Town Quixote's

[Foxfire]

Size issues? :sherlock:

Oh! That! Pweeew!

For a second there I thought I was in the "Trump will win BIG" thread. :shocked:

 

[fool]

Strange. On my screen at 3 size (which is what that Gazette is set at on the intro) it looks appreciably larger than the quoted type on my monitor. No idea why. I'll bump the next one up two sizes on the leads and one more on the header and you guys can let me know if that's too much or okay...no idea why I'm seeing something so different, but there you go.



Okay, is this easier to read:

The Saturday Morning Gazette

​

So, after Crucible related interrupting an AA meeting to give them what for...

Much better.

 

[Town Heretic]

The Hump Day Gazette​

Talked race with PJ...

I've been sick of the race card since I became aware of racism and slavery as a kid. I am white, now I'm a minority

What country do you live in? lain: Or did you move into a new neighborhood?

I think it's mostly a problem of perspective. There are legitimate complaints tied to race, objectively demonstrable ones...and there's the Oscars. Being able to distinguish between the two is essential.

One concern I have these days is that liberals, who are clearly in ascension in terms of dominating the cultural landscape, will forget one of their traditional strengths, honoring diversity, and instead replace the more monolithic judgments of the right with their own set of sacred cows...in fact, if you saw kmo's bit on what's happening in some liberal bastions that appears to be entirely the case.

And Oscar motivations with rex...

How is it that the Oscars had no non-white nominees?

I don't think there's much of an argument that the Oscars issue was racist. Symptomatic of a largely skewed voting pool, sure, but racist? The same group gave an Oscar to "It's Hard Out There For a Pimp"...they shouldn't have, but they did. Anyway, they're even older now and that has a way of shrinking interests. Because all sorts of minorities have won in recent memory. Now Creed was good enough to be nominated, though I think being of the Rocky franchise hurt that chance. They gave the nod to Stallone instead, though the invite stopped short of a statue. Idris? An unlikable turn in a movie released on Netflix. And, honestly, the nominees were good else. I don't agree with it, but I can't say it's racist...unless you think old white men being disinterested in hip-hop is racist, by way of illustration.

Fool had me wondering...

It's gonna be Trump-Clinton, the two parties are just gonna merge and then there'll only be one choice.

It'll be easier that way.

Will there be one of those catchy, celebrity nickname combos, like Trinton...no, that would make Christie too comfortable. Trumpton...Clump?

Before kmo had a thought...

I...Would like to see Compton.

On the screen or by cab? lain:

Would consider see Revenant but it doesn't pique my interest too much.

DiCaprio is someone whose work will always draw me in, as much as I don't care for what I know about him personally. A fine actor...I might root for the bear, but a fine actor.

You'd have to pay me to see Creed.

lain: No, I'd rather enjoy the satisfaction of knowing that, as with your regular season NFL watching, you're missing out on a remarkable portrayal of athleticism and achievement.

Elsewhere, the soon to be red krsto was hoping...

Wahoo! I'm the one millionth poster! Do I get a prize or anything?

Apparently not. lain:

While further political shenanigans had kmo wondering...

And? What game?

kmo, to be fair, is a Chiefs' fan, so he doesn't know much about winning games.

None of the republican candidates could outsell Donald and, really, the problem those other guys had was they all had the same product, essentially.

And that had TomO wondering...

You mean this stuff? lain:

Spoiler

View attachment 23629

:think: Needs glitter and it helps if you throw it, but that's essentially it.

Tomorrow? Papers to write and miles to go. :sigh:

 

[Town Heretic]

The Saturday Afternoon Posts​

Letsargue was in rare Alley form, prompting Theo to ask...

So...do you ask God for your desires?

If he did and God said yes we'd all be in B-I-G (((GENIUS!!!))) trouble. :noid:

And...

You "A-L-L" Are IN BIG Trouble!!!! -- ((( Romans 3:10-12 KJV ))!!!!!!!
PAUL, DAVID -- 030916

What did I tell you? lain:

Said goodbye to an all time great...

Peyton summed his greatness aptly. He said there were other more talented players at the position but that no one out prepared him and that was why he was satisfied with his career...

Spoiler

I think that's exactly right. No one will ever argue he possessed a great arm, great mobility or athleticism. His brother is reputedly the smarter of the two. But no one worked harder at maximizing his talent than Peyton, getting every last bit of advantage he could within the rules. And that's what separates him. Put that head on Rodger's body and God knows what the record book would look like by the time he finished. He's the Pete Rose (absent a gambling scandal) of his sport. And that's one of the reasons I think the average fan feels differently about him. We understand and appreciate ability, but we feel effort.

