## The Abdicate President

For discussions of culture, politics, economics, sociology, law, business and any other topic that falls under the social science remit.

### Re: The Abdicate President

Silhouette wrote:
obsrvr524 wrote:
Urwrongx1000 wrote:You are seriously criticizing Trump for going against the Establishment, as-if you or any other prospect could have done better?

I think creating those kind of people was a serious campaign strategy (and they still lost )

Urwrongx1000 wrote:Are you pro-establishment or not?! Don't answer, you're obviously a Democrat-Socialist-Communist, so you are Pro-Establishment whether you want to admit it or not.

I don't think he is even that much. He appears to be merely a dreg who got hypnotized into TDS because of his willingness, even wantingness, to hate something and get others to do the same. I don't think he would get off his ass to actually vote.

There's so much wrong here, it's hard to tell who this could possibly apply to. Certainly not me, but from process of elimination I guess it was intended to?

Oh dear. I have to apologize.

I thought he was talking about Mr R. and my comments were with that in mind.

Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

You have been observed.
Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
It's just same Satanism as always -
• separate the bottom from the top,
• the left from the right,
• the light from the dark, and
• blame each for the sins of the other
• - until they beg you to take charge.
• -- but "you" have been observed --
obsrvr524
Philosopher

Posts: 2439
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

### Re: The Abdicate President

obsrvr524 wrote:Oh dear. I have to apologize.

I thought he was talking about Mr R. and my comments were with that in mind.

Ah, well forgiven of course!
Potentially not even your fault, but mine.

At least it enabled me to get some clarity out with regards to my own position - so not a complete loss overall.

Mr R. is clearly very tongue in cheek, but merely as a stylistic means of communicating certain points with which I have to find myself in agreement. Hopefully this won't illicit a "guilt by association" response, but this is the truth of my political opinion, if such can be tolerated in the spirit of democracy. He's proving to be a relieving counter the the incessant ravings of that other guy.

Silhouette
Philosopher

Posts: 4552
Joined: Tue May 20, 2003 1:27 am
Location: Existence

### Re: The Abdicate President

Silhouette wrote:Hopefully this won't illicit a "guilt by association" response, but this is the truth of my political opinion, if such can be tolerated in the spirit of democracy. He's proving to be a relieving counter the the incessant ravings of that other guy.

Not guilt by association but I do see a similarity. I am pretty certain that you are also a victim of a hypnotized TDS. It is indicated by your extreme vitriol, not your arguments. I have been tempted in the past to ask if you could justify that vitriol but thought it better to wait.

I asked that of Mr Carleas when I first came here. He couldn't justify his vitriol. After I verified that I bowed out.
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

You have been observed.
Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
It's just same Satanism as always -
• separate the bottom from the top,
• the left from the right,
• the light from the dark, and
• blame each for the sins of the other
• - until they beg you to take charge.
• -- but "you" have been observed --
obsrvr524
Philosopher

Posts: 2439
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

### Re: The Abdicate President

obsrvr524 wrote:
Silhouette wrote:Hopefully this won't illicit a "guilt by association" response, but this is the truth of my political opinion, if such can be tolerated in the spirit of democracy. He's proving to be a relieving counter the the incessant ravings of that other guy.

Not guilt by association but I do see a similarity. I am pretty certain that you are also a victim of a hypnotized TDS. It is indicated by your extreme vitriol, not your arguments. I have been tempted in the past to ask if you could justify that vitriol but thought it better to wait.

I asked that of Mr Carleas when I first came here. He couldn't justify his vitriol. After I verified that I bowed out.

Does '(it) Doesn't diagnose us with "TDS" - we despised narcissists and were anti-neo-liberal long before he briefly got into power...' not count?

