Trump on undocumented immigrants: 'These aren't people. These are animals.'

[StLucieBengal]

(05-23-2018, 02:53 AM)Dill Wrote: The second one under 1. : cruel and vicious; aggressively hostile.

Ah yes. So bloodthirsty, sadistic, vicious, and ferocious. Yeah that’s not same as animals lol

If you feel bad he called then animals that’s fine to just say... but your describing actual animal behavior. So what’s the difference?

Sorry. But this doesn’t seem to be the best hill to die on.

[GMDino]

(05-23-2018, 01:24 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: So raping children, setting people on fire and lining streets with severed heads doesn't reach animal status for you?


Interesting.

Not to speak for Dill but I'd bet he's going for "no humans are 'animals'" rather than going for defending their behavior.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-23-2018, 02:41 AM)Dill Wrote: No.

A rather extreme point of view.  Would you mind explaining the reasoning behind this opinion?

[*bfine32*]

(05-22-2018, 08:18 PM)Dill Wrote: Very asymmetrical. Only one "liberal" in the group.  And his motivations are rather different from the others. One reason righties jump on this incident is the hunger for parity, for the right to claim "both sides do it." That will have wide circulation in the bubble, not necessarily a bad sign. But no reason to suppose there will be much perception of parity outside it.

There is more than 1 liberal in the very thread pointing out the folly of the OP.

And your claim of "righties jump on this" makes no sense if you look who started the thread

[*bfine32*]

(05-23-2018, 08:42 AM)GMDino Wrote: Not to speak for Dill but I'd bet he's going for "no humans are 'animals'" rather than going for defending their behavior.

So you're thinking he doesn't believe in evolution.

FWIW, I have 0 issue with calling ISIS animals as I do the Taliban after I've witnessed the results of them mutilating a young girl and attacking her family simply because she had the nerve to try to go to school. Dill can keep his semantics. 

[GMDino]

(05-23-2018, 09:01 AM)bfine32 Wrote: So you're thinking he doesn't believe in evolution.

FWIW, I have 0 issue with calling ISIS animals as I do the Taliban after I've witnessed the results of them mutilating a young girl and attacking her family simply because she had the nerve to try to go to school. Dill can keep his semantics. 

"Evolution" says we have risen above the other animals.

What you have no problem with doesn't have anything to do with what Dill has no problem with.

Some people feel we are no longer just animals.  I've said as much while discussing our rape culture in this country.

And some people feel labeling other groups of humans as "animals" is just a convenient way of having no guilt when it comes to the extermination of that group.

[*bfine32*]

(05-23-2018, 09:04 AM)GMDino Wrote: "Evolution" says we have risen above the other animals.

What you have no problem with doesn't have anything to do with what Dill has no problem with.

Some people feel we are no longer just animals.  I've said as much while discussing our rape culture in this country.

And some people feel labeling other groups of humans as "animals" is just a convenient way of having no guilt when it comes to the extermination of that group.

Not all humans have risen above "other" animals. 

Seems you are using the words "other" and "just" when you try to separate humans from animals, but enough about Dill. Do you think humans are animals? 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-23-2018, 08:42 AM)GMDino Wrote: Not to speak for Dill but I'd bet he's going for "no humans are 'animals'" rather than going for defending their behavior.

I got that, which is why I asked him to explain further.

(05-23-2018, 09:04 AM)GMDino Wrote: "Evolution" says we have risen above the other animals.

On the intelligence front, definitely.

Quote:What you have no problem with doesn't have anything to do with what Dill has no problem with.

Some people feel we are no longer just animals.  I've said as much while discussing our rape culture in this country.

The ironic thing, in this instance, is that such an opinion is often predicated by religious belief.

Quote:And some people feel labeling other groups of humans as "animals" is just a convenient way of having no guilt when it comes to the extermination of that group.

At the most extreme fringes, sure.  No one here is advocating for this or even approaching that territory.

[hollodero]

(05-22-2018, 08:18 PM)Dill Wrote: Very asymmetrical. Only one "liberal" in the group.  And his motivations are rather different from the others. One reason righties jump on this incident is the hunger for parity, for the right to claim "both sides do it."

Yep, so why feed that hunger. Things like that deliver evidence and credibility to that.