Is Peyton the greatest to play the position? Not to me. To me it's Joe for a few reasons. Does Peyton deserve consideration? Absolutely. He's earned the respect.

In fact, there is a Metric that can raise Peyton above his competition in the conversation. What are the most difficult accomplishments in the NFL? There are two: Super Bowl wins and MVP awards. The first requires a complete team effort, the second is more about the individual at his position. At his position, no one retires more honored than Peyton, with 5 MVPs. He also has two rings. So that's seven SB and MVP combined. Brady has him on team accomplishment, but comes up short on MVPs and trails in total, by one. He might catch or pass that with the time left, or he might not. Montana is done and stands at 6, collectively. Bradshaw has a total of five (4SB/1MVP). Rodgers, with a combined 3 is the only active player other than Tom within striking distance and with a few miles left on the tread.

So if you want to you can make the case that Manning merits the crown. But I think the better course is simply to admire the hustle, quietly keep your guy in your hip pocket for that "If I started a team with anyone" debate, and nod to the sort of athlete we wish there were more of, appreciate the time we had to watch him and close the book that was a joy to read.

Differed with THall on a particular...

[Trump] has been happily married to Milanya for over a decade, and they have had a fine young man as a son.

He was happily married to Ivana for fourteen years.
Happily married to Marla for six.

Why can't you be happy for him on a personal level?

Should she really be happy that a serial adulterer has found his latest victim happiness?

I think any candidate has positives and negatives, they are humans, not perfect.

I think Manson tried that defense. :think:.

Or fifteen...who counts these days?

People consist of much more than one act or character flaw in their lives.

:think: That one I know Manson used.

We are not electing the Pope or mother Theresa.

Which is good, because I have a feeling being a serial adulterer with a demonstrated penchant for profanity and at least one pending suit for fraud would probably put a kink in that effort.

We are electing the president. Every president has had moral failings.

So...to borrow from Daniel Boone, not much of a bar then.

People are not defending his adulterery; they are supporting his traits that will get done what needs to be done.

You mean his ability to commit to something serious and see it through good times and bad, sickness and health?

What we need in this country is to get rid of the establishment running things.

So you want to buck the system by electing a rich, old white guy with ties to half the power brokers on the Hill?

That's one plan.

The fact of adultery doesn't influence this in the least. We all have done wrong things in this life but most of us would be offended if our total being were reduced to the one act of failure.

Or a repeated pattern of failure even...apparently. lain:

Before LA was back with a blistering...

I DON'I USE All CAPS You Lying stack of LIES!!!!!!

That'll show her...and everyone really. :think:

It's Hard to believe how Ignoring everyone IS!!!!!!

I know, right?

If you could sum your approach to dialogue in a single, coherent sentence or fragment, what would that look like?

I Don't CARE What the Crap You're talking about...

That it?

YOU ALL SHOVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:idunno: I'd go with the first one.

While Carson was busy doubling down on the strange bedfellows bit...

Carson to endorse Trump.

Carson? The same Carson who only just said:

"The real question is are American people going to awaken and recognize what’s going on. I believe the answer to that yes. I do not believe that we are quite that dense."​

lain: Move over Christie, there's plenty of uncomfortable room on that wagon.:rotfl:

Had a different thought about mandatory voting...

...if people aren't motivated enough to invest their time the last thing we want is to require their participation. There are enough uninformed people advocating for candidates as it is... Rather, incentivize intelligent voting. Create a basic civic's test and connect it to a tax break/credit for passing and every year where a person casts their vote in the national cycle.

Tomorrow? Once more to the beach, dear friends... oly:

 

[Town Heretic]

Today's Thought:

Elsewhere, a friend of mine posted a photo of a carload of smiling, female graduates, along with the following caption:

"This probably won't go viral because it's a picture of women who graduated, not a half-naked group of girls twerking."

And that made me sad...that we've come to the point in our society where those are mutually exclusive.

lain: what?

 

[Town Heretic]

Looking through some old writing apart from here...A friend of mine said to me that we're all born as atheists.

So I said, "We don't come into being thinking about anything abstractly. It's more appropriate to say that we're all born ignorant and some people grow out of it.

The real argument is over who.

 

[Town Heretic]

The Monday, Monday Gazette

​

After Cruc posted a photo with a meme attached...

