Brexit

[huKSer]

 

#idiot

 

 

Donald Trump is tweeting about Scotland and Brexit. It’s as ignorant as you’d expect.

 

 

This tweet is yet another example, as if we needed one, of how Trump is often uninformed on the major public policy issues of the day. Scotland isn’t the reason the Brexit vote succeeded. Far from it: 62 percent of Scots voted to remain in the EU.

 

Beyond all that, the idea of Scotland “taking their country back” is a fraught and complicated one. In 2014, Scotland held a referendum on whether to leave the United Kingdom, and the measure failed.

 

Not being a Trump apologist, but the guy doesn't have a good grasp of the English language. He could have been referring to Great Britain as a whole after the second sentence. Like "I just got to Sacramento. They are going crazy [in Cleveland] about winning the NBA."

 

Or he's an idiot

[HuskerNation1]

 

 

The Democrats are slapping America in the face with their buffoonery. Republicans, and their mouthpiece Fox News, are chopping America's arm off with theirs.

 

Both actions are assaults on the people. They are not alike, and continuing with this "both sides do it" lie only digs the hole deeper and deeper.

 

I'm not defending Democrats to anyone. Stop defending Republicans.

But you do defend Democrats often in these debates. Just go back and look at many of your posts. In the gun control debate you claimed that Democrats do not use fear to sell their ideas. Americans continue to feel this country is on the wrong track and the career politicians are to blame, just as the British decided yesterday. Trump represents those tired of both parties and I suspect he will win the Independent vote significantly.

 

Quote the posts where I've done this. Pretty simple to prove.

 

 

Try response 1613 in the Republican Thread where you argued that Hillary's negligence and failure to listen to Ambassador Stevens for an entire year prior to the Benghazi attack was comparable to Bush's response in Katrina, an event that even surprised government officials that the levee would not hold.

 

I also saw a response from you claiming that the GOP and NRA used fear-mongering, where as the Democrats do not resort to that tactic. Did you not make that claim?

[knapplc]

 

 

 

The Democrats are slapping America in the face with their buffoonery. Republicans, and their mouthpiece Fox News, are chopping America's arm off with theirs.

 

Both actions are assaults on the people. They are not alike, and continuing with this "both sides do it" lie only digs the hole deeper and deeper.

 

I'm not defending Democrats to anyone. Stop defending Republicans.

But you do defend Democrats often in these debates. Just go back and look at many of your posts. In the gun control debate you claimed that Democrats do not use fear to sell their ideas. Americans continue to feel this country is on the wrong track and the career politicians are to blame, just as the British decided yesterday. Trump represents those tired of both parties and I suspect he will win the Independent vote significantly.

 

Quote the posts where I've done this. Pretty simple to prove.

 

 

Try response 1613 in the Republican Thread where you argued that Hillary's negligence and failure to listen to Ambassador Stevens for an entire year prior to the Benghazi attack was comparable to Bush's response in Katrina, an event that even surprised government officials that the levee would not hold.

 

I also saw a response from you claiming that the GOP and NRA used fear-mongering, where as the Democrats do not resort to that tactic. Did you not make that claim?

 

 

I did not make a blanket statement that Democrats do not use fear-mongering.

 

Here is post #1613 in the Repub Debate thread:

 

 

 

 

Bush's response to Katrina was total negligence to a very specific duty - providing aid to citizens in distress. The response was muddled and delayed, and people died.

 

Just about any way you parse it, it's comparable. I can't imagine why anyone would think it isn't - except for the fact that Bush was a Republican, and Hillary is a Democrat.

 

 

It does not say what you're claiming.

 

What you may be confused about is what I defend. I defend facts. I presented facts, they are readily available online via simple google searches which many, many people in this forum continually urge you to perform, and the unwillingness to arm yourself with facts - not politically-inspired rhetoric - is not evidence that I "defend Democrats."

 

Defense of facts is not a shortcoming. It only seems to become a problem when those facts don't fit someone's agenda.

[HuskerNation1]

 

 

 

 

The Democrats are slapping America in the face with their buffoonery. Republicans, and their mouthpiece Fox News, are chopping America's arm off with theirs.

 

Both actions are assaults on the people. They are not alike, and continuing with this "both sides do it" lie only digs the hole deeper and deeper.