I do use vitriol to express myself when I feel vitriol, which I freely allow myself to do, but I actively temper this stylistic approach when I do not feel that it is objectively warranted, which I try to communicate via my arguments - whether successfully or otherwise. I'm not really interested in other people telling me about myself - I am authentic to a fault. Just ask me if you're curious, I'll genuinely consider your suspicions and actively try to admit to myself that they're correct to balance my view to the best of my ability. I'm sick of people assuming and insisting they're right when they simply are not. Most people just want to rationalise their instinctual reflexes - I am not most people.

Silhouette
Philosopher

Posts: 4552
Joined: Tue May 20, 2003 1:27 am
Location: Existence

### Re: The Abdicate President

Silhouette wrote:Does '(it) Doesn't diagnose us with "TDS" - we despised narcissists and were anti-neo-liberal long before he briefly got into power...' not count?

Actually no.
Silhouette wrote:I do use vitriol to express myself when I feel vitriol, which I freely allow myself to do, but I actively temper this stylistic approach when I do not feel that it is objectively warranted, which I try to communicate via my arguments - whether successfully or otherwise. I'm not really interested in other people telling me about myself - I am authentic to a fault.

And honestly, they all say that and genuinely believe it. Hypnosis can cause a person to truly believe that 2+2=5. And they will deny any effort to contradict it - usually with seriously angry vitriol or just leaving the room. They feel a deep hatred and fully accept their justifications - "self-righteous indignation".

They really lose the ability to be rational. And it seems to begin affecting more and more decisions they make as time goes on. It really is a disease of the mind and in my mind, it is a sociopathic criminal act to install it into anyone. But when talking about those who have murdered over 60 million of their own in a culture war, it is silly to think a little masochism is of concern to them.

Silhouette wrote:I'm sick of people assuming and insisting they're right when they simply are not. Most people just want to rationalise their instinctual reflexes - I am not most people.

I think the hatred of the hatred, especially within oneself, is a good approach. Allowing yourself to practice or even pretend to be truly angry tempts and strengthens the anger as it finds subtle ways to finally gain its triumph over the mind and control of the soul.

But keep the salt shaker handy. I am just in a mood to let my thoughts roll out.
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

You have been observed.
Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
It's just same Satanism as always -
• separate the bottom from the top,
• the left from the right,
• the light from the dark, and
• blame each for the sins of the other
• - until they beg you to take charge.
• -- but "you" have been observed --
obsrvr524
Philosopher

Posts: 2439
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

### Re: The Abdicate President

Trump should not concede until his Fraud case is accepted.
Urwrongx1000
ILP Legend

Posts: 5308
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

### Re: The Abdicate President

I am reasonably certain that the Hillary/Trump election was also fraudulent in the same ways - just not to such an extreme. But they apparently forgot to ensure the electoral college - really really really pissed them off.
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

You have been observed.
Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
It's just same Satanism as always -
• separate the bottom from the top,
• the left from the right,
• the light from the dark, and
• blame each for the sins of the other
• - until they beg you to take charge.
• -- but "you" have been observed --
obsrvr524
Philosopher

Posts: 2439
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

### Re: The Abdicate President

obsrvr524 wrote:I am reasonably certain that the Hillary/Trump election was also fraudulent in the same ways - just not to such an extreme. But they apparently forgot to ensure the electoral college - really really really pissed them off.

Absolutely, the DNC has been cheating for decades, only this time they had to break the system because Trump outperformed their predictions and broke their Dominion Algorithms.

They exposed themselves publicly, at least one positive result from all of this. The entire MSM establishment is on the side of the Communists, and there are clear reasons for this (because of how "Journalism" is educated throughout the National Colleges and universities).
Urwrongx1000
ILP Legend

Posts: 5308
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

### Re: The Abdicate President

obsrvr524 wrote:
Silhouette wrote:Does '(it) Doesn't diagnose us with "TDS" - we despised narcissists and were anti-neo-liberal long before he briefly got into power...' not count?

Actually no.

