waterfield wrote:

To me its simple. You always vote for the lesser of two evils-always-because if you don’t your voting FOR the greater evil-even if you don’t vote at all. Sometimes stuff is just so simple.

————–

So you are conceding Hillary is indeed a “lesser Evil”
and not a good candidate for the Presidency?

w
v

I have heard-tell that ravens are carrying messages, indicating
that Pa Ram is going to make a run for King of the North.

Just rumors at this point, but still.

w
v

zn wrote:

wv wrote:

zn wrote:

In the real world, I have to deal with enough of that as is. In my social/work world, I am surrounded by both Clinton nazis who don’t get or tolerate dissent, and Sanders nazis who don’t get or tolerate “selling out.” Well a pox on both their houses. In this election, I am both a dissenter and a sell out. Which only means I can’t talk about it with anyone cause they are all diehards. I nod and smile.

————-
Thats all well and good, but other than W, i cant think of anyone on this
board who would care whether you did the “lesser evil” thing or the “fuck the Duplicats” thing. No-one here has ever called you a sell-out or a dissenter, etc. People have just shared what ‘they’ are gonna do. Thats how ive seen it, anyway. I havent seen anybody trying to ‘persuade’ anybody about how to vote — cept, W. (and we all like W, so even that dont matter)

w
v

I know. I was just getting in some extra-curricular griping. That wasn’t supposed to be a comment on the posters here. I was suggesting that my real-world demeanor was spilling over, and that in recognition of that, I wasn’t going to get into election discussions. I didn’t “blame” that on anyone but me.

—————

Ok, but i can tell you I bet no-one on this board
thinks you were being all “MOD-heavy” in any way. This aint got
nuthin to do with Mod or Not-Mod.

I get PMS all the time, and I have to take a break from
pol-threads from time to time. So, if you need to take a break for a while, fine,
but there’s no need to make it permanent.

I mean dont take any blood oaths or anything. Dont go
and join the Night Watch.

w
v

zn wrote:

In the real world, I have to deal with enough of that as is. In my social/work world, I am surrounded by both Clinton nazis who don’t get or tolerate dissent, and Sanders nazis who don’t get or tolerate “selling out.” Well a pox on both their houses. In this election, I am both a dissenter and a sell out. Which only means I can’t talk about it with anyone cause they are all diehards. I nod and smile.

————-
Thats all well and good, but other than W, i cant think of anyone on this
board who would care whether you did the “lesser evil” thing or the “fuck the Duplicats” thing. No-one here has ever called you a sell-out or a dissenter, etc. People have just shared what ‘they’ are gonna do. Thats how ive seen it, anyway. I havent seen anybody trying to ‘persuade’ anybody about how to vote — cept, W. (and we all like W, so even that dont matter)

w
v

I think its important to separate two issues:
Monsanto, being one,
and GMO’s being the other.

Monsanto is a typical mega-corporate-predator,
that puts profit over people.

Whether GMO’s are harmful or not,
is a separate issue.

I dunno whether GMO’s are harmful or not.

w
v

zn wrote:

Trump’s Outrageous Attacks Against Father of Slain Muslim Soldier Aren’t Gaffes—It’s How He Talks to His Base
Among Trump supporters, white nationalist sentiment far outstrips allegiance to the U.S. military.

Adele M. Stan / AlterNet

…In fact, Jensen said, any backlash against Trump by the political or military establishments will only push his supporters to rally around him in a “cult-like” manner.

In other words, Trump’s attacks on the Khans will only serve to build his brand among those already leaning his way.

—————————-

“…..he told George Stephanopoulos on ABC News’ This Week that, hey, he had sacrificed plenty by creating all kinds of jobs and having “tremendous success.”
…Trump, who took three draft deferments during the Vietnam War,….”

He’s got an interesting definition of ‘sacrifice’ don’t he.

Anyway, how do you get 3 deferments ?

w
v

C.Eastwood: “…I’d say get to work and start being more understanding of everybody—instead of calling everybody names, start being more understanding.”

What do you think he meant by that?

w
v

Well, i would ‘guess’ technology is certainly a ‘part’ of the reason
jobs are often lost. And some thinkers seem to be saying when the robot-revolution really gets going a TON of jobs are gonna be lost.

It will be one of the great issues of our time, i would think.

w
v

nittany ram wrote:

wv wrote:

I’m still with Jill. My interpretation is similar to some of the folks that commented after the article. I think basically she’s saying “lets take these questions/concerns seriously, and not just blow them off, and lets do more research on these issues.” And i agree with that approach. I also dont have a problem with her view of computers/corporations/profit/schools.

w
v

That’s fine. There are still more issues in which I agree with Jill than disagree.

