[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Bug Reports & Feature Requests - gtufano - Jun 19, 2019 - 11:38pm
 
volcano! - islander - Jun 19, 2019 - 9:39pm
 
Trump - kurtster - Jun 19, 2019 - 7:26pm
 
Immigration - R_P - Jun 19, 2019 - 7:02pm
 
Name My Band - Red_Dragon - Jun 19, 2019 - 6:56pm
 
Export rated songs playlist - ruby2zday - Jun 19, 2019 - 6:43pm
 
Strips, cartoons, illustrations - R_P - Jun 19, 2019 - 5:35pm
 
Radio Paradise Comments - JrzyTmata - Jun 19, 2019 - 5:12pm
 
Baseball, anyone? - zevon - Jun 19, 2019 - 4:45pm
 
Redundancy - oldviolin - Jun 19, 2019 - 3:15pm
 
Installing Dishwashers is NOT Easy - Or in Our Case, Even... - oldviolin - Jun 19, 2019 - 1:03pm
 
New Music - R_P - Jun 19, 2019 - 12:32pm
 
OUR CATS!! - Proclivities - Jun 19, 2019 - 10:40am
 
Graphs, Charts & Maps - sirdroseph - Jun 19, 2019 - 10:24am
 
Things You Thought Today - islander - Jun 19, 2019 - 7:52am
 
Anti-War - miamizsun - Jun 19, 2019 - 7:46am
 
Thorium Power - miamizsun - Jun 19, 2019 - 7:44am
 
Derplahoma Questions and Points of Interest - Red_Dragon - Jun 19, 2019 - 6:39am
 
Things I Saw Today... - - Jun 19, 2019 - 4:26am
 
Song Lyrics - sirdroseph - Jun 19, 2019 - 3:07am
 
Counting with Pictures - yuel - Jun 19, 2019 - 12:49am
 
Flower Pictures - yuel - Jun 19, 2019 - 12:29am
 
Way Cool Video - miamizsun - Jun 18, 2019 - 2:54pm
 
Banksy! - - Jun 18, 2019 - 2:37pm
 
Dangerous Bus Stop - - Jun 18, 2019 - 2:10pm
 
Tech & Science - R_P - Jun 18, 2019 - 10:44am
 
Iran - R_P - Jun 18, 2019 - 8:43am
 
Bob Dylan - sirdroseph - Jun 18, 2019 - 8:33am
 
Why Everything You Believe Is Immoral, Irresponsible, Irr... - Proclivities - Jun 18, 2019 - 6:41am
 
American Oil Strikes Again - westslope - Jun 18, 2019 - 2:20am
 
HomeKit HomePod AppleTV - gtufano - Jun 18, 2019 - 12:57am
 
Music News - R_P - Jun 17, 2019 - 3:07pm
 
Live Music - R_P - Jun 17, 2019 - 2:47pm
 
Tesla (motors, batteries, etc) - miamizsun - Jun 17, 2019 - 12:41pm
 
Getting RP in For iPad Mini 2 - Ian_and_Annie - Jun 17, 2019 - 10:12am
 
Recommended documentaries - sirdroseph - Jun 17, 2019 - 10:02am
 
Great guitar faces - Proclivities - Jun 17, 2019 - 7:02am
 
How's the weather? - miamizsun - Jun 17, 2019 - 4:43am
 
Other Medical Stuff - Antigone - Jun 17, 2019 - 2:56am
 
Mixtape Culture Club - rmgman - Jun 16, 2019 - 5:22pm
 
Climate Change - R_P - Jun 16, 2019 - 2:46pm
 
260,000 Posts in one thread? - oldviolin - Jun 16, 2019 - 2:12pm
 
Those Lovable Policemen - R_P - Jun 16, 2019 - 1:02pm
 
Trump Lies - westslope - Jun 16, 2019 - 11:59am
 
Race in America - kurtster - Jun 15, 2019 - 6:50pm
 
President Elizabeth Warren - hayduke2 - Jun 15, 2019 - 10:23am
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - kurtster - Jun 14, 2019 - 7:55pm
 
Poetry Forum - Antigone - Jun 14, 2019 - 6:51pm
 
Photoshop Help please - echols - Jun 14, 2019 - 5:06pm
 
Rock mix miss you - Arc_Light - Jun 14, 2019 - 4:31pm
 
Fake News*  ?  ! - miamizsun - Jun 14, 2019 - 3:52pm
 
First World Problems - miamizsun - Jun 14, 2019 - 2:59pm
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - R_P - Jun 14, 2019 - 2:47pm
 