I'm sorry that you need proof of Muslims celebrating 9/11. A picture will not do, and a source will not either.

The picture doesn't have any context that supports the claim written into it. I can't look at the crowd and tell where it was taken, when it was taken, or the religious views of those people in it. That's why I asked for context. Because reasonable people do that sort of thing, fail to simply assume it is what it is advertised as because someone said it and posted it on the internet.

...liberals are just dishonest, politically correct sheeple.

...all sorts of people looked into that claim and none of them produced any corroboration. Not everyone looking was a liberal, or a moderate, or even of the sort who hoped it wasn't true.

While in the "Race for the White House" thread things were getting silly...okay, it was mostly me, but still...

That pretty much describes the mechanics of socialism.

And that, that's why you can't trust mechanics.

I don't hear many recipients complaining. Do you?

:think: It's hard to hear anything over the sound of that much silk being rent.

Elsewhere, anna said...

I'm so glad I left the GOP in 2012.

That's always a good idea where parties are concerned.

[for the benefit of people who really shouldn't be reading this, the good idea is leaving a party early]

How the mighty have fallen...

If they did it in a caucus and no one showed up would it make a sound? :think:

THall had a thought or four on Trump...

A blind moron knows that a successful business man has real skills.

I'm sorry for your loss.

...Trump is whipping them at their own game,

Like I said in a blog around here, conservatives have been lazy with rhetoric for the better part of a decade, substituting no for ideas while successfully peddling suspicion, contempt and hostility toward government. Trump is just the natural conclusion to that, winning for one simple reason, he can out sell the pack of them. That's his genius. And as long as the selling isn't running into particular teeth it will work. He was tailor made to win the party nomination.

In the wake of the Christie/Carson capitulations and the Sessions sidle...

Trump will start picking up more big endorsements

Through the political barter system? Sounds...noble. :reals:

"Molasses to endorsements to jooooobs!" :guitar:

Noted one of the more truly remarkable come from his behind, last minute victory switcheroos in TOL history...

we are not idiots: -chrysostom-Timotheos-theophilus -annabenedetti

Waaaiiit a minute. Didn't you, for a very long time, call people out for not voting republican regardless? lain: I'm pretty sure I remember you giving people the business for voting for anyone who wasn't the party candidate. So....fair weather politics?

That led to...

wait a minute-didn't you one time long ago take an unequivocal stand on something

Any number of them. And I may have changed my mind on one...but I don't recall excoriating others about not making my choice. You made a serious business of it. Now you're just getting a little of it in your teeth.

Why?

Because you're following the same approach in a different direction. Now people are idiots for doing what you'd have called them idiots for not doing.

Clete picked up chrys' fallen flag though and ran around with it...

You will not vote for Donald Trump and it won't make one damn bit of difference, except that it will help Hillary Clinton win.

That was chrys' line of thinking for years around here, until Trump came along. He was wrong then and you are now.

Everyone wants to pretend that their vote is some moral action. It isn't. If you want to talk morality, you aught not have the right to vote at all! God never endorsed a democratic form or even a representative form of government where people elect their rulers. Authority to rule is not rightly derived from the consent of the people, its delegated by God Himself.

Your mistake here is to believe that the form of government, instead of the authority of government, is God declared.

...Your moral duty, if you have one at all in this context, is to cast your vote for the MOST conservative (i.e. just) person who can win and thus bolster the morally preservative effect that the least evil person will have on our society in contrast to the more corrosive effect the worse of two evils would be.

Your mistake there is in conflating conservatism and morality. They aren't necessarily joined, though they can be. The same is true for liberalism. It depends on where you take the fundamental principles.

Noted the problem in Cruc's would you choose to save your four year old or a fetus skewed hypo...

What does it matter? It's a question that has one honest answer- and three dishonest ones.

Horsefeathers...even if everyone made the same [choice], it would evidence our bias in value, not the value of the bias.

Abortion being commensurate to murder is a lie in which all people intrinsically know. It is a false reproach to abortion.

Abortion is willful taking of a human life without just cause. And it's premeditated, to tie a ribbon around it. How do you define murder?

He never really did...or tried to.



Then...

You could tell Town the sky is blue and he'd find away to tell you that you are not only wrong, but stupid for even thinking it.

Rather, I reason my way into arguments and am always content to examine one by that light. I mostly have found that people who don't and aren't similarly at ease with the prospect, whatever their claims, tend to be the sort who've felt their way into a position.

And...

