges...

I wonder if the police had yet to have see this video to use as evidence against her and had no real idea as to what happened in the accident (as the witnesses may not have helped them very much in piecing everything together; it made me wonder if this driver of the video taken stayed around for the police or merely went on their merry way and uploaded this later in the day). So they charged her with DUI, but the tests came back inconclusive so they had to release her.

Because from watching this video I can think of at least three to four charges they could arrest her with. So I'm assuming as I mentioned above that they merely slapped her with DUI and hadn't seen this yet, so they hadn't charged her with anything else as of yet; otherwise she would still be arrested. So I imagine she will be getting picked back up pretty soon. I'd love to know what the real cause was.

I'm guessing it was one of two things: high as a kite or a medical condition; I'm not entirely sure that this would be an alcohol related issue. But I have seen drunk people do some very weird things before. This however looks like she didn't care about parking the car or she "thought" that she had. Then she went to the sidewalk for whatever reason that compelled her to get out in the first place; perhaps a delusion or psychotic event--or something akin to it.

Our Greatest Delusion As Humans - Veritasium has been added as a related post - related requested by eric3579 on that post.