Weird sounds - Red_Dragon - Jun 14, 2019 - 11:17am
 
Weight Loss Discussions - westslope - Jun 14, 2019 - 9:21am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Jun 14, 2019 - 8:08am
 
Basketball, anyone? Hello? Hello? - Proclivities - Jun 14, 2019 - 6:04am
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - sunybuny - Jun 14, 2019 - 5:38am
 
war is a racket - islander - Jun 13, 2019 - 9:43pm
 
Canada - westslope - Jun 13, 2019 - 3:55pm
 
Hockey + Fantasy Hockey - SeriousLee - Jun 13, 2019 - 3:17pm
 
Outstanding Covers - SeriousLee - Jun 13, 2019 - 3:15pm
 
• • • BRING OUT YOUR DEAD • • •  - oldviolin - Jun 13, 2019 - 2:52pm
 
Favorite Quotes - oldviolin - Jun 13, 2019 - 1:42pm
 
Thought For The Day - oldviolin - Jun 13, 2019 - 1:40pm
 
Brain-Boosting (memory enhancement) - Proclivities - Jun 13, 2019 - 1:34pm
 
Overheard - SeriousLee - Jun 13, 2019 - 1:23pm
 
Gotta Get Your Drink On - SeriousLee - Jun 13, 2019 - 1:17pm
 
Cryptic Posts - Leave Them Guessing - oldviolin - Jun 13, 2019 - 12:05pm
 
Regarding dogs - oldviolin - Jun 13, 2019 - 11:08am
 
Democratic Party - Red_Dragon - Jun 13, 2019 - 10:06am
 
Lyrics that strike a chord today... - black321 - Jun 13, 2019 - 7:19am
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Jun 12, 2019 - 2:29pm
 
Bit Rate Resolution in BlueSound? - black321 - Jun 12, 2019 - 2:08pm
 
The russian guy in "Thanks for listening" - BillG - Jun 12, 2019 - 1:52pm
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Trump Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 631, 632, 633  Next
Post to this Topic
ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 17, 2019 - 6:23am



 sirdroseph wrote:
  
Am I the only one whose first thought was the Mustache of Death put a special request into the CIA?
{#Ask}

 
No you are not. I mean, no one thinks this is anything but Bolton's plan. Did we put the mines out there? May as well have.

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/is-america-ready-for-john-boltons-war-with-iran/

sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Yes
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 17, 2019 - 6:05am

 kurtster wrote:
So we have two, not one, oil tankers on fire in the Strait of Hormuz after being hit with mines.  And the week before, two other tankers had holes blown in their hulls.  And oil prices are basically down, not up.  I got gas for $2.26 a couple of days ago and have seen it even lower since.  Normally prices would have skyrocketed and maybe some missiles or something would have gone off by now.

Nope. 

The world is definitely a different place now.

Thanks Donnie !!!

 
Am I the only one whose first thought was the Mustache of Death put a special request into the CIA?{#Ask}
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 17, 2019 - 4:30am

So we have two, not one, oil tankers on fire in the Strait of Hormuz after being hit with mines.  And the week before, two other tankers had holes blown in their hulls.  And oil prices are basically down, not up.  I got gas for $2.26 a couple of days ago and have seen it even lower since.  Normally prices would have skyrocketed and maybe some missiles or something would have gone off by now.

Nope. 

The world is definitely a different place now.

Thanks Donnie !!!
R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Jun 16, 2019 - 5:40pm

How To Please A Narcissist
“It’s absolutely beautiful,” said U.S. Ambassador David Friedman, who attended Sunday’s ceremony. Noting that Trump celebrated his birthday on Friday, he said: “I can’t think of a more appropriate and a more beautiful birthday present.”

Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 15, 2019 - 11:25am

NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
hmm,  couple of thoughts:

I think we can all agree that the ideal is to have a free flow and complete transparency of information. In this ideal situation, everyone can say what they want and everyone can refute what they want. In this case the actions of a foreign power pales into significance, relativized by all the other noise out there.

However, the situation changes when you don't have a free market of ideas, when various institutions have a monopoly on the tools used to disseminate and communicate information. Also if you do not have a population that has learned the basic tools of critical thinking, you also run the risk of undue influence being exerted by shady forces/government manipulation etc.
(this can also be on the part of the domestic government, not just foreign governments). Just look at the power/influence of various religious organizations throughout history. It deteriorates rapidly when the truth is hidden, when political agendas are not disclosed and people purport to be something they are not.

