No, you say both sides because you can’t admit your “team” has a problem that isn’t ubiquitous.
Again, I show you dozens of individuals intentionally voting multiple times, dozens of campaigns and the party itself engaging in ballot harvesting and other schemes that together equate to hundreds of thousands of stolen votes, you answer “both sides” with absolutely not a single case on the Democrats side (besides the one entrapment case I handed you)….and pretend you won’t provide examples because they’ll be dismissed not because you have none….being dismissed doesn’t stop you from posting all the other propaganda. Knowing you will dismiss the verifiable facts I present you hasn’t stopped me from posting them in contradiction to your baseless propaganda.

I admit Democrats self deal, do insider trading, and sell their votes to deep pockets….but on a scale that’s microscopic compared to the complete lack of ethics and morals on the right. The right was significantly less honest, more money hungry, more corrupt than the left BEFORE Trump….after Trump it’s comparing the Mediterranean to an Olympic sized pool. Technically both have water. Comparatively the pool is completely insignificant….but you only want to focus on what happens in the pool.

Trump and family made literally BILLIONS selling favors. Never been a bigger crook in any office in the land. Greene went from pennyless to a multi millionaire in 2 years. Same for Santos who is a total fraud in every way, a fugitive, and supported by your party…apparently made millions from his campaign. You’ll be hard pressed to find any Republican that hasn’t made millions in office by ignoring ethics completely. You won’t find ANY trying to get big money (bribery) out of politics…only the left is interested in that, the right wants MORE bribery legalized (citizens United was their case, proving Republicans fight for MORE corruption in politics while Democrats fight to end it), the right refuses to divest, and opposes any strengthening of ethics rules EVERY TIME Democrats push for more/stronger ethics rules/laws.

Of course I’ll dismiss your hyper biased, unthinking, no fact idiotic claims, especially since they NEVER have references (because everything you believe is partisan nonsense and lies). It’s not worth the time because it takes no time at all to debunk your constant consistent lies and pure fantasy. If you had any actual facts it would be worth posting them, but you just don’t. You don’t bother to post lately because the stupid lies have gotten dumber and are being debunked as fast as you guys can lie them. It’s past the point where it’s safe to simply deny anything you say as a partisan lie with no investigation at all….chances are 99.96% you are lying or repeating lies any time you type. You never have facts or even references to show where your lies came from….which is totally intentional because you know that only makes debunking them much easier.

In congress….98% of corruption, 100% of child molestation, 100% of treason, 100% of calls to rescind the constitution, voting, and democracy and become a dictatorship are on the right. You call that “both sides” and pretend it’s really mostly a problem on the left with a very few outliers from the right….ignoring the facts….as usual.

You know the old saying….
“To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead, or endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture.” -Thomas Paine

You sir abandoned fact and reason well before the Traitor Trump rode his golden escalator of lies into your heart. I don’t argue with you except as practice, you have no actual argument to offer, only the far right party lines. I simply tell you the verifiable facts. You then argue with the facts and pat yourself on the head in congratulations. Silly boy.

BTW…have you grown up enough to discuss Ashley Babbitt yet? The treasonous traitor who violently attacked the capitol with an armed gang of thugs trying to overthrow democracy at Trump’s urging and got what they all deserved….your hero.
No, I’m sure you’re still just too embarrassed of how idiotic supporting domestic terrorists is and just hope everyone will forget you stand firmly with the treasonous terrorist traitors against democracy, law, and order.

“To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead, or endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture.” ― Thomas Paine

Let's fact check, he says....
Bloomberg made a temperature claim, so let's look at the population records.
He made claims about Pheonix temperatures, so let's look at Buckeye, as if Phoenix temperature records don't exist.

So sad this drivel convinces gullible and ignorant science deniers.

“To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead, or endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture.” Thomas Paine

Lol...Goya. nuff said.