But this fear of wifi stuff is ridiculous. The incidence rate of brain cancer is no higher now than prior to the incidence of wifi. And it hasn’t been ‘blown off’. Countless studies have shown there is no link. As pervasive as wifi is today, if it caused cancer, there would be a huge increase in cases. But that hasn’t happened. This is not a question that should be continue to be taken seriously because it simply isn’t supported by data.

Should we continue to spend time and resources determining whether the Earth is round because some people continue to take that question seriously?

—————-

I dont think we should spend time/money on determining whether the Earth is round. I have no problem with spending time/money on checking out aspects of Wi-Fi and its possible effects on life-forms. I know nothing about the wi-fi issue btw. This is the first I’ve heard of it.

If i have to choose between a Green-Partier who is a bit overly cautious or a bit wary of vaccines/wi-fi/whatever, but who will stop the deadly War On the Poor and the Corporate War on the Biosphere — and Hillary/Trump — I’ll take the Green-Partier every time.

Blah blah blah, politics, blah. Not trying to convince/persuade. Just a post here and there, sharing my ‘own’ small, personal, subjective view.

btw, when i was camping i saw a swarm of yellow swallow-tail butterflies
have a little conference on a patch of sand near a river. Must have been
about fifty of them. Just sitting there, all together in a circle. I think
they were talking about the election.

w
v

“…Trump also voiced concern Tuesday that the election would be rigged in November.

“I’m talking about at the voter booth – I mean we’ve seen a lot of things over the years,” Trump told Sinclair reporter Scott Thuman. “And now, without the IDs, the voter IDs, and all the things going on – and some bad court cases have come down.”

Trump provided no evidence of planned voter fraud. “I just hear things, and I just feel it,” he said…”
————————-

He just feels things.

Four years of Hillary is what
I’m feelin. Sigh.

w
v

nittany ram wrote:

It wouldn’t accomplish much to lecture him about zoology and paleontology and evolution and point out we’re not monkeys.

Actually, humans are talking monkeys. Unlike the outdated Linnean taxonomic hierarchies modern taxonomic systems are based on evolutionary history so a named group would include the common ancestor and all of its descendants. Since humans are apes and apes are descended from a monkey progenitor, then humans are also monkeys. Technically, we’re all sarcopterygii (lobe-finned fish) as well, since this group gave rise to the tetrapods which is the group that includes all reptiles, birds and mammals.

So not only are humans talking monkeys, we’re also talking lobe-finned fish…technically speaking. Obviously it’s usually not useful to talk about humans in these terms but we are sarcopterygii.

———

I can trace my family all the way back to a small pool of primordial ooze,
in the Naples Italy region. Just so you know.

Where did ‘life’ come from Mr Science?

w
v

canadaram wrote:

I see that the Jets released Zac Stacy today. If the Rams want to replace Mason I wonder if they would go back that direction. I’m a Cunningham fan and I am encouraged by Malcolm Brown. Aside from the scouting reports that I have read I don’t know what the Rams have in Aaron Green. Anyway, sounds like there might be a spot up for grabs in the backfield.

———————

Good old Zac Stacy. What a strange career. The guy really impressed
me that one year. He just bowled defenders over, and powered his way
downfield. Seemed to have good vision. Had some S.Jackson in him.
I thought he was gonna be a good-not-great-RB.

And then rather quickly it all seemed evaporate.

w
v

waterfield wrote:

This is the type of hyperbole that turns good people off. Good people who can actually make a change for the betterment of people who have little. No one -not even Trump or Hillary-is “against” the poor. No one believes these people represent a threat. There is no “WAR” against people who are poor. When people hear these ridiculous words they automatically tune out. Of course there are policies and even laws that adversely impact those who have little. There always have been. And we need to elect those who will actively help those in need along with our own personal work. But there is no “war” against the poor in the sense that we intentionally wish harm to those who we perceive as poor. Neither Hillary nor Trump have any ill will toward those less fortunate. “War against the poor” language does more harm than good because it takes a very serious issue and turns it into pure childish nonsense.

——————
Well, we disagree on that Waterfield.

No big thing, but we have fundamental disagreements on Politics/Economics.

I think the Corporotacracy that we live in, is destroying the poor. You, apparently, do not think that. We’ve gone round and round on this for years, i am not gonna say the same thing for the gazillionth time. We just disagree.

Hillary is going to win. Be happy.

w
v

• This reply was modified 10 years, 3 months ago by wv.

“…a group of six conglomerates who control 90 percent of the media in America. This results in biased or incomplete information trickling down into the offices of smaller publications with fewer investigative resources…”

If i was gonna try to describe America in ten sentences, to a visiting Extra Terrestrial,
that might be one of the ten sentences I’d pick.

w
v