 

I'm not defending Democrats to anyone. Stop defending Republicans.

But you do defend Democrats often in these debates. Just go back and look at many of your posts. In the gun control debate you claimed that Democrats do not use fear to sell their ideas. Americans continue to feel this country is on the wrong track and the career politicians are to blame, just as the British decided yesterday. Trump represents those tired of both parties and I suspect he will win the Independent vote significantly.

 

Quote the posts where I've done this. Pretty simple to prove.

 

 

Try response 1613 in the Republican Thread where you argued that Hillary's negligence and failure to listen to Ambassador Stevens for an entire year prior to the Benghazi attack was comparable to Bush's response in Katrina, an event that even surprised government officials that the levee would not hold.

 

I also saw a response from you claiming that the GOP and NRA used fear-mongering, where as the Democrats do not resort to that tactic. Did you not make that claim?

 

 

I did not make a blanket statement that Democrats do not use fear-mongering.

 

Here is post #1613 in the Repub Debate thread:

 

 

 

 

Bush's response to Katrina was total negligence to a very specific duty - providing aid to citizens in distress. The response was muddled and delayed, and people died.

 

Just about any way you parse it, it's comparable. I can't imagine why anyone would think it isn't - except for the fact that Bush was a Republican, and Hillary is a Democrat.

 

 

It does not say what you're claiming.

 

What you may be confused about is what I defend. I defend facts. I presented facts, they are readily available online via simple google searches which many, many people in this forum continually urge you to perform, and the unwillingness to arm yourself with facts - not politically-inspired rhetoric - is not evidence that I "defend Democrats."

 

Defense of facts is not a shortcoming. It only seems to become a problem when those facts don't fit someone's agenda.

 

 

The statement you posted is your opinion that there is an equivalency between Bush's Katrina response and Hillary's Benghazi response. It's just my observation that you tend to bash Trump or Republicans more often than Democrats. It's no different than the statement you just made that the Right has moved so far right, while acting as though the left has not moved so far left. Both sides have their extremes, and highlighting only one is picking sides and not presenting facts.

[knapplc]

The statement you posted is your opinion that there is an equivalency between Bush's Katrina response and Hillary's Benghazi response. It's just my observation that you tend to bash Trump or Republicans more often than Democrats. It's no different than the statement you just made that the Right has moved so far right, while acting as though the left has not moved so far left. Both sides have their extremes, and highlighting only one is picking sides and not presenting facts.

I do not think there's an equivalency between the two, and I think I made that very clear. Benghazi, tragedy though it was, pales in comparison to what happened with Katrina. I'm not going to rehash that whole conversation, so if you want to relive it, it's in that thread.

 

I think you're right that I bash Trump more than Democrats. Trump would make an atrocious president, and the fact that he had the temerity to run is proof that he deserves bashing. I think Obama has been a good president, he'll be remembered well (although not perfectly, and some of his mistakes will take a while to fix), and in general I think Trump is a disaster for the Republicans. I am not alone in that, and thinking either of those things doesn't make me liberal. Moderates, middle-of-the-road guys, can like Obama and not like Trump without being liberal whackos.

 

The Right has moved further right than the Left has moved left. As the country becomes more liberal in views on marriage, equal rights, and loses its interest in religion - all traditional bastions of the Right, those on the Right have circled their wagons. The rhetoric has become even more pointed, and it's hurting the country. I see that from both sides, but the Right is doing more damage to the country. Things that move the country forward like allowing Gays to marry (which is a no-brainer!) or universal healthcare (another no-brainer!) are being resisted by people from the Right. These aren't liberal agendas, they're simple, basic human rights - FAR more obvious rights than the "right" to carry a gun.

 

The Left has gotten Leftier, yes. But not so much as the Right has gotten Rightier. If you have an elbow scrape and a broken arm, which one gets more attention? The Right is the broken arm today. Maybe the Left will be tomorrow.

 

This is a Nebraska sports website. By its nature, it's populated with a lot of very conservative people. Some more than others, and some not so well informed. Therefore the moderates on this site tend to spend a lot of time debunking myths and nonsense from the far Right.

 

But here's the deal - if this was a Cal Bears website, it'd be populated by more Lefties. Real ones, not me & zoogs that people THINK are Lefties. If there were more Lefties here, spouting Lefty nonsense, as a Moderate I'd be debunking their nonsense, too. It's just the nature of the conversations we have here, and the population on this site, that makes it seem like some of us are "Defending Democrats."

 

Part of the problem is, you've only been talking to me since 2013, well into the Obama regime. There was a lot of nonsense posted about Bush on various message boards, and here, when he was in office. I debunked that nonsense, too. Facts are facts.

[cm husker]

Not sure this is readable by non-subscribers, but here's an interesting oped explaining why parliament may be able to ignore the narrow popular vote.

 

http://blogs.ft.com/david-allen-green/2016/06/14/can-the-united-kingdom-government-legally-disregard-a-vote-for-brexit/

 

If they do have the ability, should they exercise it?

[TITANIC VS LUSITANIA]

 

The statement you posted is your opinion that there is an equivalency between Bush's Katrina response and Hillary's Benghazi response. It's just my observation that you tend to bash Trump or Republicans more often than Democrats. It's no different than the statement you just made that the Right has moved so far right, while acting as though the left has not moved so far left. Both sides have their extremes, and highlighting only one is picking sides and not presenting facts.

I do not think there's an equivalency between the two, and I think I made that very clear. Benghazi, tragedy though it was, pales in comparison to what happened with Katrina. I'm not going to rehash that whole conversation, so if you want to relive it, it's in that thread.

 

I think you're right that I bash Trump more than Democrats. Trump would make an atrocious president, and the fact that he had the temerity to run is proof that he deserves bashing. I think Obama has been a good president, he'll be remembered well (although not perfectly, and some of his mistakes will take a while to fix), and in general I think Trump is a disaster for the Republicans. I am not alone in that, and thinking either of those things doesn't make me liberal. Moderates, middle-of-the-road guys, can like Obama and not like Trump without being liberal whackos.

 

The Right has moved further right than the Left has moved left. As the country becomes more liberal in views on marriage, equal rights, and loses its interest in religion - all traditional bastions of the Right, those on the Right have circled their wagons. The rhetoric has become even more pointed, and it's hurting the country. I see that from both sides, but the Right is doing more damage to the country. Things that move the country forward like allowing Gays to marry (which is a no-brainer!) or universal healthcare (another no-brainer!) are being resisted by people from the Right. These aren't liberal agendas, they're simple, basic human rights - FAR more obvious rights than the "right" to carry a gun.

 

The Left has gotten Leftier, yes. But not so much as the Right has gotten Rightier. If you have an elbow scrape and a broken arm, which one gets more attention? The Right is the broken arm today. Maybe the Left will be tomorrow.

 

This is a Nebraska sports website. By its nature, it's populated with a lot of very conservative people. Some more than others, and some not so well informed. Therefore the moderates on this site tend to spend a lot of time debunking myths and nonsense from the far Right.

 

But here's the deal - if this was a Cal Bears website, it'd be populated by more Lefties. Real ones, not me & zoogs that people THINK are Lefties. If there were more Lefties here, spouting Lefty nonsense, as a Moderate I'd be debunking their nonsense, too. It's just the nature of the conversations we have here, and the population on this site, that makes it seem like some of us are "Defending Democrats."

 

Part of the problem is, you've only been talking to me since 2013, well into the Obama regime. There was a lot of nonsense posted about Bush on various message boards, and here, when he was in office. I debunked that nonsense, too. Facts are facts.

 

what is your criticism of the Left?

[Bigred_inSD]

Texas is thinking of leaving the union again. So regardless of how you feel about Britix some good has came from it.

[TITANIC VS LUSITANIA]

 

 

 

Isn't what you just posted, in application to the US, considered fear-mongering as well?

Explain.

 

Well, first off, I will apologize I am not one who is good with words, or putting thoughts into words. Also, I am coming in blind, and don't know what your political conviction is. Do you mind if I ask?

 

How you came off was "if you listen to fear-mongerers (which you had qualified in a previous post to be specifically Trup, Cruz, Fox News, the NRA...in other words, the political right...). This would be bad, because it would set our society back to the stone age both economically and especially intellectually."