What happened to being in a mood to let your thoughts roll out?
Just "Actually no"? That it?
I dunno how else to say it. I don't like guys like Trump, never have, and especially so the more exposure and support they get. Am I not allowed or something? Should I enjoy and support malignant narcissism? Are you going to tell me how I should think and feel about people?

obsrvr524 wrote:And honestly, they all say that and genuinely believe it. Hypnosis can cause a person to truly believe that 2+2=5. And they will deny any effort to contradict it - usually with seriously angry vitriol or just leaving the room. They feel a deep hatred and fully accept their justifications - "self-righteous indignation".

They really lose the ability to be rational. And it seems to begin affecting more and more decisions they make as time goes on. It really is a disease of the mind and in my mind, it is a sociopathic criminal act to install it into anyone. But when talking about those who have murdered over 60 million of their own in a culture war, it is silly to think a little masochism is of concern to them.

Oh yeah, I know saying that and genuinely believing it is the rule and not the exception. I'm not certain there is a reliable way to argue a state of mind, given that it has to be delivered by that same state of mind (with our current levels of technology), like a kind of conflict of interest. I think I have a good case, and that I demonstrate as much. I leave room open for doubt and constantly challenge my case internally on all subjects including this one, and this has been my default mental state for my whole adult life. And the inherent issue here goes both ways - I can no better ensure that the person with whom I'm speaking is capable of confirming the truth of the matter. Feel free to think of me as a sociopathic criminal, and I'll certainly continue to try and detect the faintest hint of one to support your case. I can't stop you from coming to conclusions even if I don't find anything though.
It's easy to accuse others of being hypnotised, huh? Is it as easy to turn that accusation around? Is it easy to constantly uncover it in yourself with full sincerity and merciless objectivity? By now, it is for me.

Do you really pick up "seriously angry vitriol" from me? I figured I've just been liberal with regular vitriol, to be firm and clear with what I find to be unacceptable, such as unjustified certainty in others. That's a big one for me - the root of so much social ill. Hardly classes as anything remotely hateful on my end - but I can't guarantee that translates over the internet. I don't think I've ever failed to matintain rationality here. I agree that actual hate can snowball like we see with Urwrong here. A sad fate, truly, but I just don't feel it towards people's words. I think only actions could draw it out of me, and even then only particularly serious ones.

obsrvr524 wrote:I think the hatred of the hatred, especially within oneself, is a good approach. Allowing yourself to practice or even pretend to be truly angry tempts and strengthens the anger as it finds subtle ways to finally gain its triumph over the mind and control of the soul.

But keep the salt shaker handy. I am just in a mood to let my thoughts roll out.

I dunno, I don't seem to need even hatred of hatred. I just can't muster it even if I try. Contempt, disgust, derision - all easy to let fly like playthings. I admire people who just take all kinds of stupid like it was nothing, and often ponder that it would probably be better if I made more of an effort to be more like I used to be in that regard, but then I remember I can't be arsed.

obsrvr524 wrote:I am reasonably certain that the Hillary/Trump election was also fraudulent in the same ways - just not to such an extreme. But they apparently forgot to ensure the electoral college - really really really pissed them off.

If only the GOP could be so depraved, but they're all unanimously just so gosh-darned good inside. Not one would ever dream of just, y'know, "it's for their own good!" That's a dem sin.

Have you ever considered forensics or detective work as a profession? You seem to really enjoy it, whether or not you'd be any good at it.

Silhouette
Philosopher

Posts: 4552
Joined: Tue May 20, 2003 1:27 am
Location: Existence

### Re: The Abdicate President

Silhouette wrote:
obsrvr524 wrote:
Silhouette wrote:Does '(it) Doesn't diagnose us with "TDS" - we despised narcissists and were anti-neo-liberal long before he briefly got into power...' not count?

Actually no.

What happened to being in a mood to let your thoughts roll out?
Just "Actually no"? That it?

I hesitated because I suspected you might feel that way. But I chose to save it for the latter part of the post.

Silhouette wrote:Should I enjoy and support malignant narcissism? Are you going to tell me how I should think and feel about people?