Of course the best defense against all of this is having a free population composed of individuals who have learnt the basics of critical thinking and who are heathy and wealthy enough not to have their votes bought. It also necessitates freedom of the press and security from being persecuted on grounds of faith or political alignment. Unfortunately, these are hardly given truths. We are lucky enough to live in countries we they seem natural. But they are anything but.

Indeed, the natural state of humans seems to be living under tyranny, and maintaining liberty requires constant effort. It takes determined opposition to those who would return us there.

Not least to those whose pretext is "I'm all in favor of free speech but..."
NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 15, 2019 - 8:59am

hmm,  couple of thoughts:

I think we can all agree that the ideal is to have a free flow and complete transparency of information. In this ideal situation, everyone can say what they want and everyone can refute what they want. In this case the actions of a foreign power pales into significance, relativized by all the other noise out there.

However, the situation changes when you don't have a free market of ideas, when various institutions have a monopoly on the tools used to disseminate and communicate information. Also if you do not have a population that has learned the basic tools of critical thinking, you also run the risk of undue influence being exerted by shady forces/government manipulation etc.
(this can also be on the part of the domestic government, not just foreign governments). Just look at the power/influence of various religious organizations throughout history. It deteriorates rapidly when the truth is hidden, when political agendas are not disclosed and people purport to be something they are not.

Of course the best defense against all of this is having a free population composed of individuals who have learnt the basics of critical thinking and who are heathy and wealthy enough not to have their votes bought. It also necessitates freedom of the press and security from being persecuted on grounds of faith or political alignment. Unfortunately, these are hardly given truths. We are lucky enough to live in countries we they seem natural. But they are anything but.


R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Jun 14, 2019 - 1:33pm

 Lazy8 wrote:
R_P wrote:
 The article doesn't talk about "the need to protect" or any similar straw recommendations that you're offering. It addresses your assertion that "we don't meddle." You do.

The article implicitly defines engaging in propaganda as "intervening" (it uses that term interchangeably with "meddling"). In fact, it conflates even stating an opinion on the desirability of an election outcome or withholding foreign aid as a consequence of an election as "intervening"—conflating these with funding a campaign or (in the case of the 2004 Ukraine election) poisoning a candidate.

The article doesn't explicitly pass judgement on this practice, but  does it have to? "Meddling" is a normative term with inherently negative implications. (...)
 
The word "meddle" is used exactly once in the article. As the title suggests, it prefers to talk about "electoral interventions" and the types of interventions that occur (incl. whether they are overt/covert). Indeed, some or most are at odds with your (self-interested) narrow definition, but that's hardly a surprise.

I could also hypothesize about your ideological motives, but it's really not all that relevant.
hayduke2

hayduke2 Avatar

Location: Southampton, NY
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 14, 2019 - 1:05pm

Bush Ethics Lawyer Says It's 'Cowardly' That House Won't Impeach Trump | HuffPost
Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 14, 2019 - 12:58pm

R_P wrote:
 The article doesn't talk about "the need to protect" or any similar straw recommendations that you're offering. It addresses your assertion that "we don't meddle." You do.

The article implicitly defines engaging in propaganda as "intervening" (it uses that term interchangeably with "meddling"). In fact, it conflates even stating an opinion on the desirability of an election outcome or withholding foreign aid as a consequence of an election with "intervening"—conflating these with funding a campaign or (in the case of the 2004 Ukraine election) poisoning a candidate.

The article doesn't explicitly pass judgement on this practice, but  does it have to? "Meddling" is a normative term with inherently negative implications.

We're also discussing this in a years-old context: if something is done by an entity that can be called (by any stretch of the definition) "America" we can expect you to disapprove of it.

And with that history as a guide I can also expect a response that is concise, pithy, snide...and content-free.
islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 14, 2019 - 11:32am



 Lazy8 wrote:
islander wrote:
My solution is to vote for better people. It's novel, but maybe it will catch on.

What does this solve, exactly?

Leaving the reins of power in place but commanded by someone who promises—cross his or her heart—not to misuse them just postpones the issue, either until the next administration or later in the term when the polls are down and scandals are brewing and we really need to rally the public around some Enemy.

I'm not really sure about your qualifiers here either. It's not that e-mails were hacked, or that bad things were said in them it's that a foreign power tried to meddle in our election (yes, I know we do it too - still wrong).   It does seem more problematic when we have an elected leader (the big one) who is saying "yeah sure, I'd do it", when it's pretty clearly not allowed. This isn't just digging dirt, this is soliciting help from someone who is likely an enemy.  If the shoe were on the other party, you can be sure there would be outrage a plenty.

