Countdown to Extinction: The 2016 Presidential Election

[Turner]

BTW, which of the candidates suggested violence?

Shouldn´t be that hard to remember.

[Florestan]

Whatever one thinks of Trump, the fact that he was able to singlehandedly neutralize both the Bush Dynasty and the Clinton Dynasty in the space of one year is an astounding achievement.

Welcome back, BTW.

+ 1 on both accounts. 

[Madiel]

Way to miss the point, Zamyrabyrd. I'm not interested in a game of "which group of supporters did the worst thing", or any kind of argument that makes what's happening to minorities okay because something bad happened to a Trump supporter too.

Seriously? That's your counter? You respond to a mention of bad people by finding other bad people, as if that makes it okay? "They're not the only bad people" is no kind of refutation of being bad people.

You know how everyone keeps telling Muslim leaders they have to condemn Muslim terrorism (and generally ignoring when they actually fulfil that request, but let's leave that aside for a moment)?

This is Trump's first leadership test. People are doing these things invoking his name, using his campaign slogan. He's not personally responsible for their actions. What he IS responsible for is telling them no, this is not acceptable, I don't endorse you, you don't get to invoke my name.

[zamyrabyrd]

I've noticed that quite a few of your "sources" are the very trashiest of UK tabloids. Why is that?

Because CNN, BBC or any of their good buddies will not take up such a story. They do a media blitz on every time a black teenager is killed by police but not when the converse happens or even when children are attacked by thugs.

If you're actually in Britain (possible as I think you're none of the things you say you are) then I suggest taking up the Guardian.

What did I say I am that you don't believe?

Could you try linking to a Chicago paper reporting that story, or to any credible source? Otherwise I can only assume its either total BS or staged propaganda.

There are at least two google pages carrying that story. Why should anyone be surprised by it?
http://www.wnd.com/2016/11/black-mob-beats-white-trump-voter/

[zamyrabyrd]

Way to miss the point, Zamyrabyrd. I'm not interested in a game of "which group of supporters did the worst thing", or any kind of argument that makes what's happening to minorities okay because something bad happened to a Trump supporter too.

Sorry, playing the "minority" card doesn't mean a thing to me, neither the "racist", "misogynist" or "whatever-phobe" card.
Why, because "minority" is not a synonym for either oppressed or righteous.
Billionaires in the words happen to be a minority, does it make them victims we need to sympathize with?
In fact, vocal minorities as in the Bolshevik Revolution and the overthrow of the Weimar Republic can contaminate whole nations.

https://medium.com/@nntaleb/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15#.phlwh9hkj

It suffices for an intransigent minority –a certain type of intransigent minorities –to reach a minutely small level, say three or four percent of the total population, for the entire population to have to submit to their preferences. Further, an optical illusion comes with the dominance of the minority: a naive observer would be under the impression that the choices and preferences are those of the majority...
Imposing Virtue on Others
This idea of one-sidedness can help us debunk a few more misconceptions. How do books get banned? Certainly not because they offend the average person –most persons are passive and don't really care, or don't care enough to request the banning. It looks like, from past episodes, that all it takes is a few (motivated) activists for the banning of some books, or the black-listing of some people. The great philosopher and logician Bertrand Russell lost his job at the City University of New York owing to a letter by an angry –and stubborn –mother who did not wish to have her daughter in the same room as the fellow with dissolute lifestyle and unruly ideas.

[Madiel]

Sorry, playing the "minority" card doesn't mean a thing to me, neither the "racist", "misogynist" or "whatever-phobe" card.
Why, because "minority" is not a synonym for either oppressed or righteous.
Billionaires in the words happen to be a minority, does it make them victims we need to sympathize with?
In fact, vocal minorities as in the Bolshevik Revolution and the overthrow of the Weimar Republic can contaminate whole nations.

https://medium.com/@nntaleb/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15#.phlwh9hkj

It suffices for an intransigent minority –a certain type of intransigent minorities –to reach a minutely small level, say three or four percent of the total population, for the entire population to have to submit to their preferences. Further, an optical illusion comes with the dominance of the minority: a naive observer would be under the impression that the choices and preferences are those of the majority...
Imposing Virtue on Others
This idea of one-sidedness can help us debunk a few more misconceptions. How do books get banned? Certainly not because they offend the average person –most persons are passive and don't really care, or don't care enough to request the banning. It looks like, from past episodes, that all it takes is a few (motivated) activists for the banning of some books, or the black-listing of some people. The great philosopher and logician Bertrand Russell lost his job at the City University of New York owing to a letter by an angry –and stubborn –mother who did not wish to have her daughter in the same room as the fellow with dissolute lifestyle and unruly ideas.

You really are determined to miss the point, aren't you? Where the hell did I suggest that minority was a general synonym for oppressed? What it is is a shorthand for the people who have been attacked in Trump's name on the first day after his election.

As for "contamination"... words fail me. I know where I've heard that language before.

But then you only care about minorities when you claim that Planned Parenthood has been targeting them for a century.

[zamyrabyrd]

But then you only care about minorities when you claim that Planned Parenthood has been targeting them for a century.

I repeat, I do not "care about minorities". To deprive individuals of equal treatment is more to the point.
Liberals can shed crocodile tears over the poor and oppressed. That last thing they want to do is enfranchise them and recognize their inherent dignity.
What the Clinton Foundation did in Haiti was a case in point. Hopefully, all the rats will be coming out of the woodwork now.

[Madiel]

Hopefully, all the rats will be coming out of the woodwork now.

Oh, I think one of them already has.

[Wendell_E]

Not when their scriptures clearly say kill the unbeliever.