And similarly - coming up in a few lines -

Silhouette wrote:I think I have a good case, and that I demonstrate as much. I leave room open for doubt and constantly challenge my case internally on all subjects including this one, and this has been my default mental state for my whole adult life.

Silhouette wrote: Feel free to think of me as a sociopathic criminal, and I'll certainly continue to try and detect the faintest hint of one to support your case. I can't stop you from coming to conclusions even if I don't find anything though.

Attention deficiency there. I said the "sociopathic criminals are those who install it in others" -
obsrvr524 wrote:in my mind, it is a sociopathic criminal act to install it into anyone.
You don't go around hypnotizing people do you?

Silhouette wrote:It's easy to accuse others of being hypnotised, huh? Is it as easy to turn that accusation around? Is it easy to constantly uncover it in yourself with full sincerity and merciless objectivity? By now, it is for me.

I think it is easy to accuse the accuser. That is a significant part of the manipulation going on ("don't look at me". Look at my opponent"). The cure is to take the time to investigate the fact based details. The hypnotized will have to struggle to come up with excuses and they won't be enough to actually compensate for the facts.

Silhouette wrote:Do you really pick up "seriously angry vitriol" from me? I figured I've just been liberal with regular vitriol, to be firm and clear with what I find to be unacceptable, such as unjustified certainty in others. That's a big one for me - the root of so much social ill. Hardly classes as anything remotely hateful on my end - but I can't guarantee that translates over the internet. I don't think I've ever failed to matintain rationality here.

Now we get to it -

Just in the last couple of days -
Silhouette wrote:we could get a real human being in power instead of this nothing-zombie who "at least isn't Trump"... but anything to get that orange twat off the news, seriously.
Silhouette wrote:Now we continue to witness the denial of idol worshippers, who see in one specific person their saviour.

Like childish hero kowtowing, they see only the tree and not the forest: venerating the person over the bigger picture.~~~

The epitome of narcissism - as exemplified by their highest trash piece of crap himself.