This gets really tedious, but I'm not going to concede the vocabulary (and thus the argument) so easily.

We do not meddle in elections in other countries. We do not steal/stuff ballot boxes, do not change vote totals after their cast, do not prevent foreigners from voting in their own elections. Further, no foreign power has done this to us. That's what meddling in an election looks like.

Informing the electorate—propaganda, if you'd rather—is a normal, even essential part of a free and fair election. Restrictions on what anyone can say during or about an election are restrictions on what the electorate may hear. We are subjected to propaganda from all quarters. It's up to us as voters to assess it, weigh its credibility, and decide what to do about it. Proposing to protect us from that reveals a monstrous conceit: that you (or whoever you want to designate as the political speech censors) know how to do that for us better than we do ourselves.

From where will these enlightened beings come? The same population you don't trust with the information in the first place? How do you dare trust them to vote at all? And if indeed you don't why should they trust you to pick who gets to speak to them?

To the extent we have allowed this paradigm—that if we can just silence the right people our elections will bring forth enlightened statesmen who will lead us to the promised land—to take root in our own political system...shame on us. Its existence is not its own justification.

I know the bloviating and puffed-up outrage is mostly performative, sour grapes about a lost election. If a foreign power (or some hated minority in our own midst) wants to say something about an election there is no way to stop them short of some complete top-down control of all communication. North Korea, for instance, is completely free of foreign influence in its elections. They aren't any kind of model to emulate.

If you have something else in mind say so, but in the three years since the wrong power-mad oligarch won an election I have seen nothing proposed but ham-fisted attempts to censor (sorry—regulate) online speech.


meddling/ˈmed(ə)liNG/
Noun
  1. intrusive or unwarranted interference.
 

I'm pretty comfortable saying that we do meddle in others elections.  

I'm also pretty comfortable saying that it's not just 'providing transparency', especially when only dirt on one side gets revealed, and when the source material is the product of a crime.  Also I'm pretty comfortable with the idea that actively soliciting the assistance of a foreign nation state is a crime here (not sure about other countries, and I'd love to see who is on Juan Guaidós speed dial... Yes, still wrong). 



Sure, my method isn't particularly effective, but I'd argue that given our current results neither is the ever popular "less evil choice".  I've always been a fan of ballots over bullets, but on our current trajectory I wonder how long that idea will hold popularity. I see several near term scenarios where it really breaks down.  Maybe some real death and destruction is what it will take to get people to enlightenment. 

R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Jun 14, 2019 - 10:41am

 Lazy8 wrote:
R_P wrote:
Where did I make this argument?

...you did read the article you posted as a response, right?
 
The article doesn't talk about "the need to protect" or any similar straw recommendations that you're offering. It addresses your assertion that "we don't meddle." You do.
Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 14, 2019 - 10:28am

R_P wrote:
Where did I make this argument?

...you did read the article you posted as a response, right?
R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Jun 14, 2019 - 9:53am

 Lazy8 wrote:
R_P wrote:

(...) Your argument is fashionable—that people need to be protected from speech by the wrong people, in this case foreigners.  (...)
 
Where did I make this argument?
Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 14, 2019 - 9:50am

R_P wrote:

We're not just arguing semantics. I made my case, and you aren't addressing it.

Your argument is fashionable—that people need to be protected from speech by the wrong people, in this case foreigners.

I could point out the irony of a Dutch/Canadian holding forth on this, but really you're making my point: You're wrong. You're a foreigner, trying to influence our elections. You frequently supply misleading or false information about our country and our politics.

And I welcome your contribution.
R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Jun 14, 2019 - 9:33am

 Lazy8 wrote:
We do not meddle in elections in other countries. We do not steal/stuff ballot boxes, do not change vote totals after their cast, do not prevent foreigners from voting in their own elections. Further, no foreign power has done this to us. That's what meddling in an election looks like.
 
Only according to your definition.

When the Great Power Gets a Vote: The Effects of Great Power Electoral Interventions on Election Results
westslope

westslope Avatar

Location: BC sage brush steppe


Posted: Jun 14, 2019 - 9:20am

Had me thinking again.  That is a crucial distinction on what constitutes meddling in a general election.

Thanks Lazy8.  

Good luck with persuading your fellow Americans.  
Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 14, 2019 - 8:47am

islander wrote:
My solution is to vote for better people. It's novel, but maybe it will catch on.

What does this solve, exactly?

