info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Trump Co-Defendant Suggests Georgia Prosecutors Lied About Relationship Timing
2 views
Skip to first unread message
Mark Weiner
Feb 10, 2024, 4:45:28 PMFeb 10
to
On 03 Jun 2023, Lou Bricano <l...@cap.con> posted some
news:lGVeM.859437$PXw7....@fx45.iad:
> Oozing scarlet red from my butthole. Need more lube!
A lawyer for the co-defendant said she had a witness who could testify
that the relationship began before Fani Willis, the Fulton County district
attorney, hired Nathan Wade.
A lawyer for one of former President Donald J. Trump’s co-defendants in
the Georgia election case suggested on Friday that the two prosecutors
leading the case had lied about when their romantic relationship started.
The defense lawyer, Ashleigh Merchant, said that a witness she hoped to
put on the stand could testify that the romantic relationship between Fani
T. Willis, the Fulton County district attorney, and the special prosecutor
managing the Trump case, Nathan J. Wade, had begun before Ms. Willis hired
Mr. Wade.
That would contradict Mr. Wade, who said in a recent affidavit that his
relationship with Ms. Willis had not begun until 2022, after his hiring.
The affidavit was attached to a court filing made by Ms. Willis.
Ms. Merchant identified the witness as Terrence Bradley, a lawyer who once
worked in Mr. Wade’s law firm and for a time served as Mr. Wade’s divorce
lawyer. “Bradley has non-privileged, personal knowledge that the romantic
relationship between Wade and Willis began prior to Willis being sworn as
the district attorney for Fulton County, Georgia in 2021,” Ms. Merchant’s
filing, which came late Friday afternoon, states.
Ms. Merchant, on behalf of her client Michael Roman, a former Trump
campaign official, is seeking to have Mr. Wade, Ms. Willis and Ms.
Willis’s entire office disqualified from the Trump case. Ms. Merchant
argues that the romantic relationship, as well as vacations the
prosecutors took together that were paid for at least in part by Mr. Wade,
amount to a conflict of interest.
“It is evident that the district attorney and her personally appointed
special prosecutor have enriched themselves off this case,” Ms. Merchant
wrote.
In court filings last week, Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade acknowledged a
romantic relationship after they had declined to address the matter for
almost a month. But Ms. Willis also dismissed the effort to have her taken
off the Trump case as a publicity stunt with little legal merit. Last
week, she asked the judge in the case to deny Ms. Merchant’s motion
without an evidentiary hearing, which she said would intrude into her
personal life and amount to “a ticket to the circus.”
That prompted Ms. Merchant’s latest filing on Friday, in which she argued
that such a hearing was necessary to sort out the facts of the
relationship.
Jeff DiSantis, a spokesman for Ms. Willis’s office, declined to comment on
the new filing on Friday evening. Mr. Bradley could not be reached for
comment.
Editors’ Picks
I’ve Never Bought Anything From QVC. I Can’t Stop Watching It.
Climate Change Is No Laughing Matter. Or Is It?
Get Ready to Dress Up Again
The judge, Scott McAfee of Fulton County Superior Court, has scheduled a
hearing on the allegations for Thursday. Ms. Merchant has subpoenaed at
least a dozen potential witnesses, including Mr. Bradley, Mr. Wade and Ms.
Willis, and a number of other people in the district attorney’s office.
Ms. Willis is seeking to quash those subpoenas, and the judge has set a
hearing for Monday on the matter.
A number of legal experts have argued that the details of the romantic
relationship do not amount to a conflict of interest under Georgia law. If
the judge agrees, he could ostensibly decide to bar any testimony about
the two prosecutors’ personal lives.
Ms. Willis has told the court that she “disputes” the idea that Mr.
Bradley has any information relevant to the case. She has also argued that
any information he might have would be protected by attorney-client
privilege — given that he once served as Mr. Wade’s divorce lawyer — and
thus inadmissible in court.
Ms. Merchant, on Friday, wrote that Mr. Bradley had “obtained information
about the relationship between Wade and Willis directly from Wade when
Wade was not seeking legal advice from Bradley.”
She added, “Bradley obtained this information in a personal capacity as
Wade’s friend prior to Wade’s decision to file for divorce.”
Ms. Merchant, in her filing, raised a number of other reasons that she
believes Ms. Willis should be taken off the case, including statements and
access that Ms. Willis gave to the authors of a recent book about the
Trump case. Ms. Merchant said those statements were part of an effort to
“prejudice Mr. Roman and poison the jury pool.”
A number of other defendants have also asked the judge to have the
prosecutors disqualified and the case dismissed. Among them is Mr. Trump,
whose lawyers have argued that Ms. Willis violated state bar rules when
she gave a speech last month suggesting that racism was a factor in the
scrutiny of her and Mr. Wade.
Mr. Trump has also joined Mr. Roman’s motion concerning the romantic
relationship.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/09/us/trump-co-defendant-willis-georgia-
relationship.html
news:lGVeM.859437$PXw7....@fx45.iad:
> Oozing scarlet red from my butthole. Need more lube!
A lawyer for the co-defendant said she had a witness who could testify
that the relationship began before Fani Willis, the Fulton County district
attorney, hired Nathan Wade.
A lawyer for one of former President Donald J. Trump’s co-defendants in
the Georgia election case suggested on Friday that the two prosecutors
leading the case had lied about when their romantic relationship started.
The defense lawyer, Ashleigh Merchant, said that a witness she hoped to
put on the stand could testify that the romantic relationship between Fani
T. Willis, the Fulton County district attorney, and the special prosecutor
managing the Trump case, Nathan J. Wade, had begun before Ms. Willis hired
Mr. Wade.
That would contradict Mr. Wade, who said in a recent affidavit that his
relationship with Ms. Willis had not begun until 2022, after his hiring.
The affidavit was attached to a court filing made by Ms. Willis.
Ms. Merchant identified the witness as Terrence Bradley, a lawyer who once
worked in Mr. Wade’s law firm and for a time served as Mr. Wade’s divorce
lawyer. “Bradley has non-privileged, personal knowledge that the romantic
relationship between Wade and Willis began prior to Willis being sworn as
the district attorney for Fulton County, Georgia in 2021,” Ms. Merchant’s
filing, which came late Friday afternoon, states.
Ms. Merchant, on behalf of her client Michael Roman, a former Trump
campaign official, is seeking to have Mr. Wade, Ms. Willis and Ms.
Willis’s entire office disqualified from the Trump case. Ms. Merchant
argues that the romantic relationship, as well as vacations the
prosecutors took together that were paid for at least in part by Mr. Wade,
amount to a conflict of interest.
“It is evident that the district attorney and her personally appointed
special prosecutor have enriched themselves off this case,” Ms. Merchant
wrote.
In court filings last week, Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade acknowledged a
romantic relationship after they had declined to address the matter for
almost a month. But Ms. Willis also dismissed the effort to have her taken
off the Trump case as a publicity stunt with little legal merit. Last
week, she asked the judge in the case to deny Ms. Merchant’s motion
without an evidentiary hearing, which she said would intrude into her
personal life and amount to “a ticket to the circus.”
That prompted Ms. Merchant’s latest filing on Friday, in which she argued
that such a hearing was necessary to sort out the facts of the
relationship.
Jeff DiSantis, a spokesman for Ms. Willis’s office, declined to comment on
the new filing on Friday evening. Mr. Bradley could not be reached for
comment.
Editors’ Picks
I’ve Never Bought Anything From QVC. I Can’t Stop Watching It.
Climate Change Is No Laughing Matter. Or Is It?
Get Ready to Dress Up Again
The judge, Scott McAfee of Fulton County Superior Court, has scheduled a
hearing on the allegations for Thursday. Ms. Merchant has subpoenaed at
least a dozen potential witnesses, including Mr. Bradley, Mr. Wade and Ms.
Willis, and a number of other people in the district attorney’s office.
Ms. Willis is seeking to quash those subpoenas, and the judge has set a
hearing for Monday on the matter.
A number of legal experts have argued that the details of the romantic
relationship do not amount to a conflict of interest under Georgia law. If
the judge agrees, he could ostensibly decide to bar any testimony about
the two prosecutors’ personal lives.
Ms. Willis has told the court that she “disputes” the idea that Mr.
