Lavar Ball - ingrate

[Dill]

(11-21-2017, 02:00 PM)Dill Wrote: Thanks for the insight into your world of internet memes. Would it be fair to say that your view of US politics is wholly framed by this level of political discourse?Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: A fair point.  I just wonder why you never call out your buddy for his near constant use of gifs and lame memes to "rebut" arguments.  Maybe more of michaelsean's point at work, eh?

The short answer is that Dino's knowledge of politics does not appear to be wholly derived from and framed by internet memes and a few partisan internet sources.

He has the capacity to check his sources and refuse to post lies and errors, and uses it.

As far as using gifs as rebuttal, so far as I've seen, that comes when people opt out of serious dialogue but keep aggressively posting at him.  But I don't follow Dino around thread after thread looking for a post to "call out."  You know his posting style better than I do.  Maybe there are some posts I would "call out" as you put it.

[Dill]

(11-21-2017, 10:29 AM)Johnny Cupcakes Wrote: Since weak conjecture arguments are the trend here, I'll counter with this. If Donald Trump could pretend to be less of an idiot, and start acting even 1/2 as presidential as Barack Obama did, people would not be even close to as against him as they currently are.

LOL Oh YEAH . . . What about CLINTON and Uranium ONE!!??   Is she presidential??? Why are the liberal media all talking about Trump instead of her?

Why are people always criticizing Trump when Hillary could have been president?

[Dill]

(11-21-2017, 12:32 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Everybody does that all the time to point out perceived hypocrisy.  You don't think I can find a tome of whatabouts concerning Trump in this forum?  And what are the odds I find you have called them out on it?

I'm not a big fan of Wikipedia, but finally we have a useful history and definition of the term.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

A counter argument only becomes "whataboutery" as an attempt to change the subject.

Comparing Trump/Obama/Hillary/liberals/conservatives on issues is not automatically whataboutery. If someone claims Obama's foreign policy was the worst ever, and I raise the issue of Bush's Iraq War, that is not changing the subject; it is at minimum asking for a clarification of the standard by which Obama is being judged.

When Trump is judged for his disgusting behaviors, recalling Bill Clinton to the discussion to support claims and speculation about "liberal hypcrisy" is not in itself whataboutery. Though it might be if the issue is Trump's behavior in relation to a current policy issue and mentioning Clinton clarifies nothing, but sets the argument off in a different direction.

So it's clear to me that people are always comparing politicians, but it's not so clear there is a "tome of whatabouts concerning Trump" in this forum. There might some. But as of late, Trump supporters have set the standard outside this forum as well as in it.  Kellyann Conway is the current Queen of the tactic.

[Millhouse]

I watched Lavar Bell's interview he gave, and was asking how do we know if Trump did help get them out of it? He also basically thanked the Chinese president instead, and something about if Trump did get them out, why not fly them home on Air Force 1?

Dude is a ****ing idiot. Anyone that buys those $500 shoes are equal idiots too.

And why Trump didnt take the high road to really make Bell look like an ingrateful douche father that he is, I dont know. He had a golden opportunity to really do so here, but instead didnt.

[*jason*]

(11-21-2017, 03:53 PM)Millhouse Wrote: I watched Lavar Bell's interview he gave, and was asking how do we know if Trump did help get them out of it? He also basically thanked the Chinese president instead, and something about if Trump did get them out, why not fly them home on Air Force 1?

Dude is a ****ing idiot. Anyone that buys those $500 shoes are equal idiots too.

And why Trump didnt take the high road to really make Bell look like an ingrateful douche father that he is, I dont know. He had a golden opportunity to really do so here, but instead didnt.

Confucius once say... Never argue with an idiot. Those that observe the argument from a distance will have difficulty judging which person is the idiot.

Maybe he didn't say that, but given the backdrop if the story, it seems appropriate.

[Dill]

(11-21-2017, 03:53 PM)Millhouse Wrote: And why Trump didnt take the high road to really make Bell look like an ingrateful douche father that he is, I dont know. He had a golden opportunity to really do so here, but instead didnt.

Wouldn't it be more of a surprise if Trump DID take the high road? Remember we are talking about the guy who makes fun of a disabled reporter, attacks Gold Star parents, and publicly shames women for cosmetic surgery.

I don't ever see Trump on the high road unless someone is on the spot to persuade him it might result in public praise.

[*michaelsean*]

(11-21-2017, 01:09 PM)GMDino Wrote: But I'm not playing politics.  I'm point out a bad argument.  By not pointing it are you defending it?  Is that "playing politics" too?

Like I said, have fun with searching for all the times I didn't call something out.  I'm sure there are a few that will make people happy.  

As to the premise in the thread: Trump got praise...but didn't get enough for his own ego.  And someone dared diss him so he had to respond just like the thin skinned child he has always been.  It's not about what Obama did or what have done...it's about what the current POTUS is:  A child.

No not pointing it out means I have no problem with it, and I haven't pointed it out the other way.  I don't car eif people use hypotheticals.  Some may be insightful and some may be stupid, but it doesn't mean the use of it is bad.  

I don't have to search it out.  Anytime someone said, if a Republican President put this forward Republicans would be all for it, but because it's Obama they won't.  

[*michaelsean*]

(11-21-2017, 03:12 PM)Dill Wrote: I'm not a big fan of Wikipedia, but finally we have a useful history and definition of the term.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

A counter argument only becomes "whataboutery" as an attempt to change the subject.

Comparing Trump/Obama/Hillary/liberals/conservatives on issues is not automatically whataboutery. If someone claims Obama's foreign policy was the worst ever, and I raise the issue of Bush's Iraq War, that is not changing the subject; it is at minimum asking for a clarification of the standard by which Obama is being judged.

When Trump is judged for his disgusting behaviors, recalling Bill Clinton to the discussion to support claims and speculation about "liberal hypcrisy" is not in itself whataboutery. Though it might be if the issue is Trump's behavior in relation to a current policy issue and mentioning Clinton clarifies nothing, but sets the argument off in a different direction.

So it's clear to me that people are always comparing politicians, but it's not so clear there is a "tome of whatabouts concerning Trump" in this forum. There might some. But as of late, Trump supporters have set the standard outside this forum as well as in it.  Kellyann Conway is the current Queen of the tactic.

And here I was going to credit Dino with creating a new word.  

[Dill]

(11-21-2017, 06:27 PM)michaelsean Wrote: And here I was going to credit Dino with creating a new word.  

And it didn't even start with our partisan politics. I know you like history so I figured you'd appreciate the background.

[*bfine32*]

(11-21-2017, 04:13 PM)jason Wrote: Confucius once say... Never argue with an idiot. Those that observe the argument from a distance will have difficulty judging which person is the idiot.

Maybe he didn't say that, but given the backdrop if the story, it seems appropriate.

Pretty sure that was Mark Twain

[GMDino]

[*michaelsean*]

(11-22-2017, 05:32 PM)GMDino Wrote:

Two dumb tweets.  

[CKwi88]

(11-22-2017, 05:32 PM)GMDino Wrote:

Remember when I said that the situation was a new low? 

Yeah, it's waaaaay up there now. 

[GMDino]

(11-22-2017, 07:59 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: Remember when I said that the situation was a new low? 

Yeah, it's waaaaay up there now. 

But wait!  There's more!

...LaVar, you could have spent the next 5 to 10 years during Thanksgiving with your son in China, but no NBA contract to support you. But remember LaVar, shoplifting is NOT a little thing. It’s a really big deal, especially in China. Ungrateful fool!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 22, 2017

The POTUS ladies and gentlemen!