Realizing that rehashing a cause that has already achieved it's goal is simply subtle misandry- is not 'irrational' or 'misogynist'. If you disagree, however, it is BECAUSE you are an irrational misandrist-

Not necessarily, but I can see how it would help.

or in Town's case a man who embraces his chains

You can call a rock a cheese, but you're going to break your teeth if you try to chew it.

La was back with, well...

LIFE!!

Who Told You Fools that there was a Difference between Plants and Animals; Or that there is Both; - "Plants AND Animals"?? ---- THERE IS NOT BUT ONE Form of LIFE, And that IS "L-I-F-E"!!!!!!! - Christ IS THE ""T-R-E-E"" Of Life!!! -- Is Christ a Plant or AN Animal?? - S-T-U-P-I-D!!!!!!!!

Do you call everyone you meet by the same name?

If you don't then you understand part of the point. Beyond keeping us from pointing/gesturing in a helpless frustration and maybe yelling "Marklar!" at every object we see, words also allow us to group things by significant similarities and distinguish along significant divergences.

So we say dog for this and snake for that and we say animal for warm blooded creatures and not for trees, etc. I don't think anyone is confused about every living thing being alive. lain:

Tomorrow? More fun with Cruc on politics and religion and someone hits a horse...no, really. :shocked:

 

[Eeset]

You forgot to use crayons!

 

[Crucible]

Liberal logic:

If you can't put me in a time machine and take me to the exact moment you claim happened, then not only do I not believe you, but you are a LIAR.

Muslims celebrating a terrorist attack? That NEVER happens

(Except: every. . single. . time)

 

[Town Heretic]

Liberal logic:

First, still not a liberal, which means only one of us is intentionally attempting to mislead anyone. (hint: it's you) lain:

If you can't put me in a time machine and take me to the exact moment you claim happened, then not only do I not believe you, but you are a LIAR.

I never called you a liar. What I did say was:

I'm sorry that you need proof of Muslims celebrating 9/11.

I'd imagine any number of Muslims were happy about 9/11. What I asked you for was for a citation to source on the photo. A way to establish its legitimacy in relation to its claim.

A picture will not do, and a source will not either.

The picture doesn't have any context that supports the claim written into it. I can't look at the crowd and tell where it was taken, when it was taken, or the religious views of those people in it. That's why I asked for context. Because reasonable people do that sort of thing, fail to simply assume it is what it is advertised as because someone said it and posted it on the internet.

Guess what you never did...I'll wait while you work up the next unfounded accusation or whatnot. lain:


For the rest of you and whoever else is sober...Today's Gazette found here (link). :e4e:

 

[Crucible]

Guess what you never did...I'll wait while you work up the next unfounded accusation or whatnot. lain:

You have a denialist approach, asking me to provide a 'citation' to prove that Trump- along with hundreds of other people- saw Muslims celebrate 9/11.

Provide a citation..
OF WHAT

It was back in 2001.

Professional liars and deniers, that's all it amounts to with you all. Sitting there making others out to be dishonest or unpopular because you can't accept simple things- ever notice that Trump isn't affected by it? Because a lot of the country recognizes yall's nonsense.

 

[WizardofOz]

Not even Trump could prove it so how are you supposed to? It's obvious, you'll believe anything that supports your narrative.

 

[Crucible]

Not even Trump could prove it so how are you supposed to? It's obvious, you'll believe anything that supports your narrative.

There is no basis to see it as 'unbelievable' or requiring 'proof'. This is something that most people assumed as true because it is something that happens with every terrorist attack.

It's OBVIOUS that those as yourself will deny anything that doesn't support your narrative.

It happened, go be skeptical within the confines of your mind but don't go be a slandering fool and imply dishonesty on someone else' part just because YOU DON'T LIKE THE PERSON WHO SAID IT- which is all it really is about.

 

[WizardofOz]

There is no basis to see it as 'unbelievable' or requiring 'proof'. This is something that most people assumed as true because it is something that happens with every terrorist attack.

So there is no proof or even evidence that it occurred yet you believe it. Why?

It's OBVIOUS that those as yourself will deny anything that doesn't support your narrative.

I expect claims to offer corresponding evidence that said claim is true, especially when actual evidence suggests it isn't.

It happened

No it didn't. See how easy it was to prove you wrong?

go be skeptical within the confines of your mind but don't go be a slandering fool and imply dishonesty on someone else' part just because YOU DON'T LIKE SOMEBODY- which is all it really is about.

No, it's really about expecting claims to be supported by even a shred of evidence.