Thank goodness Jesus never said this:

"But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me." (Luke 19:27 KJV)

Oh.  Wait.

[zamyrabyrd]

Thank goodness Jesus never said this:
Oh.  Wait.

The quote was part of a parable.

22 He said to him, 'I will condemn you with your own words, you wicked servant! You knew that I was a severe man, taking what I did not deposit and reaping what I did not sow? 23 Why then did you not put my money in the bank, and at my coming I might have collected it with interest?' 24 And he said to those who stood by, 'Take the mina from him, and give it to the one who has the ten minas.' 25 And they said to him, 'Lord, he has ten minas!' 26 'I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. 27 But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaughter them before me.'" Luke 19:11-27 ESV

Thus, this verse has nothing to do with an individual turning the other cheek, nor does it speak to the idea of human governance at all. What it does teach is that all mankind will one day face the judgment of God. Those who have hated and rejected God will be punished.

http://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/23932/what-does-bring-them-here-and-kill-them-in-front-of-me-in-luke-1927-mean

[zamyrabyrd]

Meanwhile, I see that the joys of "overthrowing political correctness" by making blatant threats to blacks, Latinos, homosexuals and Muslims have already started. Well done, everyone.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/11/11/riot-declared-in-oregon-as-anti-trump-demonstrators-damage-cars-buildings.html

Police in Portland, Ore. declared that a once peaceful protest was a riot after demonstrators were seen attacking drivers and committing acts of vandalism during their march against Donald Trump's election Thursday night. Portland police said at least 29 people were arrested in the riot and that more information would be given on the charges Friday morning.

According to KPTV, one driver had her windshield smashed and someone painted "Capitalism kills" on a nearby convenience store. Police declared the protest a riot at around 8:30 pm. A riot is a Class C felony in Oregon.

Protesters in Portland's Pearl District were breaking windows of several businesses and some were arming themselves with rocks from a construction site, police said.

[Karl Henning]

Thank goodness Jesus never said this:

Oh.  Wait.

The quote was part of a parable.

22 He said to him, 'I will condemn you with your own words, you wicked servant! You knew that I was a severe man, taking what I did not deposit and reaping what I did not sow? 23 Why then did you not put my money in the bank, and at my coming I might have collected it with interest?' 24 And he said to those who stood by, 'Take the mina from him, and give it to the one who has the ten minas.' 25 And they said to him, 'Lord, he has ten minas!' 26 'I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. 27 But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaughter them before me.'" Luke 19:11-27 ESV

Thus, this verse has nothing to do with an individual turning the other cheek, nor does it speak to the idea of human governance at all. What it does teach is that all mankind will one day face the judgment of God. Those who have hated and rejected God will be punished.

http://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/23932/what-does-bring-them-here-and-kill-them-in-front-of-me-in-luke-1927-mean

Aye. As with Obama supposedly slavering after "ribs and pussy," the context neutralizes the tendentious misconstrual.

[zamyrabyrd]

Aye. As with Obama supposedly slavering after "ribs and pussy," the context neutralizes the tendentious misconstrual.

In plain language, the message and overall context of the Gospel is non-violence but there is also justice.

[(poco) Sforzando]

In plain language, the message and overall context of the Gospel is non-violence but there is also justice.

The Torah remains part of the Christian Bible. An eye for an eye.

[Karl Henning]

Those who are hostile to a religion do not have the privilege of characterizing it, I shouldn't think.

Else even Christianity . . . well, I have an old schoolmate whose preferred term for all people of faith is superstitionists.

[zamyrabyrd]

Those who are hostile to a religion do not have the privilege of characterizing it, I shouldn't think.
Else even Christianity . . . well, I have an old schoolmate whose preferred term for all people of faith is superstitionists.

Right, those who think religion is superstition, shouldn't bother to quote scripture.

[zamyrabyrd]

The Torah remains part of the Christian Bible. An eye for an eye.

I don't know how much history you know but plenty of the "Old Testament" does not apply in the New, for instance sacrificing animals and stoning criminals.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Those who are hostile to a religion do not have the privilege of characterizing it, I shouldn't think.

Else even Christianity . . . well, I have an old schoolmate whose preferred term for all people of faith is superstitionists.

That is like saying that those who are hostile to Wagner or Havergal Brian have no "privilege" of characterizing their music. But then again, you presume hostility where there is none. I am not religious myself, but one of my favorite people in this world is a young friend who is an orthodox Jew (Modern Orthodox, not Hasid), who is one of the most charming, charismatic, good-natured, and accomplished people I know.

[Karl Henning]

That is like saying that those who are hostile to Wagner or Havergal Brian have no "privilege" of characterizing their music. But then again, you presume hostility where there is none. I am not religious myself, but one of my favorite people in this world is a young friend who is an orthodox Jew (Modern Orthodox, not Hasid), who is one of the most charming, charismatic, good-natured, and accomplished people I know.

Well, I was actually presuming zb's hostility to Islam.  Still, I appreciate your post.

[(poco) Sforzando]

I don't know how much history you know but plenty of the "Old Testament" does not apply in the New, for instance sacrificing animals and stoning criminals.

Plenty of Old Testament does not apply in the Old either, depending on how Orthodox you are. (And Judaism has as many branches as candles in the menorah, if not more.) Not all Jews take all 613 commandments literally, and many are freely and cheerfully disregarded. Even my young Orthodox friend has a gay roommate. The good ones worth keeping for any and all of us include: to love all who of the convenant, not to harbor hate, not to bear a grudge, to honor your father and mother, and others similar. The idea that the "New" testament is a repudiation of the brutality and crudity of the "Old" is altogether false.

And what does this have to do with Donald Trump?