 

This is classic left-wing fear-mongerning, isn't it?

 

 

My political affiliation (Independent) is irrelevant to facts.

 

What I see are people choosing teams and sticking with those teams for a lifetime regardless of how far left or right those teams move. The Democrats and Republicans of the 1980s don't exist today, yet (for example) Republicans consistently bill themselves as the party of Reagan and invoke his name frequently. Modern Republicans decry nearly everything Obama does, despite the fact that he's more a Reagan Republican than a modern Democrat. He has a "D" behind his name, therefore he's a "leftist" or "liberal" which are terms that have been so massaged that they have almost no meaning.

 

Moderates, like me, have not changed. By definition we are always moderate. The problem is that the Right has moved SO FAR to the right that anything near moderate looks left-wing to them.

 

This is human nature no ? You never changed your mind, always been a moderate... are you not the same? People have to live with their decisions and so they justify them, whether they are mistakes or not.

Its funny, I actually have changed stances on politics over time. I must be exceptional in your view.

And I am genuinely curious as to why you think Obama is so similar to Regan ? I am sure you have some cold facts, and not just an opinion ?

I really don't know, I wasn't alive in the Regan era...

[TITANIC VS LUSITANIA]

dp

[cm husker]

 

 

Isn't what you just posted, in application to the US, considered fear-mongering as well?

Explain.

 

Well, first off, I will apologize I am not one who is good with words, or putting thoughts into words. Also, I am coming in blind, and don't know what your political conviction is. Do you mind if I ask?

 

How you came off was "if you listen to fear-mongerers (which you had qualified in a previous post to be specifically Trup, Cruz, Fox News, the NRA...in other words, the political right...). This would be bad, because it would set our society back to the stone age both economically and especially intellectually."

 

This is classic left-wing fear-mongerning, isn't it?

 

 

 

Appealing to intellectualism is literally the opposite of fear mongering, whether it's economic intellectualism (espoused by traditionally "republican" people) or scientific intellectualism, which used to be espoused in various ways by both parties, but has unfortunately been ceded to "democrats" of late.

[TITANIC VS LUSITANIA]

 

 

 

Isn't what you just posted, in application to the US, considered fear-mongering as well?

Explain.

 

Well, first off, I will apologize I am not one who is good with words, or putting thoughts into words. Also, I am coming in blind, and don't know what your political conviction is. Do you mind if I ask?

 

How you came off was "if you listen to fear-mongerers (which you had qualified in a previous post to be specifically Trup, Cruz, Fox News, the NRA...in other words, the political right...). This would be bad, because it would set our society back to the stone age both economically and especially intellectually."

 

This is classic left-wing fear-mongerning, isn't it?

 

 

 

Appealing to intellectualism is literally the opposite of fear mongering, whether it's economic intellectualism (espoused by traditionally "republican" people) or scientific intellectualism, which used to be espoused in various ways by both parties, but has unfortunately been ceded to "democrats" of late.

 

To paraphrase what he is saying even further, "if we democratically concede power to the Right, the population will become subject to much foolishness. Do you really want to live in such a horrible country?"

That was the appeal (as I took it) which is a method of fear-mongering, typically used by the left.

On the Right there are other similar tactics of fear...like "do you want to live in Cuba?"

Haha thats a good one too.

[knapplc]

This is human nature no ? You never changed your mind, always been a moderate... are you not the same? People have to live with their decisions and so they justify them, whether they are mistakes or not.

Its funny, I actually have changed stances on politics over time. I must be exceptional in your view.

And I am genuinely curious as to why you think Obama is so similar to Regan ? I am sure you have some cold facts, and not just an opinion ?

I really don't know, I wasn't alive in the Regan era...

Is there an end to these questions, or a goal, or a point? This is a pretty one-sided conversation.

[Creighton Duke]

^^^

this conversation doesn't have to do with Brexit, not even loosely. Take it to another thread (Hitting the Links? Bump When Drunk?) Thanks!

[knapplc]

^^^

this conversation doesn't have to do with Brexit, not even loosely. Take it to another thread (Hitting the Links? Bump When Drunk?) Thanks!

Agreed. It's become "quiz knapplc" and it's boring. I wouldn't mind if a Mod moved all of it to some tangent thread, or its own thread.