I'm sorry that you lack even a basic standard.

Did you know the moon landing was faked and that the moon is actually made of cheese? Don't be a fool by being skeptical.

 

[Crucible]

So there is no proof or even evidence that it occurred yet you believe it. Why?

You don't need forensic proof of what is otherwise almost certainly true to believe something.

What kind of proof would you need, exactly? Analysis and time stamp? Please tell me what is compelling enough about the claim to warrant that kind of back work.

Did you know the moon landing was faked and that the moon is actually made of cheese?

Every terrorist attack is marked by Muslims celebrating somewhere in the 1st World- you all denied it to imply Trump as being dishonest, not because anyone actually needs proof of it.

So with that, I'm done with this worthless discussion. You know it's true, and you will deny it, but you know what- that's you all's sole tactic and that's all you got with this election.

 

[Town Heretic]

You have a denialist approach, asking me to provide a 'citation' to prove that Trump- along with hundreds of other people- saw Muslims celebrate 9/11.

Provide a citation..OF WHAT

The source of the photo. Something that authenticates what it's of, who is there, where it was taken, when it was taken. I could take a photo of a party and slap claims across it, post it on the internet. Anyone could. No one should just accept it because it fits their world view. It's reasonable to ask someone making a claim to provide proof for it. And as it sits, that photo isn't proof of anything.

It was back in 2001.

Surprisingly, a lot of video footage, reports of the written variety, etc. is still existent now from that remote time period. [/end sarcasm]

Professional liars and deniers, that's all it amounts to with you all.

You may or may not be an idiot, but when you keep posting that sort of screed you just might as well be.

Sitting there making others out to be dishonest

No, that's you. The guy who keeps calling everyone who doesn't buy into an unsubstantiated claim that very thing. I'm just saying that a claim like that requires proof and that photo is only proof of itself, not of any claim slapped onto it by who knows.

 

[WizardofOz]

You don't need forensic proof of what is otherwise almost certainly true to believe something.

What kind of proof would you need, exactly?

Evidence. Any proof. If it was seen on tv the clips are out there. The chief of police of NJ says it didn't happen.

You showed a picture of a bunch of Caucasians throwing the peace sign and claimed it was Arab Americans celebrating 9/11.

How gullible are you?

That's what you all sound like when you deny very simple things that happen all the time

See, you don't even require evidence. You heard a claim and just believe it.

There's a word for that.

Sucker

 

[Crucible]

Evidence. Any proof. If it was seen on tv the clips are out there. The chief of police of NJ says it didn't happen.

You seem to have forgotten the day of 9/11 to suppose what you just stated.

And
The chief of police is not the All Seeing Eye.

You showed a picture of a bunch of Caucasians throwing the peace sign and claimed it was Arab Americans celebrating 9/11.

There were Middle Eastern people in that picture, coupled with presumably white sympathizers.
You can't even be honest with that. And you wonder why conservatives assume you to be the kind of people they see you as.

How gullible are you?

Says the person who thinks Muslims haven't celebrated every single terrorist attack of the past fifteen years.

See, you don't even require evidence. You heard a claim and just believe it.

I require evidence of things that reasonably demand it. I'm not a denialist moron- like some people

 

[Town Heretic]

You seem to have forgotten the day of 9/11 to suppose what you just stated.
The chief of police is not the All Seeing Eye.

As between the chief of police of an area where it was supposed to have happened and an anonymous someone publishing a photo that isn't self-authenticating, only someone knee deep in fantasy would side with the latter.

There were Middle Eastern people in that picture, coupled with presumably white sympathizers.

You literally can't know that from a photo.

You can't even be honest with that.

You have a problem so deep and so pervasive that you're reading in whatever suits it. Until you produce something like corroboration for the photo that's the only way to read it.

I require evidence of things that reasonably demand it. I'm not a denialist moron- like some people

No, you're a whole other sort of moron, apparently. If you want to talk any more about this you'll have to take it back to the thread where you ran from every other response and rebuttal I wasted time presenting to your blind wall of a mind.

For the rest of you and whoever else is sober...Today's Gazette found here (link).

 

[annabenedetti]

Evidence. Any proof. If it was seen on tv the clips are out there. The chief of police of NJ says it didn't happen.

You showed a picture of a bunch of Caucasians throwing the peace sign and claimed it was Arab Americans celebrating 9/11.

How gullible are you?



See, you don't even require evidence. You heard a claim and just believe it.

There's a word for that.

Sucker

Meme-ing is believing. :chuckle: