[kenrexford]

Ok. Yall are too easy. A one sided argument is boring.

My resume:

Crim defense lawyer who voted for Obama in 2008. 7 laws declared unconstituional on issues like free speech, medical privacy, and gay rights. Out front more than any Ohio attorney on racial disparity in sentencing and racial profiling. Currently taking on corruption in law enforcement.

Do you think I really want Trump picking the next Supreme Court justice?

LOL

[hrothgar]

kenrexford, on 2016-September-29, 06:30, said:

And in anticipation of a possible rebuttal. Christianity was just as offensive at many points. We are alive at the time that Martin Luther Bank the 95 Theses on the Wittenburg door I also would have been as violently against the Catholic Church. That Menace was essentially eradicated with the most bloody period In European history. Europe innocence killed that version of Christianity to the blood of many people.

I would hardly call switching targets from fellow Christians over to Jews and Muslims a real change of heart...

[ggwhiz]

Between now and the election I'm counting the number of times Trump says

I love (fill in the blank). I have property there.

[hrothgar]

kenrexford, on 2016-September-29, 06:54, said:

Ok. Yall are too easy. A one sided argument is boring.

In what world does one get kicks and giggles by pretending to be a racist?

For future reference, when you pull ***** like this you run a very real risk that people decide that

• The supposed act is the "real" you
  
• The "just kidding" claim is a lie because you don't want to lose face

[kenrexford]

hrothgar, on 2016-September-29, 08:43, said:

In what world does one get kicks and giggles by pretending to be a racist?

For future reference, when you pull ***** like this you run a very real risk that people decide that

• The supposed act is the "real" you
  
• The "just kidding" claim is a lie because you don't want to lose face

You have a fair point. But you've got to be able to argue better. It is difficult to argue better because Clinton is such a flawed candidate. I mean how in the heck is Trump in any way close to winning this thing?

Some of the issues that just stupid. I mean take the example of race relations. The Focus right now is idiotic. Sure there are problems with Law Enforcement Officers shooting black people. Very rare though. Usually excused. Much less sexy and dramatic however is the incredibly rampant racial disparity in sentencing and profiling in traffic stops. Much less sexy is the fact that we are incarcerating so many people over drug use which is stupid.

Trade. The real problem is that manual labor jobs cannot produce the type of income they used to produce. Unions have negotiated themselves out of a job. People who used to join the union should be getting their education. We would be much better off spending our money on education then on means of propping up unions.

Corporate taxes. Obviously the issue is competition in the world market for corporate tax rates. The solution is in fact partially to reduce the corporate income tax to competitive. You do that because corporations can move. You upset that however with an increase in the capital gains tax on corporate stock income. The end result is a wash but the corporation's stay in the United States.

Islamic extremism. The number of people being killed by terrorist attacks pales in comparison to the number of people who die if we send in the military to try to do something about it. Obviously. The solution perhaps is to create an environment where the Martin Luther of the Islamic world can arrive.

Illegal immigration. Statute of limitations? Seems like a simple way to resolve the problem. Figure out the number of years and then example people past that. Of years. Instead we have two insane sides. Wind up with a giant wall and Sanctuary cities. Sort of like a Maze Runner movie.

There are people like me in the middle who don't understand what the hell is going on. The Democrats put up Hillary Clinton who was clearly corrupt and clearly a liar. The Republicans put up a candidate who is clearly insane. The alternative for the Democrats was a man with a good heart but completely unrealistic ideas. The alternatives for the Republicans were essentially big business Jesus Freaks.

For what it's worth the only person of that made any sense during any of this was Rand Paul. How to agree with Rand Paul on everything but at least seem to make some sense.

[kenberg]

kenrexford, on 2016-September-29, 06:54, said:

Ok. Yall are too easy. A one sided argument is boring.

My resume:

Crim defense lawyer who voted for Obama in 2008. 7 laws declared unconstituional on issues like free speech, medical privacy, and gay rights. Out front more than any Ohio attorney on racial disparity in sentencing and racial profiling. Currently taking on corruption in law enforcement.

Do you think I really want Trump picking the next Supreme Court justice?

LOL

Thank you for this clarification.

[hrothgar]

kenrexford, on 2016-September-29, 18:17, said:

You have a fair point. But you've got to be able to argue better.

Fine. Here's the crux of my argument

1. You spent the better part of three weeks posting poorly constructed racist arguments on the forums.

2. Eventually, a significant number of active participants on the thread started posting slightly more polite versions of the following: "Kenrexford is a racist"

3. At this point in time you come back with "I was bored. I was trolling. I'm not really a racist. I'm actually some kind of Rand Paul libertarian. Lets continue our talk"

I don't care if you are a racist or merely someone who thought it would be amusing to be perceived as a racist.
In either case, you aren't worth spending mental cycles engaging with.

Its better just to label you as an assh0le, constantly remind people that at best you are a self identified troll (and you are probably actually a racist).
Congratulations! You now will get as the same respect as Al-U-Card, Lukewarm, and the like...

Please note:

This is very different than the way that I was treating you just a month ago. A month ago, I was willing to try to have a serious discussion about geo politics, the nature of Islam, and the like.
I didn't agree with what you were saying and didn't like what I was hearing, but I thought that you were due some respect and so I engaged with you as if you were an equal.