Leaving the reins of power in place but commanded by someone who promises—cross his or her heart—not to misuse them just postpones the issue, either until the next administration or later in the term when the polls are down and scandals are brewing and we really need to rally the public around some Enemy.

I'm not really sure about your qualifiers here either. It's not that e-mails were hacked, or that bad things were said in them it's that a foreign power tried to meddle in our election (yes, I know we do it too - still wrong).   It does seem more problematic when we have an elected leader (the big one) who is saying "yeah sure, I'd do it", when it's pretty clearly not allowed. This isn't just digging dirt, this is soliciting help from someone who is likely an enemy.  If the shoe were on the other party, you can be sure there would be outrage a plenty.

This gets really tedious, but I'm not going to concede the vocabulary (and thus the argument) so easily.

We do not meddle in elections in other countries. We do not steal/stuff ballot boxes, do not change vote totals after their cast, do not prevent foreigners from voting in their own elections. Further, no foreign power has done this to us. That's what meddling in an election looks like.

Informing the electorate—propaganda, if you'd rather—is a normal, even essential part of a free and fair election. Restrictions on what anyone can say during or about an election are restrictions on what the electorate may hear. We are subjected to propaganda from all quarters. It's up to us as voters to assess it, weigh its credibility, and decide what to do about it. Proposing to protect us from that reveals a monstrous conceit: that you (or whoever you want to designate as the political speech censors) know how to do that for us better than we do ourselves.

From where will these enlightened beings come? The same population you don't trust with the information in the first place? How do you dare trust them to vote at all? And if indeed you don't why should they trust you to pick who gets to speak to them?

To the extent we have allowed this paradigm—that if we can just silence the right people our elections will bring forth enlightened statesmen who will lead us to the promised land—to take root in our own political system...shame on us. Its existence is not its own justification.

I know the bloviating and puffed-up outrage is mostly performative, sour grapes about a lost election. If a foreign power (or some hated minority in our own midst) wants to say something about an election there is no way to stop them short of some complete top-down control of all communication. North Korea, for instance, is completely free of foreign influence in its elections. They aren't any kind of model to emulate.

If you have something else in mind say so, but in the three years since the wrong power-mad oligarch won an election I have seen nothing proposed but ham-fisted attempts to censor (sorry—regulate) online speech.
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Jun 14, 2019 - 6:05am

 islander wrote:


My solution is to vote for better people. It's novel, but maybe it will catch on.

I'm not really sure about your qualifiers here either. It's not that e-mails were hacked, or that bad things were said in them it's that a foreign power tried to meddle in our election (yes, I know we do it too - still wrong).   It does seem more problematic when we have an elected leader (the big one) who is saying "yeah sure, I'd do it", when it's pretty clearly not allowed. This isn't just digging dirt, this is soliciting help from someone who is likely an enemy.  If the shoe were on the other party, you can be sure there would be outrage a plenty.
 
I like your idea, but the goddam parties have a monopoly on who we get to choose. I'd love to see a system wherein parties don't exist and all elections are publicly funded, but... hahahaha
hayduke2

hayduke2 Avatar

Location: Southampton, NY
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 14, 2019 - 5:25am

{#Drool}Rainbow vomit splootch for tRump on his birthday, Happy bone-spurs to the fat crook


sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Yes
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 14, 2019 - 4:17am

 islander wrote:


 Lazy8 wrote:


If all this bothers you feel free to propose a solution. I haven't heard one yet, not in the 3 years since y'all lost an election, but knock yourselves out.

*While there was much outrage over the leaks no one ever denied the veracity of what was leaked.
**Yeah, sure, be outraged about having email hacked. I'm outraged about it too, it's just that my outrage isn't selective as to who's doing it or to which political party. The NSA reading my email bothers me just as much as the Russians. I channel my outrage into secure passwords and effective countermeasures.
 
My solution is to vote for better people. It's novel, but maybe it will catch on.

I'm not really sure about your qualifiers here either. It's not that e-mails were hacked, or that bad things were said in them it's that a foreign power tried to meddle in our election (yes, I know we do it too - still wrong).   It does seem more problematic when we have an elected leader (the big one) who is saying "yeah sure, I'd do it", when it's pretty clearly not allowed. This isn't just digging dirt, this is soliciting help from someone who is likely an enemy.  If the shoe were on the other party, you can be sure there would be outrage a plenty.
 
As long as there is a 2 party duopoly that solution is irrelevant and therein lies the rub.{#Frustrated}
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 631, 632, 633  Next