Bradley has any information relevant to the case. She has also argued that
any information he might have would be protected by attorney-client
privilege — given that he once served as Mr. Wade’s divorce lawyer — and
thus inadmissible in court.
Ms. Merchant, on Friday, wrote that Mr. Bradley had “obtained information
about the relationship between Wade and Willis directly from Wade when
Wade was not seeking legal advice from Bradley.”
She added, “Bradley obtained this information in a personal capacity as
Wade’s friend prior to Wade’s decision to file for divorce.”
Ms. Merchant, in her filing, raised a number of other reasons that she
believes Ms. Willis should be taken off the case, including statements and
access that Ms. Willis gave to the authors of a recent book about the
Trump case. Ms. Merchant said those statements were part of an effort to
“prejudice Mr. Roman and poison the jury pool.”
A number of other defendants have also asked the judge to have the
prosecutors disqualified and the case dismissed. Among them is Mr. Trump,
whose lawyers have argued that Ms. Willis violated state bar rules when
she gave a speech last month suggesting that racism was a factor in the
scrutiny of her and Mr. Wade.
Mr. Trump has also joined Mr. Roman’s motion concerning the romantic
relationship.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/09/us/trump-co-defendant-willis-georgia-
relationship.html
pothead
Feb 10, 2024, 4:48:13 PMFeb 10
to
You usually end up with incompetent losers.
And these two are real doozys.
--
pothead
Tommy Chong For President 2024.
Crazy Joe Biden Is A Demented Imbecile.
Impeach Joe Biden 2022.
Governor Swill
Feb 10, 2024, 11:02:16 PMFeb 10
to
On Sat, 10 Feb 2024 21:48:11 -0000 (UTC), pothead <pot...@snakebite.com> wrote:
>This is what happens when hiring / appointing people based upon DEI.
>You usually end up with incompetent losers.
>And these two are real doozys.
Is that why Trump has so many incompetent lawyers?
>This is what happens when hiring / appointing people based upon DEI.
>You usually end up with incompetent losers.
>And these two are real doozys.
Swill
--
"Trump has erased the assumption that credibility is a nice thing to have."
- David Brooks
Not left, not right, https://www.forwardparty.com/
Heroyam slava! Glory to the Heroes!
Sláva Ukrajíni! Glory to Ukraine!
Putin tse prezervatyv! Putin is a condom!
Go here to donate to Ukrainian relief.
<https://www2.deloitte.com/ua/uk/pages/registration-forms/help-cities.html>
D
Feb 11, 2024, 5:48:19 AMFeb 11
to
On Sat, 10 Feb 2024, pothead wrote:
> This is what happens when hiring / appointing people based upon DEI.
> You usually end up with incompetent losers.
> And these two are real doozys.
president Trump will win the election 100%.
The only thing that scares me is that the democrats will push some
emergency eject button and replace him with a charismatic, 45-year old,
center/right democrat. Then Trump has no chance.
pothead
Feb 11, 2024, 11:26:16 AMFeb 11
to
They are hell bent on the green new deal, open borders, spending, wars, welfare states etc
destroying the country.
The DNC is shrewd though so nothing would surprse me.
Governor Swill
Feb 11, 2024, 11:44:20 AMFeb 11
to
D
Feb 11, 2024, 12:37:55 PMFeb 11
to
On Sun, 11 Feb 2024, pothead wrote:
> On 2024-02-11, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 10 Feb 2024, pothead wrote:
>>
>>> This is what happens when hiring / appointing people based upon DEI.
>>> You usually end up with incompetent losers.
>>> And these two are real doozys.
>>
>> Don't worry, if the democrats insist on continuing to front Biden for
>> president Trump will win the election 100%.
>>
>> The only thing that scares me is that the democrats will push some
>> emergency eject button and replace him with a charismatic, 45-year old,
>> center/right democrat. Then Trump has no chance.
>
> That is true however the far left contingent of the DNC, ie:AOC and so forth wouldn't allow it.
> They are hell bent on the green new deal, open borders, spending, wars, welfare states etc
> destroying the country.
> The DNC is shrewd though so nothing would surprse me.
oldernow
Feb 12, 2024, 5:30:11 PMFeb 12
to
On 2024-02-11, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>> The DNC is shrewd though so nothing would surprse me.
>
> Let's hope they are intent on sabotaging themselves! =)
To me it has less to do with intent than with too few braincells
>> The DNC is shrewd though so nothing would surprse me.
>
> Let's hope they are intent on sabotaging themselves! =)
attempting to keep too many inconsistent world/people view claims
simultaneously coexistent.
--
oldernow
xyz001 at nym.hush.com
D
Feb 13, 2024, 3:53:21 AMFeb 13
to
On Mon, 12 Feb 2024, oldernow wrote:
> On 2024-02-11, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>
>>> The DNC is shrewd though so nothing would surprse me.
>>
>> Let's hope they are intent on sabotaging themselves! =)
>
> To me it has less to do with intent than with too few braincells
> attempting to keep too many inconsistent world/people view claims
> simultaneously coexistent.
Training yourself to be _able_ to have those inconsistent views? That
shows top achievement within the realm of politics! ;)
oldernow
Feb 13, 2024, 7:05:15 AMFeb 13
to
On 2024-02-13, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
> > To me it has less to do with intent than with too few
> > braincells attempting to keep too many inconsistent
> > world/people view claims simultaneously coexistent.
>
> That reminds me of 1984. Isn't that just a mind control
> technique? Training yourself to be _able_ to have those
> inconsistent views? That shows top achievement within the
> realm of politics! ;)
The better the politician, the more better the ability to quickly
> > To me it has less to do with intent than with too few
> > braincells attempting to keep too many inconsistent
> > world/people view claims simultaneously coexistent.
>
> That reminds me of 1984. Isn't that just a mind control
> technique? Training yourself to be _able_ to have those
> inconsistent views? That shows top achievement within the
> realm of politics! ;)
and deeply context switch between related *and* disparate topics,
convincingly becoming a subject matter expert you and everyone
else - BUT ESPECIALLY *YOU* - can trust.
I don't think Biden had the gift, incapable of hiding his inner
Snidely Whiplash. If anything, that fake smile and hyper-groomed
hair made his lack of integrity "pop" all the more.
He doesn't look too different to me these days, but now we're
talking about people so self-centric-ally moronic that they'll
do whatever they're by their scripture, i.e. any of their sacred
"news" sources. If/when scripture reports the sighting of a Big
Bad Insurrectionist Hitler scheming a world dictatorship with a
collusion buddy named Putin, then, by golly, do fear and murmur
perpetually about the clear and present danger monster!!!
BTW, what's this libertarian stuff we're allegedly gathered here
to discuss?
Governor Swill
Feb 13, 2024, 7:57:14 AMFeb 13
to
On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 09:53:14 +0100, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>On Mon, 12 Feb 2024, oldernow wrote:
>> On 2024-02-11, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>>>> The DNC is shrewd though so nothing would surprse me.
>>> Let's hope they are intent on sabotaging themselves! =)
>> To me it has less to do with intent than with too few braincells
>> attempting to keep too many inconsistent world/people view claims
>> simultaneously coexistent.
The DNC is not one brain but it makes sense that a conservative would think of it that
>On Mon, 12 Feb 2024, oldernow wrote:
>> On 2024-02-11, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>>>> The DNC is shrewd though so nothing would surprse me.
>>> Let's hope they are intent on sabotaging themselves! =)
>> To me it has less to do with intent than with too few braincells
>> attempting to keep too many inconsistent world/people view claims
>> simultaneously coexistent.
way.
The DNC is a group of many brains, each allowed independent thought.
The RNC is a group of many brains, all required to think the same thoughts.
The GOP is fragmented because the very *nature* of conservatism is conformity,
homogeneity, obedience to authority and unchanging sameness. But the Party is finding
that not all its members are in agreement and some of them want change so it shows cracks
and weak spots.
By nature, the DNC can function when its members are not all in agreement but the RNC, by
*its* nature, cannot.
>That reminds me of 1984. Isn't that just a mind control technique?
>Training yourself to be _able_ to have those inconsistent views? That
>shows top achievement within the realm of politics! ;)
Governor Swill
Feb 13, 2024, 8:04:08 AMFeb 13
to
On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 09:53:14 +0100, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
"1984" was about enforcing conformity and obedience, not diversity.