My, how times have changed...

[kenrexford]

To be honest I was actually having fun early on with the legitimate conversation. I like to bounce ideas off of people to see whether or not the ideas can be taken down legitimately. Sort of from the Socratic method. I have to admit that I've been got sucked into the Absurd when the attack started getting vitriolic. It's sort of like this. In order to have the conversation and the debate actually work this thing out on the globalism and economics part and on Trump as a candidate I had to take that side otherwise no one else would do anything except agree with each other. But then stupid responses like you are racist started breaking down the conversation. So in my mind I said okay let's go there. Let's make as strong an argument as possible for the most absolute racist ideas you can have. Since I got sucked into the drain. I mean it was somewhat humorous for me to start going into the farthest extremes of possible thought and try to tie it to some semblance of reality. I mean truth be told there are some things that Trump says that are not completely absurd. Truth said there are also some things that Clinton says that are somewhat absurd. That's the nature of politics absurdity is a shared Contagion.

[hrothgar]

kenrexford, on 2016-September-30, 09:32, said:

I like to bounce ideas off of people to see whether or not the ideas can be taken down legitimately. Sort of from the Socratic method.

Ken, I studied with Socrates.
I knew Socrates.
Socrates was a friend of mine.
Ken, you're no Socrates.

[kenberg]

This dispute was all started by Socrates in the Athenian elections of 460 B.C. He sent his campaign manager Nerdy Plato to Sparta to check up. .They failed, big time. I found the truth. Oedipus was not born in Thebes. And I could tell you about his mother, but I'll hold back on that until the next debate. Socrates started this controversy, but I finished it.

And hemlock is terrific, really great, I serve it at all my parties. Trust me. I guarantee it.

[helene_t]

kenrexford, on 2016-September-30, 09:32, said:

I like to bounce ideas off of people to see whether or not the ideas can be taken down legitimately. Sort of from the Socratic method.

He-he I remember things like that from the Marxist school I attended before college. We had lots of discussions about political issues. I found it boring and frankly un-sportive to argue a case which everybody would agree with so I would often argue things like genocide, nuclear war or slavery. It was before the word "troll" went viral

[Winstonm]

In Trumpality, the Republican Party did not reject its most Republican candidates but simply went for the "smartest guy in the room". Unfortunately, this may be true.

[kenrexford]

Crook
Goofy Southerner
Actor
Bush
Clinton
Bush
Community Organizer

Our next choice?

Goofy Southerner Crook Clinton

Or

Crook Actor

I just wish we had a Bush Community Organizer to elect.

[kenberg]

kenrexford, on 2016-October-01, 20:23, said:

Crook
Goofy Southerner
Actor
Bush
Clinton
Bush
Community Organizer

Our next choice?

Goofy Southerner Crook Clinton

Or

Crook Actor

I just wish we had a Bush Community Organizer to elect.

Otherwise put? We are in deep stuff.
But some stuff is deeper than other stuff.

[Trinidad]

kenberg, on 2016-October-02, 09:36, said:

Otherwise put? We are in deep stuff.
But some stuff is deeper than other stuff.

I trust that, as an academic, you know what BS, MS and PhD stand for...

IMO, a USA with DT as POTUS has it PhD.

Rik

[kenberg]

Trinidad, on 2016-October-08, 10:45, said:

I trust that, as an academic, you know what BS, MS and PhD stand for...

IMO, a USA with DT as POTUS has it PhD.

Rik

I first learned this from my high school trig teacher. He and I were both a bit nuts, each in our own way.

When I get optimistic, it goes like this:

Let us accept that Trump is channeling fear and anger. And there is a lot of fear and anger. But there is more to any person than fear and anger, and then we must ask whether Trump, at all, represents this additional part of us. I like to hope people are thinking this through and saying no he does not.

[Al_U_Card]

kenberg, on 2016-October-08, 11:39, said:

I first learned this from my high school trig teacher. He and I were both a bit nuts, each in our own way.

When I get optimistic, it goes like this:

Let us accept that Trump is channeling fear and anger. And there is a lot of fear and anger. But there is more to any person than fear and anger, and then we must ask whether Trump, at all, represents this additional part of us. I like to hope people are thinking this through and saying no he does not.

As with all pitch-men, he is pandering to a perceived need. We are not talking philosophy or ideology, just simply the current sentiment that needs to be addressed. No need to come up with well-reasoned arguments or rationales, (Remember Reagan and the "New Dawning in America"? Now that was a concept for a time of disgust and dissatisfaction.) you just need to be seen to be taking the popular sentiment under consideration.

[Winstonm]

In Trumpality, there is only Trump.

[Winstonm]

While watching the second debate, I kept wondering why someone as intelligent and knowledgeable as Hillary Clinton should debate someone as obviously uninformed as Donald Trump - having Trump as some kind of viable Presidential candidate and giving him a stage to spout his vitriol is the most humiliating thing that has ever happened in U.S. politics period.

[Hanoi5]

I was wondering why nobody mentioned Hillary saying she wanted to arm the Kurds.