“To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead, or endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture.” - Thomas Paine

Only delusional cultists would say they failed to prove his motive was personal and against the national interest. Deal with it.
His "transcript", a heavily edited summary that put the best possible spin on his call proved it handily by itself, and not one word, action, or piece of evidence contradicts that conclusion.
His defence was "as president, I'm essentially king and can do no wrong, and everything is permitted. My party is in control and are too scared of me to convict." So much for faithfully preserving, protecting and defending the constitution, he can't even read one sentence from it, said it was a foreign language. (That's fact, not opinion, btw) It's obvious he has no idea whatever it says.
There was no amount of indisputable proof that would have convinced the cowardly sycophantic"republicans" to turn on Trump, they ignored all evidence provided and refused to look at any, much less investigate because they know he now owns what's left of their party and therefore their futures, and they also know the slightest step out of line makes them his target, which means losing their job, power, and family's safety because his cultists include thousands of potential domestic terrorists just itching for him to set their target.
Edit:"The strength and power of despotism consists wholly in the fear of resistance." Thomas Paine

Edit: my theory is they reserved the dozen indisputable criminal acts they can prove until the Democrats run the Senate next year just in case he wins by hook or crook, knowing there is nothing, including cold blooded public murder, that the Republicans would convict him of.

*promote

https://videosift.com/video/Thomas-Paine-Christopher-Hitchens-Lecture-Full
https://videosift.com/video/Christopher-Hitchens-On-NPR-discussing-Thomas-Paine-2007

Well if you hate your country then try and fix it.
I love mine, and I hate some of the problems we got, but I'd never go anywhere else. If enemies try to attack us, then don't whine when we retaliate. And yes we've had a technical coup de tat during Roosevelt era, he ignored the standard 2 terms and stayed in 4 terms, 16 years instead of 8. It was after him that a new amendment was formed to force the 2 term limitation as before it was a honored tradition only stated verbally by George Washington, and kept until Roosevelt, then a law had to be made to stop it from happening again. Since he abused it.

become a hactivist, if you don't want to take up arms. learn sql injection, xss attacks, and use wikileaks to expose things and force changes. Or if the majority is fed up then the people have the right to coup de tat.

If you don't like how Americans on a whole do things, then in your router block the American CIDR. Go to Arin.net and you can easily firewall the entire country so you'll never see another Amercan based website again.

While I may dislike certain policies or even hate my president and disagree with occasional supreme court ruling. There's 3 things I'd have zero problems dying for. First I'd die for my son, I'd die to defend myself and my home, and I'd die for my country.
The American dream can never be destroyed, no matter how retarded and uneducated the 'political correct' mongs try, or any whining, or anything at all, will never change the American way of life.

I'll let a few founding fathers' quotes explain the ferocity of the "American way of life". I would never want to live anywhere else.

"I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787

“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

"Americans need never fear their government because of the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation on Earth."
- James Madison

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom... go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels nor arms. May your chains set lightly upon you and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."
- Samuel Adams; 1776


and in response to people like you who attack what we say/do/etc for not being "political correct" or whatever made up phobia they want to use this week.

"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine

I don't necessarily disagree with you. My opinions, while oft contrarian, are really just open ended processes without judgement or declaration. They are hardly even opinions, as I almost always simultaneously believe and hold dear multiple conflicting ideas about particular subjects. An enlightened doublethink as it were. Everything is a theory worth pondering. Thanks Socrates. Thanks for making me not know anything.

Now while tenure certainly holds clout, it can also blind us to the moments in time which were shorter but sweeter than any of the fine tuned complexities of empire. The Internet as we know it, with youtube and Facebook, for example, may be the fixture but I'll always think kindly upon those early 90s, when it was the awkward but mysterious world wide web.

So, cool, yay for fixtures, but I'm a founders man, not a member of the club after its maturity. The Thomas Paine -- Cool, the revolution is over, now fuck yo couch. Where's the next one?

Other examples where the fixture isn't necessarily the only method to decide value by: Van Halen's prolific career versus that first, highly exceptional, fast and heavy album. Or the short but sweet years Ronnie James Dio or Glenn Huges sang for Black Sabbath -- Ozzy is the fixture, but those short moments of time where something strange and magical was created with other diverse geniuses, prior to or after the bread winners, those are the moments of fascination.

I love Jon Stewart but this ain't no thang. My interest was already piqued and held years ago, before him. He's great though and far better than a single television show.

Successfully processed your "amazon" invocation - view all Amazonized posts here

DFT,

I think Sam is prepared to make the distinction between moderate and radical Islam - and I believe he does. Still, it is true that he writes that religious moderation creates the foundation for religious extremism.

The problem is Hedges is greatly misrepresenting Sam's sentiment. He does not present the scenario in the detail or terms that Sam does in regard to the nuclear first strike or the use of torture. To generalize as he has done paints Sam's comments as advocating for a nuclear first strike against 'muslims'. That simply isn't true.


I think Sam would say if any group (religous, political, ideological) came to power somewhere in the world and had the means and will to deploy WMD we may be forced into a 'First Strike'.

I agree with you that the Middle East despises the US for its constant violence and meddling in their affairs. However, it seems that a perverted form of Islam is still used to motivate many of the 'foot soldiers.' It really isn't an either/or. You have blow back that expresses itself through the regional religion.

Chris Hedges, like David Eagleman, wants to represent the 'new atheists' as something that they are not - closed minded zealots with a blood-thirst. Having read of Sam and Hitchens' work do you really believe that represents them?


The smearing that Hedges is doing is similar to how atheist were dealt with near the turn of the 20th century when they were grouped with the unpopular fascist, socialist/communist, and darwinist. "Stalin was a socialist atheist, look what he did!"

Are Sam and Hitchens intolerant of people or of bad ideas? There is a big difference, and I reckon it is the latter.



Furthermore - Hedges here states that there is nothing in "human nature or human history to support that we are collectively morally moving forward as a species." (2:01 in the video) Really? Has Hedges bothered to read Sam's book Moral Landscape?

Steve Pinker on the Myth of Violence

Does Hedges posit then that we cannot progress morally? Slavery has been abolished, women were finally given the right to vote and equal rights, violence is on the decline globally... yet we are not collectively improving morally? Sorry Chris but the evidence is not in your favor.



I am pleased to see atheist coming back out. Thomas Paine, Walt Whitman, Thomas Huxley, Richard Ingersoll...Harris, Hitchens, Dawkins. Marching foward.

In closing - All opinions matter, but informed opinions matter more. That is why knowledge is good and ignorance is evil.

-Kevin

Tags for this video have been changed from 'religion, atheism, history, science, skeptic' to 'religion, atheism, skeptic, thomas paine, richard carlisle, sigmund freud' - edited by xxovercastxx

>> ^NetRunner:

Thomas Paine: "Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not YET sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favour; a long habit of not thinking a thing WRONG, gives it a superficial appearance of being RIGHT, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason."
People you think sound like Thomas Paine:
<div id="widget_1982863756">

</div>

I can tell the difference, why can't you?
>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
I wonder what he would say of Thomas Paine's works. Arguably, the voice of the revolution in America; his rhetoric is very similar to ours today.


"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property... Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."

"He that rebels against reason is a real rebel, but he that in defence of reason rebels against tyranny has a better title to Defender of the Faith, than George the Third. "

- Thomas Paine

We can quote bomb all day really. But it doesn't address my question. When does rhetoric turn into something more sinister?

(ugh, quote fail)

Thomas Paine: "Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not YET sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favour; a long habit of not thinking a thing WRONG, gives it a superficial appearance of being RIGHT, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason."

People you think sound like Thomas Paine:

I can tell the difference, why can't you?

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

I wonder what he would say of Thomas Paine's works. Arguably, the voice of the revolution in America; his rhetoric is very similar to ours today.

While I appreciate the sentiment of most everything he said, I wonder what he would say of Thomas Paine's works. Arguably, the voice of the revolution in America; his rhetoric is very similar to ours today. I guess the only real measure of the worth of your rhetoric is your cause. If you cause beit to free a nation and you win, then history will think kindly of you. If your rhetorics objective is about keeping your/parties position of power, then most likely history will paint you with more than just golden colors.

Thought you might appreciate this as well http://www.bogsource.com/main/2010/07/27/the-thomas-paine-affair/