You can't have conformity and obedience if you allow people to have their own thoughts.
D
Feb 13, 2024, 11:04:48 AMFeb 13
to
On Tue, 13 Feb 2024, Governor Swill wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 09:53:14 +0100, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 12 Feb 2024, oldernow wrote:
>>
>>> On 2024-02-11, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> The DNC is shrewd though so nothing would surprse me.
>>>>
>>>> Let's hope they are intent on sabotaging themselves! =)
>>>
>>> To me it has less to do with intent than with too few braincells
>>> attempting to keep too many inconsistent world/people view claims
>>> simultaneously coexistent.
>>
>> That reminds me of 1984. Isn't that just a mind control technique?
>> Training yourself to be _able_ to have those inconsistent views? That
>> shows top achievement within the realm of politics! ;)
>
> Yet another right wing bigot proves he doesn't know what he's talking about.
>
> "1984" was about enforcing conformity and obedience, not diversity.
>
> You can't have conformity and obedience if you allow people to have their own thoughts.
>
> Swill
D
Feb 13, 2024, 11:05:18 AMFeb 13
to
On Tue, 13 Feb 2024, Governor Swill wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 09:53:14 +0100, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 12 Feb 2024, oldernow wrote:
>>
>>> On 2024-02-11, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> The DNC is shrewd though so nothing would surprse me.
>>>>
>>>> Let's hope they are intent on sabotaging themselves! =)
>>>
>>> To me it has less to do with intent than with too few braincells
>>> attempting to keep too many inconsistent world/people view claims
>>> simultaneously coexistent.
>>
>> That reminds me of 1984. Isn't that just a mind control technique?
>> Training yourself to be _able_ to have those inconsistent views? That
>> shows top achievement within the realm of politics! ;)
>
> Yet another right wing bigot proves he doesn't know what he's talking about.
>
> "1984" was about enforcing conformity and obedience, not diversity.
>
> You can't have conformity and obedience if you allow people to have their own thoughts.
>
> Swill
Racist Swill, racist.
>> On Mon, 12 Feb 2024, oldernow wrote:
>>
>>> On 2024-02-11, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> The DNC is shrewd though so nothing would surprse me.
>>>>
>>>> Let's hope they are intent on sabotaging themselves! =)
>>>
>>> To me it has less to do with intent than with too few braincells
>>> attempting to keep too many inconsistent world/people view claims
>>> simultaneously coexistent.
>>
>> That reminds me of 1984. Isn't that just a mind control technique?
>> Training yourself to be _able_ to have those inconsistent views? That
>> shows top achievement within the realm of politics! ;)
>
> Yet another right wing bigot proves he doesn't know what he's talking about.
>
> "1984" was about enforcing conformity and obedience, not diversity.
>
> You can't have conformity and obedience if you allow people to have their own thoughts.
>
> Swill
D
Feb 13, 2024, 11:08:46 AMFeb 13
to
On Tue, 13 Feb 2024, oldernow wrote:
> On 2024-02-13, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>
>>> To me it has less to do with intent than with too few
>>> braincells attempting to keep too many inconsistent
>>> world/people view claims simultaneously coexistent.
>>
>> That reminds me of 1984. Isn't that just a mind control
>> technique? Training yourself to be _able_ to have those
>> inconsistent views? That shows top achievement within the
>> realm of politics! ;)
>
> The better the politician, the more better the ability to quickly
> and deeply context switch between related *and* disparate topics,
> convincingly becoming a subject matter expert you and everyone
> else - BUT ESPECIALLY *YOU* - can trust.
weekend. The funniest one said on friday "I promise, sweden will never
join", and I think next week said "we're joining".
There is another socialist politician who never had anything to do with
Hamas, and quickly the media dug out that he'd been attending Hamas
events.
Classic politician! =)
> BTW, what's this libertarian stuff we're allegedly gathered here
> to discuss?
deep and meaningful thoughts about libertariaism!
But sadly it's mostly democrats, so what can one do beside trolling and
enjoying their emotional outburst from time to time. ;)
Governor Swill
Feb 13, 2024, 2:05:37 PMFeb 13
to
On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 17:04:42 +0100, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>> "1984" was about enforcing conformity and obedience, not diversity.
>>
>> You can't have conformity and obedience if you allow people to have their own thoughts.
>Racist Swill, racist.
>> "1984" was about enforcing conformity and obedience, not diversity.
>>
>> You can't have conformity and obedience if you allow people to have their own thoughts.
What's racist about that?
Swill
--
Jon Stewart is back on The Daily Show! First episode is on Youtube.
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpBPm0b9de
The Daily Show streams on the Paramount network (includes Showtime, CBS
and your local CBS station). https://help.paramountplus.com/
Governor Swill
Feb 13, 2024, 2:06:38 PMFeb 13
to
On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 17:05:08 +0100, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>
>
>On Tue, 13 Feb 2024, Governor Swill wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 09:53:14 +0100, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 12 Feb 2024, oldernow wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2024-02-11, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> The DNC is shrewd though so nothing would surprse me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's hope they are intent on sabotaging themselves! =)
>>>>
>>>> To me it has less to do with intent than with too few braincells
>>>> attempting to keep too many inconsistent world/people view claims
>>>> simultaneously coexistent.
>>>
>>> That reminds me of 1984. Isn't that just a mind control technique?
>>> Training yourself to be _able_ to have those inconsistent views? That
>>> shows top achievement within the realm of politics! ;)
>>
>> Yet another right wing bigot proves he doesn't know what he's talking about.
>>
>> "1984" was about enforcing conformity and obedience, not diversity.
>>
>> You can't have conformity and obedience if you allow people to have their own thoughts.
>>
>> Swill
>
>Racist Swill, racist.
Ah, I get it now. You're just saying that as a swear word because you can't think of a
>
>
>On Tue, 13 Feb 2024, Governor Swill wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 09:53:14 +0100, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 12 Feb 2024, oldernow wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2024-02-11, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> The DNC is shrewd though so nothing would surprse me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's hope they are intent on sabotaging themselves! =)
>>>>
>>>> To me it has less to do with intent than with too few braincells
>>>> attempting to keep too many inconsistent world/people view claims
>>>> simultaneously coexistent.
>>>
>>> That reminds me of 1984. Isn't that just a mind control technique?
>>> Training yourself to be _able_ to have those inconsistent views? That
>>> shows top achievement within the realm of politics! ;)
>>
>> Yet another right wing bigot proves he doesn't know what he's talking about.
>>
>> "1984" was about enforcing conformity and obedience, not diversity.
>>
>> You can't have conformity and obedience if you allow people to have their own thoughts.
>>
>> Swill
>
>Racist Swill, racist.
logical refutation.
Carry on, Nazi.
Swill
--
Jon Stewart is back on The Daily Show! First episode is on Youtube.
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpBPm0b9de
The Daily Show streams on the Paramount network (includes Showtime, CBS
and your local CBS station). https://help.paramountplus.com/
D
Feb 13, 2024, 4:37:17 PMFeb 13
to
On Tue, 13 Feb 2024, Governor Swill wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 17:04:42 +0100, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>
>>> "1984" was about enforcing conformity and obedience, not diversity.
>>>
>>> You can't have conformity and obedience if you allow people to have their own thoughts.
>
>> Racist Swill, racist.
>
> What's racist about that?
>
Sorry, can't tell you. That would spoil your self-development!
>
>>> "1984" was about enforcing conformity and obedience, not diversity.
>>>
>>> You can't have conformity and obedience if you allow people to have their own thoughts.
>
>> Racist Swill, racist.
>
> What's racist about that?
>
oldernow
Feb 13, 2024, 5:52:33 PMFeb 13
to
On 2024-02-13, Governor Swill <governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The DNC is not one brain but it makes sense that a
> conservative would think of it that way.
>
> The DNC is a group of many brains, each allowed independent
> thought.
>
> The RNC is a group of many brains, all required to think
> the same thoughts.
>
> The GOP is fragmented because the very *nature* of
> conservatism is conformity, homogeneity, obedience to
> authority and unchanging sameness. But the Party is
> finding that not all its members are in agreement and some
> of them want change so it shows cracks and weak spots.
>
> By nature, the DNC can function when its members are not
> all in agreement but the RNC, by *its* nature, cannot.
Okay... so you're a halfway decent writer, and politically biased.
> The DNC is not one brain but it makes sense that a
> conservative would think of it that way.
>
> The DNC is a group of many brains, each allowed independent
> thought.
>
> The RNC is a group of many brains, all required to think
> the same thoughts.
>
> The GOP is fragmented because the very *nature* of
> conservatism is conformity, homogeneity, obedience to
> authority and unchanging sameness. But the Party is
> finding that not all its members are in agreement and some
> of them want change so it shows cracks and weak spots.
>
> By nature, the DNC can function when its members are not
> all in agreement but the RNC, by *its* nature, cannot.
Unfortunately, the only thing that degree of bias ever convinces me
of is that the author is more capable of dipping-bird-like biased
statement repetition than critical thinking, and thus probably not
worth reading. I just plain don't find another's fundamentalism
being perpetually rammed down my cognitive throat either appetizing
or conceptually nutritious.
> Are you guys discussing freedom of thought and diversity of opinion?
reading. I enjoy occasionally chancing upon others similarly playful.
My condolences if you're convinced getting words to appear on others'
screens constitutes accomplishing anything important. If you're
trying to do that, I'd recommend finding and helping others in
need....
oldernow
Feb 13, 2024, 6:12:49 PMFeb 13
to
On 2024-02-13, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
> > The better the politician, the more better the ability to
> > quickly and deeply context switch between related *and*
> > disparate topics, convincingly becoming a subject matter
> > expert you and everyone else - BUT ESPECIALLY *YOU* -
> > can trust.
>
> Agreed. The swedish socialists reverse their stance on
> Nato in about a weekend. The funniest one said on friday
> "I promise, sweden will never join", and I think next week
> said "we're joining".
>
> There is another socialist politician who never had
> anything to do with Hamas, and quickly the media dug out
> that he'd been attending Hamas events.
>
> Classic politician! =)
Journalists are of similar integrity ilk. As with politicians and
> > The better the politician, the more better the ability to
> > quickly and deeply context switch between related *and*
> > disparate topics, convincingly becoming a subject matter
> > expert you and everyone else - BUT ESPECIALLY *YOU* -
> > can trust.
>
> Agreed. The swedish socialists reverse their stance on
> Nato in about a weekend. The funniest one said on friday
> "I promise, sweden will never join", and I think next week
> said "we're joining".
>
> There is another socialist politician who never had
> anything to do with Hamas, and quickly the media dug out
> that he'd been attending Hamas events.
>
> Classic politician! =)
votes, journalists do/say anything - aka "The News" - to get more
attention on the advertising that is their proprietors' *actual*
product.
> > BTW, what's this libertarian stuff we're allegedly gathered
> > here to discuss?
>
> Good question! My hope is that this group will slowly
> become an outlet for deep and meaningful thoughts about
> libertariaism!
something derogatory about Joe Biden, and then sneak breaths while
those who have to keep publicly doubling down on supporting someone
*obviously* not fit for the job lose their shit in the vicinity of
your post.
> But sadly it's mostly democrats, so what can one do beside
> trolling and enjoying their emotional outburst from time
> to time. ;)
their vacuously headed/conscience-d idol, and thus do I tend to
refrain from imagining I could have interesting conversations with
them. Their responses will likely be mostly ridiculously biased
prattle, because that's apparently the upper limit of their word
prowess - not to mention what their idol models for them on a
regular basis.
Scout
Feb 14, 2024, 10:06:22 AMFeb 14
to
"oldernow" <olde...@dev.null> wrote in message
news:slrnusnsld....@oldernow.jethrick.com...
> On 2024-02-13, Governor Swill <governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The DNC is not one brain but it makes sense that a
>> conservative would think of it that way.
>>
>> The DNC is a group of many brains, each allowed independent
>> thought.
And yet you complain how there are disagreements among Republicans.. which
>
>> The DNC is not one brain but it makes sense that a
>> conservative would think of it that way.
>>
>> The DNC is a group of many brains, each allowed independent
>> thought.
is the result of independent thought.. and how Democrats don't have that
issues.. which is the result of a lack of independent thought.
>>
>> The RNC is a group of many brains, all required to think
>> the same thoughts.
>>
>> The GOP is fragmented because the very *nature* of
>> conservatism is conformity, homogeneity, obedience to
>> authority and unchanging sameness.
uniformity of thought.
Takes a special kind of stupid to make a claim and then immediately admit
you lied.
>> But the Party is
>> finding that not all its members are in agreement and some
>> of them want change so it shows cracks and weak spots.
oldernow
Feb 14, 2024, 10:53:19 AMFeb 14
to
On 2024-02-14, Scout <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
> "oldernow" <olde...@dev.null> wrote in message
> news:slrnusnsld....@oldernow.jethrick.com...
>> On 2024-02-13, Governor Swill <governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The DNC is not one brain but it makes sense that a
>> conservative would think of it that way.
>>
>> The DNC is a group of many brains, each allowed independent
>> thought.
> And yet you complain how there are disagreements among Republicans..
I do? Where? I'm pretty sure someone else wrote what you're quoting
> "oldernow" <olde...@dev.null> wrote in message
> news:slrnusnsld....@oldernow.jethrick.com...
>> On 2024-02-13, Governor Swill <governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The DNC is not one brain but it makes sense that a
>> conservative would think of it that way.
>>
>> The DNC is a group of many brains, each allowed independent
>> thought.
> And yet you complain how there are disagreements among Republicans..
back to me as though I wrote it.
FWIW, I think it's important to effective USENET communication to
pair quoting attributions to the correct quoted text.
> which is the result of independent thought.. and how
> Democrats don't have that issues.. which is the result of
> a lack of independent thought.
>> The RNC is a group of many brains, all required to think
>> the same thoughts.
>>
>> The GOP is fragmented because the very *nature* of
>> conservatism is conformity, homogeneity, obedience to
>> authority and unchanging sameness.
> First you claim uniformity of thought.. then admit there
> is no such uniformity of thought.
>
> Takes a special kind of stupid to make a claim and then
> immediately admit you lied.
they were.
How am I supposed to consider anything you write intelligent if
you can't even get the simplest part of doing this correct?
>> But the Party is
>> finding that not all its members are in agreement and some
>> of them want change so it shows cracks and weak spots.
> Further confirming there isn't the uniformity of thought
> you asserted.
In fact, I couldn't be *less* about believing in uniformity of
thought across individuals. Heck, I don't even believe people
understand that they individually bring individual nuances of
meaning to the same words used by others, hence the Tower of Babel
also known as "this world" - especially since internet inception.
Further more, I consider individuality a mental illness, a pox
upon the species, and far more worthy of our attention/fixing
than the two-party turd-flinging that I imagine constitutes 99.99%
of political "discussion".
Fix the root, and the tree likely turns out just fine for being a
collection of emergent properties of the root(s).
D
Feb 14, 2024, 12:59:12 PMFeb 14
to
Good evening older,
On Tue, 13 Feb 2024, oldernow wrote:
star reviews to the vendors that give him the most expensive whiskey
during their demonstrations. ;)
Other journalists have their agenda, and completely disregard the facts
if those facts contradicts their agenda. Very frustrating!
>> Good question! My hope is that this group will slowly
>> become an outlet for deep and meaningful thoughts about
>> libertariaism!
>
> If you're holding your breath, you have my permission to yell
> something derogatory about Joe Biden, and then sneak breaths while
> those who have to keep publicly doubling down on supporting someone
> *obviously* not fit for the job lose their shit in the vicinity of
> your post.
Haha, yes why not?
Biden... is not so good. ;)
>> But sadly it's mostly democrats, so what can one do beside
>> trolling and enjoying their emotional outburst from time
>> to time. ;)
>
> I just figure they're *necessarily* as cognitively astute as
> their vacuously headed/conscience-d idol, and thus do I tend to
> refrain from imagining I could have interesting conversations with
> them. Their responses will likely be mostly ridiculously biased
> prattle, because that's apparently the upper limit of their word
> prowess - not to mention what their idol models for them on a
> regular basis.
True. I find that the trick is to have fun with them. If they think you
are serious, then the real fun begins, but I suspect that the most jaded
and experienced ones have massive killfiles where my name is located. ;)
Best regards,
Daniel
On Tue, 13 Feb 2024, oldernow wrote:
>> There is another socialist politician who never had
>> anything to do with Hamas, and quickly the media dug out
>> that he'd been attending Hamas events.
>>
>> Classic politician! =)
>
> Journalists are of similar integrity ilk. As with politicians and
> votes, journalists do/say anything - aka "The News" - to get more
> attention on the advertising that is their proprietors' *actual*
> product.
Oh tell me about it! A "journalist" within IT I've heard about gives his 5
>> anything to do with Hamas, and quickly the media dug out
>> that he'd been attending Hamas events.
>>
>> Classic politician! =)
>
> Journalists are of similar integrity ilk. As with politicians and
> votes, journalists do/say anything - aka "The News" - to get more
> attention on the advertising that is their proprietors' *actual*
> product.
star reviews to the vendors that give him the most expensive whiskey
during their demonstrations. ;)
Other journalists have their agenda, and completely disregard the facts
if those facts contradicts their agenda. Very frustrating!
>> Good question! My hope is that this group will slowly
>> become an outlet for deep and meaningful thoughts about
>> libertariaism!
>
> If you're holding your breath, you have my permission to yell
> something derogatory about Joe Biden, and then sneak breaths while
> those who have to keep publicly doubling down on supporting someone
> *obviously* not fit for the job lose their shit in the vicinity of
> your post.
Biden... is not so good. ;)
>> But sadly it's mostly democrats, so what can one do beside
>> trolling and enjoying their emotional outburst from time
>> to time. ;)
>
> I just figure they're *necessarily* as cognitively astute as
> their vacuously headed/conscience-d idol, and thus do I tend to
> refrain from imagining I could have interesting conversations with
> them. Their responses will likely be mostly ridiculously biased
> prattle, because that's apparently the upper limit of their word
> prowess - not to mention what their idol models for them on a
> regular basis.
are serious, then the real fun begins, but I suspect that the most jaded
and experienced ones have massive killfiles where my name is located. ;)
Best regards,
Daniel
oldernow
Feb 15, 2024, 8:38:44 AMFeb 15
to
On 2024-02-14, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
> Oh tell me about it! A "journalist" within IT I've heard
> about gives his 5 star reviews to the vendors that give him
> the most expensive whiskey during their demonstrations. ;)
It amazes me the same people that know this is how interactions
> Oh tell me about it! A "journalist" within IT I've heard
> about gives his 5 star reviews to the vendors that give him
> the most expensive whiskey during their demonstrations. ;)
*actually* work can somehow still believe it matters which
political/economic "system" we're "under".
> Other journalists have their agenda, and completely
> disregard the facts if those facts contradicts their
> agenda. Very frustrating!
for *paying* attention to them. It's ridiculous to expect lying to
stop when people in throngs pay attention. That attention screams
"keep it coming!" to the liars.
> Haha, yes why not?
>
> Biden... is not so good. ;)
> True. I find that the trick is to have fun with them. If
> they think you are serious, then the real fun begins,
> but I suspect that the most jaded and experienced ones
> have massive killfiles where my name is located. ;)
D
Feb 15, 2024, 5:17:33 PMFeb 15
to
>> Oh tell me about it! A "journalist" within IT I've heard
>> about gives his 5 star reviews to the vendors that give him
>> the most expensive whiskey during their demonstrations. ;)
>
> It amazes me the same people that know this is how interactions
> *actually* work can somehow still believe it matters which
> political/economic "system" we're "under".
not in the perfect system, but the system we are living in is way better
than the USSR.
>> Haha, yes why not?
>>
>> Biden... is not so good. ;)
>
> Whoa, Nellie! How about *easing* into it....? :-)
>
>> True. I find that the trick is to have fun with them. If
>> they think you are serious, then the real fun begins,
>> but I suspect that the most jaded and experienced ones
>> have massive killfiles where my name is located. ;)
>
> I'm working hard to hopefully wind up there was well.
Best regards,
Daniel
oldernow
Feb 15, 2024, 6:40:14 PMFeb 15
to
On 2024-02-15, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
> Well, that's not a binary question, it's a question of
> degrees. So we're not in the perfect system, but the
> system we are living in is way better than the USSR.
How do you know it's the system and not the people?
> Well, that's not a binary question, it's a question of
> degrees. So we're not in the perfect system, but the
> system we are living in is way better than the USSR.
> Sorry, sorry! Let me try again. Biden... is suboptimal! ;)
>>> True. I find that the trick is to have fun with them. If
>>> they think you are serious, then the real fun begins,
>>> but I suspect that the most jaded and experienced ones
>>> have massive killfiles where my name is located. ;)
>>
>> I'm working hard to hopefully wind up there was well.
>
> I will pray for you!
Governor Swill
Feb 15, 2024, 8:39:05 PMFeb 15
to
On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 22:52:30 -0000 (UTC), oldernow <olde...@dev.null> wrote:
>On 2024-02-13, Governor Swill <governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The DNC is not one brain but it makes sense that a
>> conservative would think of it that way.
>>
>> The DNC is a group of many brains, each allowed independent
>> thought.
>>
>> The RNC is a group of many brains, all required to think
>> the same thoughts.
>>
>> The GOP is fragmented because the very *nature* of
>> conservatism is conformity, homogeneity, obedience to
>> authority and unchanging sameness. But the Party is
>> finding that not all its members are in agreement and some
>> of them want change so it shows cracks and weak spots.
>>
>> By nature, the DNC can function when its members are not
>> all in agreement but the RNC, by *its* nature, cannot.
>
>Okay... so you're a halfway decent writer,
Thanks.
>On 2024-02-13, Governor Swill <governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The DNC is not one brain but it makes sense that a
>> conservative would think of it that way.
>>
>> The DNC is a group of many brains, each allowed independent
>> thought.
>>
>> The RNC is a group of many brains, all required to think
>> the same thoughts.
>>
>> The GOP is fragmented because the very *nature* of
>> conservatism is conformity, homogeneity, obedience to
>> authority and unchanging sameness. But the Party is
>> finding that not all its members are in agreement and some
>> of them want change so it shows cracks and weak spots.
>>
>> By nature, the DNC can function when its members are not
>> all in agreement but the RNC, by *its* nature, cannot.
>
>Okay... so you're a halfway decent writer,
>and politically biased.
Yeah, I'm biased toward the center.
>Unfortunately, the only thing that degree of bias ever convinces me
>of is that the author is more capable of dipping-bird-like biased
>statement repetition than critical thinking, and thus probably not
>worth reading. I just plain don't find another's fundamentalism
>being perpetually rammed down my cognitive throat either appetizing
>or conceptually nutritious.
observations to me. Typically partisan, you project your own feelings, objectives and
methods onto others.
>> Are you guys discussing freedom of thought and diversity of opinion?
>
>I'm attempting to have what I consider fun typing, posting, and
>reading. I enjoy occasionally chancing upon others similarly playful.
>
>My condolences if you're convinced getting words to appear on others'
>screens constitutes accomplishing anything important. If you're
>trying to do that, I'd recommend finding and helping others in
>need....
Swill
--
Jon Stewart is back on The Daily Show! First episode is on Youtube.
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpBPm0b9de
The Daily Show streams on the Paramount network (includes Showtime, CBS
and your local CBS station). https://help.paramountplus.com/
Governor Swill
Feb 15, 2024, 8:41:15 PMFeb 15
to
On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 09:45:20 -0500, "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net>
wrote:
>"oldernow" <olde...@dev.null> wrote in message
>news:slrnusnsld....@oldernow.jethrick.com...
>> On 2024-02-13, Governor Swill <governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The DNC is not one brain but it makes sense that a
>>> conservative would think of it that way.
>>>
>>> The DNC is a group of many brains, each allowed independent
>>> thought.
>
>And yet you complain how there are disagreements among Republicans.. which
>is the result of independent thought.. and how Democrats don't have that
>issues.. which is the result of a lack of independent thought.
If you feel like reversing what I wrote, have at it. Nothing changes the fact that
Democrats can all think different things and arrive at consensus while Republicans have to
do whatever Authority tells them to do regardless of their own views.
Swill
--
Jon Stewart is back on The Daily Show! First episode is on Youtube.
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpBPm0b9de
The Daily Show streams on the Paramount network (includes Showtime, CBS
and your local CBS station). https://help.paramountplus.com/
wrote:
>"oldernow" <olde...@dev.null> wrote in message
>news:slrnusnsld....@oldernow.jethrick.com...
>> On 2024-02-13, Governor Swill <governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The DNC is not one brain but it makes sense that a
>>> conservative would think of it that way.
>>>
>>> The DNC is a group of many brains, each allowed independent
>>> thought.
>
>And yet you complain how there are disagreements among Republicans.. which
>is the result of independent thought.. and how Democrats don't have that
>issues.. which is the result of a lack of independent thought.
Democrats can all think different things and arrive at consensus while Republicans have to
do whatever Authority tells them to do regardless of their own views.
Swill
--
Jon Stewart is back on The Daily Show! First episode is on Youtube.
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpBPm0b9de
The Daily Show streams on the Paramount network (includes Showtime, CBS
and your local CBS station). https://help.paramountplus.com/
Governor Swill
Feb 15, 2024, 8:46:33 PMFeb 15
to
On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 15:53:17 -0000 (UTC), oldernow <olde...@dev.null> wrote:
>On 2024-02-14, Scout <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>
>> "oldernow" <olde...@dev.null> wrote in message
>> news:slrnusnsld....@oldernow.jethrick.com...
>>> On 2024-02-13, Governor Swill <governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The DNC is not one brain but it makes sense that a
>>> conservative would think of it that way.
>>>
>>> The DNC is a group of many brains, each allowed independent
>>> thought.
>
>> And yet you complain how there are disagreements among Republicans..
>
>I do? Where? I'm pretty sure someone else wrote what you're quoting
>back to me as though I wrote it.
>
>FWIW, I think it's important to effective USENET communication to
>pair quoting attributions to the correct quoted text.
He was replying to me. View his post to which you've replied. It seems that somehow YOU
>On 2024-02-14, Scout <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>
>> "oldernow" <olde...@dev.null> wrote in message
>> news:slrnusnsld....@oldernow.jethrick.com...
>>> On 2024-02-13, Governor Swill <governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The DNC is not one brain but it makes sense that a
>>> conservative would think of it that way.
>>>
>>> The DNC is a group of many brains, each allowed independent
>>> thought.
>
>> And yet you complain how there are disagreements among Republicans..
>
>I do? Where? I'm pretty sure someone else wrote what you're quoting
>back to me as though I wrote it.
>
>FWIW, I think it's important to effective USENET communication to
>pair quoting attributions to the correct quoted text.
have screwed up the attributions.
>> which is the result of independent thought.. and how
>> Democrats don't have that issues.. which is the result of
>> a lack of independent thought.
>
>No idea what you're referring to.
>
>>> The RNC is a group of many brains, all required to think
>>> the same thoughts.
>>>
>>> The GOP is fragmented because the very *nature* of
>>> conservatism is conformity, homogeneity, obedience to
>>> authority and unchanging sameness.
>
>> First you claim uniformity of thought.. then admit there
>> is no such uniformity of thought.
>>
>> Takes a special kind of stupid to make a claim and then
>> immediately admit you lied.
>
>Again, those weren't my words, yet you respond to them as though
>they were.
front of the statements he's replying to. YOU messed up the quote marks.
>How am I supposed to consider anything you write intelligent if
>you can't even get the simplest part of doing this correct?
>
>>> But the Party is
>>> finding that not all its members are in agreement and some
>>> of them want change so it shows cracks and weak spots.
>
>> Further confirming there isn't the uniformity of thought
>> you asserted.
Swill
--
Jon Stewart is back on The Daily Show! First episode is on Youtube.
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpBPm0b9de
The Daily Show streams on the Paramount network (includes Showtime, CBS
and your local CBS station). https://help.paramountplus.com/
D
Feb 16, 2024, 4:38:44 AMFeb 16
to
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024, oldernow wrote:
> On 2024-02-15, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>
>> Well, that's not a binary question, it's a question of
>> degrees. So we're not in the perfect system, but the
>> system we are living in is way better than the USSR.
>
> How do you know it's the system and not the people?
>
expressed through people. So I think you could say that it could be the
people governed by "the system". Or did I just have an accident while
thinking?
>> Sorry, sorry! Let me try again. Biden... is suboptimal! ;)
>
> You are cruisin' for a BLUEsin'!
just waiting for the political opponents to walk right into it! ;)
oldernow
Feb 16, 2024, 6:18:27 AMFeb 16
to
On 2024-02-16, Governor Swill <governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >and politically biased.
>
> Yeah, I'm biased toward the center.
What fundamental beliefs constitute "the center"?
> >and politically biased.
>
> Yeah, I'm biased toward the center.
> And I don't appreciate radical extremists explaining
> themselves but attributing those observations to me.
> Typically partisan, you project your own feelings,
> objectives and methods onto others.
> > My condolences if you're convinced getting words to appear
> > on others' screens constitutes accomplishing anything
> > important. If you're trying to do that, I'd recommend
> > finding and helping others in need....
>
> I'd be glad to help you out. ;)
oldernow
Feb 16, 2024, 6:20:07 AMFeb 16
to
> If you feel like reversing what I wrote, have at it.
> Nothing changes the fact that Democrats can all think
> different things and arrive at consensus while Republicans
> have to do whatever Authority tells them to do regardless
> of their own views.
At this point I suspecting USENET isn't much more than brushstroke
> Nothing changes the fact that Democrats can all think
> different things and arrive at consensus while Republicans
> have to do whatever Authority tells them to do regardless
> of their own views.
width contest....
oldernow
Feb 16, 2024, 6:25:34 AMFeb 16
to
> He was replying to me. View his post to which you've
> replied. It seems that somehow YOU have screwed up the
> attributions.
Thank you! I just won a huge bet that not only would you consider
> replied. It seems that somehow YOU have screwed up the
> attributions.
such my fault, but that you would do so emphatically, e.g. "YOU"!
> > Again, those weren't my words, yet you respond to them as
> > though they were.
>
> Again, note the same number of quote marks in front of
> his statements as there are in front of the statements
> he's replying to. YOU messed up the quote marks.
oldernow
Feb 16, 2024, 6:39:55 AMFeb 16
to
On 2024-02-16, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
> > > Well, that's not a binary question, it's a question of
> > > degrees. So we're not in the perfect system, but the system
> > > we are living in is way better than the USSR.
> >
> > How do you know it's the system and not the people?
>
> I think that is a matter of definition. A system "lives in"
> people and is expressed through people. So I think you
> could say that it could be the people governed by "the
> system". Or did I just have an accident while thinking?
I'm not sure how to tell the difference between whether systems
> > > Well, that's not a binary question, it's a question of
> > > degrees. So we're not in the perfect system, but the system
> > > we are living in is way better than the USSR.
> >
> > How do you know it's the system and not the people?
>
> I think that is a matter of definition. A system "lives in"
> people and is expressed through people. So I think you
> could say that it could be the people governed by "the
> system". Or did I just have an accident while thinking?
drive people, or people behave per self interested in ways that
at a meta level of behavior observation can appear to be a system
driving people.
Faith in a theory has a way of making said theory seem so,
you see....
> > > Sorry, sorry! Let me try again. Biden... is suboptimal! ;)
> >
> > You are cruisin' for a BLUEsin'!
>
> You can teach old dogs new tricks apparently! Now the trap
> is set, and I'm just waiting for the political opponents
> to walk right into it! ;)
Kamala.... ;-)
D
Feb 16, 2024, 7:41:04 AMFeb 16
to
On Fri, 16 Feb 2024, oldernow wrote:
> On 2024-02-16, Governor Swill <governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> He was replying to me. View his post to which you've
>> replied. It seems that somehow YOU have screwed up the
>> attributions.
>
> Thank you! I just won a huge bet that not only would you consider
> such my fault, but that you would do so emphatically, e.g. "YOU"!
>
D
Feb 16, 2024, 7:47:13 AMFeb 16
to
>> I think that is a matter of definition. A system "lives in"
>> people and is expressed through people. So I think you
>> could say that it could be the people governed by "the
>> system". Or did I just have an accident while thinking?
>
> I'm not sure how to tell the difference between whether systems
> drive people, or people behave per self interested in ways that
> at a meta level of behavior observation can appear to be a system
> driving people.
that we think, and act based on our thoughts, then systems, as in
thought packages we ingest or are brought up in, drive our behaviour.
> Faith in a theory has a way of making said theory seem so,
> you see....
is proven if it is sound or not.
On the other hand, continuously crashing socialist experiments doesn't
seem to convince socialists of how untennable their beliefs are, so
perhaps reality as a "reality check" is overrated? ;)
>>>> Sorry, sorry! Let me try again. Biden... is suboptimal! ;)
>>>
>>> You are cruisin' for a BLUEsin'!
>>
>> You can teach old dogs new tricks apparently! Now the trap
>> is set, and I'm just waiting for the political opponents
>> to walk right into it! ;)
>
> Personally I think your trap could use a little bit more
> Kamala.... ;-)
Well, what if I told you that I think Kamala once added too much salt in
her soup?
Take that you democrats! ;)
Best regards,
Daniel
oldernow
Feb 16, 2024, 8:01:45 AMFeb 16
to
On 2024-02-16, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
> > > He was replying to me. View his post to which you've
> > > replied. It seems that somehow YOU have screwed up the
> > > attributions.
> >
> > Thank you! I just won a huge bet that not only would
> > you consider such my fault, but that you would do so
> > emphatically, e.g. "YOU"!
>
> Aha! So older buys the beers then! ;)
A round of Hacker-Pschorr it is, then!
> > > He was replying to me. View his post to which you've
> > > replied. It seems that somehow YOU have screwed up the
> > > attributions.
> >
> > Thank you! I just won a huge bet that not only would
> > you consider such my fault, but that you would do so
> > emphatically, e.g. "YOU"!
>
> Aha! So older buys the beers then! ;)
oldernow
Feb 16, 2024, 8:26:53 AMFeb 16
to
> > I'm not sure how to tell the difference between whether
> > systems drive people, or people behave per self interested
> > in ways that at a meta level of behavior observation can
> > appear to be a system driving people.
>
> I guess it depends on where you place the starting
> point. If you think that we think, and act based on our
> thoughts, then systems, as in thought packages we ingest
> or are brought up in, drive our behaviour.
Okay. So let's take "capitalism" as a "system". I'm picking it
> > systems drive people, or people behave per self interested
> > in ways that at a meta level of behavior observation can
> > appear to be a system driving people.
>
> I guess it depends on where you place the starting
> point. If you think that we think, and act based on our
> thoughts, then systems, as in thought packages we ingest
> or are brought up in, drive our behaviour.
because these days I chance upon a fair number of posts in which
the author is upset about capitalism as though "everything would
be fine we we *just* followed a different system".
But do we really... *follow* capitalism? What would that even mean?
Here's one definition of capitalism I found:
"an economic system characterized by private or corporate
ownership of capital goods, by investments that are
determined by private decision, and by prices, production,
and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly
by competition in a free market"
Argument about whether or not that's the best definition aside,
let's just say that's THE definition, and (most) everyone knows that.
What would (at an individual level) "following capitalism" mean?
Does it mean I... buy things because I believe in private or
corporate ownership of capital goods...? "I'm going to buy that
widget because doing so supports the free market!"?
Or....?
Do you see what I'm getting at?
Personally, I couldn't care less how the widget got there, who
deserves credit for its invention, etc., etc. I just want a bleeping
widget, and so I'm going to buy one. There are absolutely no thoughts
of an economic system in mind from the desire through the purchasing
(and beyond) phases.
To me, if we're to say a system is driving people, there ought
to be some evidence that the people are, first off, aware of the
details of the system, and furthermore make choices and/or act in
accord with them.
If individuality behavior happens to subconsciously fall in line
with the definition of an economic system, then how could the system
be given credit for driving the behavior?
> > Faith in a theory has a way of making said theory seem so,
> > you see....
>
> True. But every political theory eventually meets reality,
> and there it is proven if it is sound or not.
>
> On the other hand, continuously crashing socialist
> experiments doesn't seem to convince socialists of how
> untennable their beliefs are, so perhaps reality as a
> "reality check" is overrated? ;)
different) are likely above-average in the ego mental illness
department: they're certain of the close alignment - if not
coincidence - of what they believe with some common "reality",
they gone public with their beliefs, and the results of others
living in a context defined by those beliefs not "panning out"
as their beliefs said they would is paramount to that precious
little self of theirs being *wrong*, and it turns out said mental
illness is such that most suffering from it would rather die than
be seen/knowng to be "wrong"....
> > You can teach old dogs new tricks apparently! Now the trap
> > is set, and I'm just waiting for the political opponents
> > to walk right into it! ;)
> >
> > Personally I think your trap could use a little bit more
> > Kamala.... ;-)
>
> Ahh!
>
> > Well, what if I told you that I think Kamala once added
> > too much salt in her soup?
>
> Take that you democrats! ;)
"you're a mean one
mister Dan...."
D
Feb 16, 2024, 10:50:26 AMFeb 16
to
On Fri, 16 Feb 2024, oldernow wrote:
Oktoberfest in München, but that was many years ago.
oldernow
Feb 16, 2024, 11:14:45 AMFeb 16
to
On 2024-02-16, D <nos...@example.net> wrote:
>> A round of Hacker-Pschorr it is, then!
>
> That's a good one! Hmm, if memory serves, I think they
> had a tent at Oktoberfest in M=FCnchen, but that was many
>> A round of Hacker-Pschorr it is, then!
>
> That's a good one! Hmm, if memory serves, I think they
> years ago.
That's the most compelling reason to buy a tent I've ever read!
Governor Swill
Feb 17, 2024, 9:45:05 AMFeb 17
to
On Fri, 16 Feb 2024 13:26:51 -0000 (UTC), oldernow <olde...@dev.null> wrote:
>To me, if we're to say a system is driving people, there ought
>to be some evidence that the people are, first off, aware of the
>details of the system, and furthermore make choices and/or act in
>accord with them.
I disagree. People can be easily manipulated without their knowledge. So yes, a system
>To me, if we're to say a system is driving people, there ought
>to be some evidence that the people are, first off, aware of the
>details of the system, and furthermore make choices and/or act in
>accord with them.
can drive behavior without the driven being aware of what is happening.
Swill
--
"I don't want everybody to vote. As a matter of fact, our leverage in
the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."
- Paul Weyrich, co founder of Heritage Foundation and Moral Majority
Governor Swill
Feb 17, 2024, 9:46:12 AMFeb 17
to
On Fri, 16 Feb 2024 11:25:32 -0000 (UTC), oldernow <olde...@dev.null> wrote:
>On 2024-02-16, Governor Swill <governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> He was replying to me. View his post to which you've
>> replied. It seems that somehow YOU have screwed up the
>> attributions.
>
>Thank you! I just won a huge bet that not only would you consider
>such my fault, but that you would do so emphatically, e.g. "YOU"!
And I proved it! :)
>On 2024-02-16, Governor Swill <governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> He was replying to me. View his post to which you've
>> replied. It seems that somehow YOU have screwed up the
>> attributions.
>
>Thank you! I just won a huge bet that not only would you consider
>such my fault, but that you would do so emphatically, e.g. "YOU"!
Swill
--
"I don't want everybody to vote. As a matter of fact, our leverage in
the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."
- Paul Weyrich, co founder of Heritage Foundation and Moral Majority
the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."
- Paul Weyrich, co founder of Heritage Foundation and Moral Majority
Governor Swill
Feb 17, 2024, 9:46:40 AMFeb 17
to
Swill
--
"I don't want everybody to vote. As a matter of fact, our leverage in
the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."
- Paul Weyrich, co founder of Heritage Foundation and Moral Majority
the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."
- Paul Weyrich, co founder of Heritage Foundation and Moral Majority
Governor Swill
Feb 17, 2024, 9:48:23 AMFeb 17
to
statistics for many of our claims/beliefs.
Swill
--
"I don't want everybody to vote. As a matter of fact, our leverage in
the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."
- Paul Weyrich, co founder of Heritage Foundation and Moral Majority
the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."
- Paul Weyrich, co founder of Heritage Foundation and Moral Majority
Governor Swill
Feb 17, 2024, 10:05:29 AMFeb 17
to
On Fri, 16 Feb 2024 11:18:24 -0000 (UTC), oldernow <olde...@dev.null> wrote:
>On 2024-02-16, Governor Swill <governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >and politically biased.
>>
>> Yeah, I'm biased toward the center.
>
>What fundamental beliefs constitute "the center"?
Don't believe either side. Compare them and you'll find the truth is usually somewhere in
>On 2024-02-16, Governor Swill <governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >and politically biased.
>>
>> Yeah, I'm biased toward the center.
>
>What fundamental beliefs constitute "the center"?
the middle, or at least both sides will have different pieces of it.
Not having extremist views usually indicates some degree of centrism. Agreeing with both
sides on different facets indicates centrism. Being excoriated by both sides is probably
the best test for centrism. :)
I agree with the left that gender education stories in schools aren't pornography but I
agree with the right that those stories aren't appropriate for all ages the schools have
made them available to.
The right used to believe in a strong defense. Defense is more than weapons systems. It's
diplomatic power, economic leverage and many other sorts of pressures.
Today they seem only to believe in holding a gun behind locked doors.
I believe in having a lock on the door and a gun to hand, but like the left, pulling the
trigger is the last resort. Open the door and talk first.
The US has pioneered having an empire without having an empire. That is, Pax Americana
doesn't require annexing wide swathes of the planet. We have other means. We established
the dollar as the de facto international currency and we control its supply and value. Our
vast agricultural output lets us use food exports usually as a carrot, rarely as a stick.
We have learned that carrots work better than sticks.
We have shared opportunities with less fortunate nations. Our trade agreements with
Mexico have cost us some jobs, but has allowed Mexico to become the world's 14th largest
economy.
Fewer and fewer border crossers are actually Mexican. More and more they're Venezuelans,
Brazilians, Nicaraguans, folks from failed or weak economies who want a better life.
Anybody with the chutzpah to walk a thousand miles across swamp, forest, mountain, jungle
and desert just so they can get a job washing dishes at Denny's is someone we should be
encouraging to come here. We need hard working self starters who can make sacrifices
without giving up.
Hopefully these ramblings will indicate something of why I consider myself a centrist.
>> And I don't appreciate radical extremists explaining
>> themselves but attributing those observations to me.
>> Typically partisan, you project your own feelings,
>> objectives and methods onto others.
>
>I don't disagree.
>
>> > My condolences if you're convinced getting words to appear
>> > on others' screens constitutes accomplishing anything
>> > important. If you're trying to do that, I'd recommend
>> > finding and helping others in need....
>>
>> I'd be glad to help you out. ;)
>
>Hilarious! :-)
There is a whiff of troll about you, but you're ok! :)
>> themselves but attributing those observations to me.
>> Typically partisan, you project your own feelings,
>> objectives and methods onto others.
>
>I don't disagree.
>
>> > My condolences if you're convinced getting words to appear
>> > on others' screens constitutes accomplishing anything
>> > important. If you're trying to do that, I'd recommend
>> > finding and helping others in need....
>>
>> I'd be glad to help you out. ;)
>
>Hilarious! :-)
Swill
--
"I don't want everybody to vote. As a matter of fact, our leverage in
the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."
- Paul Weyrich, co founder of Heritage Foundation and Moral Majority
the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."
- Paul Weyrich, co founder of Heritage Foundation and Moral Majority
oldernow
Feb 17, 2024, 6:20:39 PMFeb 17
to
On 2024-02-17, Governor Swill <governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > To me, if we're to say a system is driving people, there
> > ought to be some evidence that the people are, first off,
> > aware of the details of the system, and furthermore make
> > choices and/or act in accord with them.
> I disagree. People can be easily manipulated without
> their knowledge. So yes, a system can drive behavior
> without the driven being aware of what is happening.
<adjusts dunces cap>
> > To me, if we're to say a system is driving people, there
> > ought to be some evidence that the people are, first off,
> > aware of the details of the system, and furthermore make
> > choices and/or act in accord with them.
> I disagree. People can be easily manipulated without
> their knowledge. So yes, a system can drive behavior
> without the driven being aware of what is happening.
I agree. Thank you!
oldernow
Feb 17, 2024, 6:21:19 PMFeb 17
to
> > A round of Hacker-Pschorr it is, then!
>
> Got a Creemore Lager handy?
Never heard of it before, but hopefully I'll remember the name next
>
> Got a Creemore Lager handy?
time I'm in a place proud of its beer inventory.
oldernow
Feb 17, 2024, 6:22:31 PMFeb 17
to
> > > Yeah, I'm biased toward the center.
> >
> > What fundamental beliefs constitute "the center"?
>
> Don't believe either side. Compare them and you'll find
> the truth is usually somewhere in the middle, or at least
> both sides will have different pieces of it.
>
> Not having extremist views usually indicates some degree
> of centrism. Agreeing with both sides on different facets
> indicates centrism. Being excoriated by both sides is
> probably the best test for centrism. :)
Well, whaddaya know.. I've been centrist all this time without even
> >
> > What fundamental beliefs constitute "the center"?
>
> Don't believe either side. Compare them and you'll find
> the truth is usually somewhere in the middle, or at least
> both sides will have different pieces of it.
>
> Not having extremist views usually indicates some degree
> of centrism. Agreeing with both sides on different facets
> indicates centrism. Being excoriated by both sides is
> probably the best test for centrism. :)
knowing it!
> There is a whiff of troll about you, but you're ok! :)
themselves, and I've difficulty resisting. But I think I'm even
centrist about that, because I rather enjoy return fire so long as
it's generally nuanced/intelligent.
oldernow
Feb 17, 2024, 6:27:10 PMFeb 17
to
> > At this point I suspecting USENET isn't much more than
> > brushstroke width contest....
>
> Conversations typically have to work in generalities
> because we don't have precise statistics for many of our
> claims/beliefs.
Nicely tidy and accurate-sounding explanation!
> > brushstroke width contest....
>
> Conversations typically have to work in generalities
> because we don't have precise statistics for many of our
> claims/beliefs.
Governor Swill
Feb 18, 2024, 7:56:58 AMFeb 18
to
On Sat, 17 Feb 2024 23:21:17 -0000 (UTC), oldernow <olde...@dev.null> wrote:
>On 2024-02-17, Governor Swill <governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > A round of Hacker-Pschorr it is, then!
>>
>> Got a Creemore Lager handy?
>
>Never heard of it before, but hopefully I'll remember the name next
>time I'm in a place proud of its beer inventory.
You can get it in Toronto.
>On 2024-02-17, Governor Swill <governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > A round of Hacker-Pschorr it is, then!
>>
>> Got a Creemore Lager handy?
>
>Never heard of it before, but hopefully I'll remember the name next
>time I'm in a place proud of its beer inventory.
Governor Swill
Feb 18, 2024, 8:00:08 AMFeb 18
to
I changed jobs not long after.
oldernow
Feb 18, 2024, 8:38:27 AMFeb 18
to
On 2024-02-18, Governor Swill <governo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Got a Creemore Lager handy?
>>
>>Never heard of it before, but hopefully I'll remember the name next
>>time I'm in a place proud of its beer inventory.
>
> You can get it in Toronto.
That's a bit of a hike for this lad - nevermind that the older I get,
>>> Got a Creemore Lager handy?
>>
>>Never heard of it before, but hopefully I'll remember the name next
>>time I'm in a place proud of its beer inventory.
>
> You can get it in Toronto.
the more the medicinal aspect of drink towers over taste. Just as
I'd no longer walk a mile for a Camel, it's unlikely I'd drive a
day for a beer.
oldernow
Feb 18, 2024, 8:43:25 AMFeb 18
to
>>> There is a whiff of troll about you, but you're ok! :)
>>
>>More a "part time needler", if you will. Opportunities present
>>themselves, and I've difficulty resisting. But I think I'm even
>>centrist about that, because I rather enjoy return fire so long as
>>it's generally nuanced/intelligent.
>
> When I was in tech support, my supervisor noted that,
> "you don't suffer fools gladly".
I started feeling that way about the species in general several
>>
>>More a "part time needler", if you will. Opportunities present
>>themselves, and I've difficulty resisting. But I think I'm even
>>centrist about that, because I rather enjoy return fire so long as
>>it's generally nuanced/intelligent.
>
> When I was in tech support, my supervisor noted that,
> "you don't suffer fools gladly".
decades ago. It's so "this world" that improving one's conceptual
skills manages to increase the number of idiots one is surrounded by.
> I changed jobs not long after.
starting to feel like not nearly enough change.... ;-)
0 new messages