(05-22-2018, 08:18 PM)Dill Wrote: Of course we agree there is nothing wrong with critiquing exaggeration. And you've not heard me argue "If they do it then it's ok if we do it." Where we part ways is at the claim that a liberal media exaggeration here and there by some journalists--generated in the OP from Trump's own clumsy speech and previous demonization of immigrants--will somehow harm the Democrats in the face of Trump's daily blizzard of lies and distortions.

That's right. I do think this spin is a mistake, also I think defending that spin is a mistake.

But yeah well, I stated my case and in the end I only would somehow rearrange my words. I said my piece and made my case.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-23-2018, 09:15 AM)hollodero Wrote: Yep, so why feed that hunger. Things like that deliver evidence and credibility to that.



That's right. I do think this spin is a mistake, also I think defending that spin is a mistake.

But yeah well, I stated my case and in the end I only would somehow rearrange my words. I said my piece and made my case.

I appreciate your efforts in this matter.  The extreme sides in this country ( I can only assume something similar exists in every country) are completely blinkered as to how their opinions and behavior reinforce the opposite extreme.  They also require ideological purity or you be labeled as the other extreme.  It should be patently obvious that such behavior repels people with more moderate or nuanced views.  For some this appears to absolutely not be so obvious.

[hollodero]

(05-23-2018, 09:19 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I appreciate your efforts in this matter.  The extreme sides in this country ( I can only assume something similar exists in every country) are completely blinkered as to how their opinions and behavior reinforce the opposite extreme.  They also require ideological purity or you be labeled as the other extreme.  It should be patently obvious that such behavior repels people with more moderate or nuanced views.  For some this appears to absolutely not be so obvious.

Seems like it.

Remark A: It sure exists in every country, I feel the US is more extreme (which I can not quite prove) in that regard, which I attribute to the two party system. Most countries have more parties from left to middle to right, hence more diversity in political leanings, hence not that much entrenchment. The left vs. right thing exists in some form still, and things aren't gentle anywhere.

Remark B: Other countries don't have these news networks and nothing quite as extreme as FOX. My own pathetic country excluded, we're basically ruled by one newspaper. But that's not normal elsewhere in the western world.

Remark C: The "right wing media" still takes things way further than the "non-right wing media", just my opinion, but I'd feel bad to imply both sides are equal. But never mind.

[Dill]

(05-23-2018, 08:53 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: A rather extreme point of view.  Would you mind explaining the reasoning behind this opinion?

Are you requiring some sort of ideological purity? Is that why a refusal to call other human beings animals is "extreme"?

And a refusal is not an "opinion." 

Actually I would mind explaining. I have repeatedly treated your requests for explanation/challenges with respect by answering them with a length, care and exactness unusual in venues like this. Your response has generally been insults, threats, quippery, and misrepresentation.

When I pose you serious questions, I get more quippery, personal insults, TL;DR or explicit refusal--in short, an inability to respond seriously to serious discussion.  There is now nearly a two-year record of this.

So before I answer your question, I'd need some assurance that you would actually take the response seriously, rather than, say, simply searching for a tu quoque somewhere or throwing up a scattershot of quips. Otherwise, forget it.

[Dill]

(05-23-2018, 10:18 AM)hollodero Wrote: Seems like it.

Remark A: It sure exists in every country, I feel the US is more extreme (which I can not quite prove) in that regard, which I attribute to the two party system. Most countries have more parties from left to middle to right, hence more diversity in political leanings, hence not that much entrenchment. The left vs. right thing exists in some form still, and things aren't gentle anywhere.

Remark B: Other countries don't have these news networks and nothing quite as extreme as FOX. My own pathetic country excluded, we're basically ruled by one newspaper. But that's not normal elsewhere in the western world.

Remark C: The "right wing media" still takes things way further than the "non-right wing media", just my opinion, but I'd feel bad to imply both sides are equal. But never mind.

I think that Russia might now count as a country with several Fox-style stations.  News papers like Komolskya Pravda and tv channels like Lifenews.ru are similarly Kremlin subservient and happy to treat rumor/conspiracy as news. Under Yeltsin they did have some pretty wild television offering, with Rush Limbaugh style showmen and the like. But Putin put his foot down on any wide-reaching news organization which criticized his policies right after the Kursk incident.

I know that state news in places like China and Myanmar are heavily censored, but I don't know if, for all that, they encourage chatty, personal conspiracy mongering from leggy women and angry "experts" the way Fox does.

[Dill]

(05-23-2018, 08:58 AM)bfine32 Wrote: There is more than 1 liberal in the very thread pointing out the folly of the OP.

And your claim of "righties jump on this" makes no sense if you look who started the thread

So righties DON'T jump on this?

[Dill]

(05-23-2018, 09:15 AM)hollodero Wrote: Yep, so why feed that hunger. Things like that deliver evidence and credibility to that.

That's right. I do think this spin is a mistake, also I think defending that spin is a mistake.

But yeah well, I stated my case and in the end I only would somehow rearrange my words. I said my piece and made my case.

Understood. Neither of us can go any further, make any substantial point, without specific cases and demographic data, which will unlikely be available till late summer.

PS I agree with you the hunger should not be fed. The smallest incident equalizes a whole day of Trump trash talk (but almost solely for his audience.)  One big incident fogs up a year's work of respectable journalism for the equivalizers. But that we even have to worry about this indicates who is really in control of the mediasphere.

[fredtoast]

(05-23-2018, 01:04 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Would you label the ISIS fighters animals?

They didn't kill near as many children as we did with our atomic bomb.

And getting your head cut off is not bad compared to laying around for days with all the flesh burnt off your body before you die.

[hollodero]

(05-23-2018, 04:39 PM)Dill Wrote: I think that Russia might now count as a country with several Fox-style stations.  News papers like Komolskya Pravda and tv channels like Lifenews.ru are similarly Kremlin subservient and happy to treat rumor/conspiracy as news. Under Yeltsin they did have some pretty wild television offering, with Rush Limbaugh style showmen and the like. But Putin put his foot down on any wide-reaching news organization which criticized his policies right after the Kursk incident.

I know that state news in places like China and Myanmar are heavily censored, but I don't know if, for all that, they encourage chatty, personal conspiracy mongering from leggy women and angry "experts" the way Fox does.

Yeah I meant in western countries. In Uzbekistan, I could imagine there are things way worse than FOX.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-23-2018, 04:29 PM)Dill Wrote: Are you requiring some sort of ideological purity? Is that why a refusal to call other human beings animals is "extreme"?

And a refusal is not an "opinion." 

Actually I would mind explaining. I have repeatedly treated your requests for explanation/challenges with respect by answering them with a length, care and exactness unusual in venues like this. Your response has generally been insults, threats, quippery, and misrepresentation.

When I pose you serious questions, I get more quippery, personal insults, TL;DR or explicit refusal--in short, an inability to respond seriously to serious discussion.  There is now nearly a two-year record of this.

So before I answer your question, I'd need some assurance that you would actually take the response seriously, rather than, say, simply searching for a tu quoque somewhere or throwing up a scattershot of quips. Otherwise, forget it.

That's a lot of words to say, no. 

EDIT: BTW I have never threatened you or anyone else. Don't spew blatant falsehoods.

(05-23-2018, 05:02 PM)fredtoast Wrote: They didn't kill near as many children as we did with our atomic bomb.

And getting your head cut off is not bad compared to laying around for days with all the flesh burnt off your body before you die.

Well played Fred.  Pelosi defends MS13 and you compare the US military to ISIS.  An outstanding days work there.

[Dill]

(05-23-2018, 05:45 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: That's a lot of words to say, no. 

EDIT: BTW I have never threatened you or anyone else.  Don't spew blatant falsehoods.


Well played Fred.  Pelosi defends MS13 and you compare the US military to ISIS.  An outstanding days work there.

Since it generally goes against my principles to refuse an explanation, some context was necessary.

E.g. you threatened once never to respond to me again unless I apologized to you. But couldn't keep your word. That is what I mean by threats.

[fredtoast]

(05-23-2018, 05:45 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Well played Fred.  Pelosi defends MS13 and you compare the US military to ISIS.  An outstanding days work there.

Thank you.  Glad I could give you a little needed perspective.

If ISIS are "animals" for what they did then the US military are also animals for what they did, correct?