It's pathetic what we have to put up with, but now Biden won, it'll be just as pathetic as all the SJWs crying in the street when the ultimate fool somehow got lucky
~~~
Soon they'll have a new God to venerate, and I hope the next one is not half as disgustingly pathetic as a human being as the last failure who lost "bigly".
Silhouette wrote:
Mr Reasonable wrote:truth is biden gonna be sworn in and trumpism is dead

Thank fuck for that.
Shame it had to be Biden, but I'll take it just to get the stain out.

You said those things, right?

The revealing questions are twofold -
• what is your factual justification for those extreme feelings? I don't think that you know him personally so have you factually examined what he has actually accomplished despite your original sense about him? Realize that everything you feel about him came from MSM
• Have you rationally and closely examined the impact of the only alternative being offered - what I believe to be very serious authoritarianism and no more democracy for anyone. Have you made certain that you are not cutting off your nose just to spite your face?

Honestly and rationally answering those at least to yourself is what a person who says "I don't think I've ever failed to maintain rationality here." would do.

Silhouette wrote:Have you ever considered forensics or detective work as a profession? You seem to really enjoy it, whether or not you'd be any good at it.

I prefer litigation but thanks for the thought.
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

You have been observed.
Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
It's just same Satanism as always -
• separate the bottom from the top,
• the left from the right,
• the light from the dark, and
• blame each for the sins of the other
• - until they beg you to take charge.
• -- but "you" have been observed --
obsrvr524
Philosopher

Posts: 2439
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

### Re: The Abdicate President

obsrvr524 wrote:The revealing questions are twofold -
• what is your factual justification for those extreme feelings? I don't think that you know him personally so have you factually examined what he has actually accomplished despite your original sense about him? Realize that everything you feel about him came from MSM
• Have you rationally and closely examined the impact of the only alternative being offered - what I believe to be very serious authoritarianism and no more democracy for anyone. Have you made certain that you are not cutting off your nose just to spite your face?

Oh obsrvr....I wish I had the confidence and certainty to tell others that "everything you feel was informed by mainstream media." But the reality is, I don't know enough about anybody, especially through an internet forum, to determine not only what somebody feels, but where those feelings originate.

People DO still read books, scholarly papers and essays, you know....
"So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men." -Voltaire

"If an opinion contrary to your own makes you angry, that is a sign that you are subconsciously aware of having no good reason for thinking as you do."
-Bertrand Russell
d0rkyd00d
Philosopher

Posts: 3059
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 3:37 pm

### Re: The Abdicate President

obsrvr524 wrote:OK then it's settled -
• us, we, our
• you, them, those other blokes

Except sometimes I'm not talking about me rather just about the two groups. So maybe also -
• you, yours
• them, theirs

• party of the first part
• party of the second part

Let them figure it out.
Observ, that's funny, but it's not really a response. Calling them communists is not going to make anything clear in their minds. Second you lose nothing calling them whatever they identify with, say Liberals, and then making your case that their Liberal actions will lead to Communism. Or The Left.

The conclusion you mocked was not my conclusion. A parody of a strawman.

And any specific arguments I made are simply not responded to.

Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher

Posts: 3625
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

### Re: The Abdicate President

I sexually Identify as an Attack Helicopter. Ever since I was a boy I dreamed of soaring over the oilfields dropping hot sticky loads on disgusting foreigners. People say to me that a person being a helicopter is Impossible and I'm fucking retarded but I don't care, I'm beautiful. I'm having a plastic surgeon install rotary blades, 30 mm cannons and AMG-114 Hellfire missiles on my body. From now on I want you guys to call me "Apache" and respect my right to kill from above and kill needlessly. If you can't accept me you're a heliphobe and need to check your vehicle privilege. Thank you for being so understanding.

phoneutria
purveyor of enchantment, advocate of pulchritude AND venomously disarming

Posts: 4265
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:37 am

### Re: The Abdicate President

d0rkyd00d wrote:Oh obsrvr....I wish I had the confidence and certainty to tell others that "everything you feel was informed by mainstream media." But the reality is, I don't know enough about anybody, especially through an internet forum, to determine not only what somebody feels, but where those feelings originate.

People DO still read books, scholarly papers and essays, you know....

But not you. But are you now saying that YOU know where people get their information?
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

You have been observed.
Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
It's just same Satanism as always -
• separate the bottom from the top,
• the left from the right,
• the light from the dark, and
• blame each for the sins of the other
• - until they beg you to take charge.
• -- but "you" have been observed --
obsrvr524
Philosopher

Posts: 2439
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

### Re: The Abdicate President

obsrvr524 wrote:
d0rkyd00d wrote:Oh obsrvr....I wish I had the confidence and certainty to tell others that "everything you feel was informed by mainstream media." But the reality is, I don't know enough about anybody, especially through an internet forum, to determine not only what somebody feels, but where those feelings originate.

People DO still read books, scholarly papers and essays, you know....

But not you. But are you now saying that YOU know where people get their information?

I know better than to assume.
"So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men." -Voltaire

"If an opinion contrary to your own makes you angry, that is a sign that you are subconsciously aware of having no good reason for thinking as you do."
-Bertrand Russell
d0rkyd00d
Philosopher

Posts: 3059
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 3:37 pm

### Re: The Abdicate President

d0rkyd00d wrote:I know better than to assume.

I think we all wish that was true.

And what I wish you could learn is to put some meat into your arguments - something other than just denials and ad homs. You started off with pretty good in depth questioning but now you just deny everything anyone says - "dismissal" then hypocritically accuse them of being dismissive.
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

You have been observed.
Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
It's just same Satanism as always -
• separate the bottom from the top,
• the left from the right,
• the light from the dark, and
• blame each for the sins of the other
• - until they beg you to take charge.
• -- but "you" have been observed --
obsrvr524
Philosopher

Posts: 2439
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

### Re: The Abdicate President

it's safe to assume the source of people's information
when they're parroting talking points from one side or another
word for word

phoneutria
purveyor of enchantment, advocate of pulchritude AND venomously disarming

Posts: 4265
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:37 am

### Re: The Abdicate President

obsrvr524 wrote:You don't go around hypnotizing people do you?

Only with my undeniable charm and temperance. So no.

obsrvr524 wrote:I think it is easy to accuse the accuser. That is a significant part of the manipulation going on ("don't look at me". Look at my opponent"). The cure is to take the time to investigate the fact based details. The hypnotized will have to struggle to come up with excuses and they won't be enough to actually compensate for the facts.

And therefore it's easy to get accused by accusers.
It's not so easy to accuse yourself and honestly and relentlessly pry out all the weaknesses that you might not have previously seen in your own point of view, to correctly place it within the wider context of as many other points of view, to draw upon as many sources as possible and iron out all the counterpoints you'll likely be challenged with in advance, to build the strongest possible position before you even open your mouth - which is basically all I do as a human being aside from see to day-to-day essentials. It's been mentioned that people don't like to think, but I need it like breathing. The drawback is that as soon as you reveal a point of view, all the criticism you've already considered ad nauseum and thoroughly dealt with gets thrown at you by people who insist "you're wrong" because you don't think what they do, and that you've not thought of what they're saying before, and you either hate or cannot understand their point, and the more you lead them through the well-rehearsed reasoning that solves the flaws in their point of view, the more they dig their heels in and the lower they stoop to try and rationalise their view...
People are tiresome - I come here just to confirm there's nothing I've missed, and as a vain hope just to check if I can't quite convince someone, or at least succeed in teaching somebody something they've not considered before. Yeah, I know. But in practice the majority of my time is taken up correcting people trying to misrepresent me in a desperate attempt to elevate their opinions back up by dragging a bastardisation of my opinions back down.

It's not so much that they're hypnotised, they're just so rarely prepared to be wrong, and irrationally fear and overestimate the shame of being outsmarted. Being wrong is easy, and you actually gain respect from admitting it - I just miss the opportunity to get to do that and instead just grow weary and grumpy that I'm not being challenged. And of course these others will just claim the same is the case for them when it's so plainly obvious to me that they have absolutely no idea.
Hence the common exasperation and impatience in my tone.
The problem is that there's no way to prove this to anyone. They'll rightly claim that plenty of people think they have the same problem, and think of themselves in the same way. This easily dismisses the whole plight and only appears to level the playing field, but it's like a specialist meeting an enthusiastic amateur with a bit of an overinflated opinion of themselves because they're better at what they do than laymen (or at least think they are). They present what they've got and you don't want to demoralise them, but at the same time you can't tell them they're as amazing as they think they are. The only thing in the way is their ego, without which it'd be so simple. This is why teaching children is so much easier than teaching adults.

But whatever, I know only too well what will come to me as a response to this - probably better to ignore the above rant and just get to this TDS stuff.

obsrvr524 wrote:Just in the last couple of days -
Silhouette wrote:we could get a real human being in power instead of this nothing-zombie who "at least isn't Trump"... but anything to get that orange twat off the news, seriously.
Silhouette wrote:Now we continue to witness the denial of idol worshippers, who see in one specific person their saviour.

Like childish hero kowtowing, they see only the tree and not the forest: venerating the person over the bigger picture.~~~

The epitome of narcissism - as exemplified by their highest trash piece of crap himself.

It's pathetic what we have to put up with, but now Biden won, it'll be just as pathetic as all the SJWs crying in the street when the ultimate fool somehow got lucky
~~~
Soon they'll have a new God to venerate, and I hope the next one is not half as disgustingly pathetic as a human being as the last failure who lost "bigly".
Silhouette wrote:
Mr Reasonable wrote:truth is biden gonna be sworn in and trumpism is dead

Thank fuck for that.
Shame it had to be Biden, but I'll take it just to get the stain out.

You said those things, right?

Oh absolutely.

Great language, right? I like to use what I find to be a tasteful amount of colour in what I post - makes it more interesting to write, if not to read.

obsrvr524 wrote:The revealing questions are twofold -
• what is your factual justification for those extreme feelings? I don't think that you know him personally so have you factually examined what he has actually accomplished despite your original sense about him? Realize that everything you feel about him came from MSM
• Have you rationally and closely examined the impact of the only alternative being offered - what I believe to be very serious authoritarianism and no more democracy for anyone. Have you made certain that you are not cutting off your nose just to spite your face?

Honestly and rationally answering those at least to yourself is what a person who says "I don't think I've ever failed to maintain rationality here." would do.

There's a bit of "moving the goalposts" going on here - sure in theory I could befriend him and really get to know him, just to really be as sure as possible that my impression of his character as a whole was exactly and entirely justified to the highest possible degree that practicality would permit. But I ask you, is that really a realistic requirement that anyone at all really applies to anyone outside of psychiatry and clinical psychology, just to get a reasonable idea about somebody? And moreover - should it be? Even for lovers and married couples, this is probably a bit much - to treat another like a scientific experiment and thoroughly dissect their entire being just to rationally qualify one's feelings? Even the process of attempting to do such a thing would skew it, as if in a quantum experiment where you change the results by measuring them...

Of course that's an extreme, and of course I could get to know him better to some normal extent, which brings me to the realm of intuition. As a third "of course" to add here, we all know how infamously people make up their mind about one another within the first minute - and experiment rather hilariously correlates first impressions within the first 1/10 of a second very highly with lasting ones. This goes for job interviews, dates, friends, everything - and as a final "of course", wouldn't it be nice if we had more of a chance? Though you can see the value to human evolution of this instinct being so honed, probably being life and death for much of human existence and prior to that.

But that's enough of that - it's a tough position to be in to really want to be able to agree with you, but to also be so averse to ever having to endure any experience of him ever again. The conflict of interest really makes it hard for me to communicate just how sincere I am that I don't want to have to have this opinion about anyone...
To clarify on different point though, I think I did make it abundantly clear that however detestable he is, this doesn't excuse "the only alternative being offered". I do keep saying I'm not pro-Biden, surely you've not managed to miss that? I know you believe that alternative to be the end of the world, and I agree that going back to the status quo smells depressingly like a return to the slow tendency back towards more social authoritarianism and more neo-liberalism. As a leftist I want the exact opposite of both of these things. As a rightist I know you agree with the first bit, but at least you're probably cool with the second bit - lucky you. I dunno, all the above seems perfectly rational to me, insofar as you can be about emotions. Though I'm sure you'll disagree.

obsrvr524 wrote:
Silhouette wrote:Have you ever considered forensics or detective work as a profession? You seem to really enjoy it, whether or not you'd be any good at it.

I prefer litigation but thanks for the thought.

No problem.
Did you ever consider getting qualifications for litigation?
The discipline always struck me as an endless exercise in plugging holes in a ship, and with a long history. I prefer more orderliness and closure, hence the logic obsession.

Silhouette
Philosopher

Posts: 4552
Joined: Tue May 20, 2003 1:27 am
Location: Existence

### Re: The Abdicate President

Silhouette wrote:Only with my undeniable charm and temperance. So no.

i see you there little guy
copying my lines
tsk tsk tsk

phoneutria
purveyor of enchantment, advocate of pulchritude AND venomously disarming

Posts: 4265
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:37 am

### Re: The Abdicate President

phoneutria wrote:
Silhouette wrote:Only with my undeniable charm and temperance. So no.

i see you there little guy
copying my lines
tsk tsk tsk

Two or three lines here, two or three lines there.

You can do better.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382

iambiguous
ILP Legend

Posts: 41058
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

### Re: The Abdicate President

Silhouette wrote:It's not so easy to accuse yourself and honestly and relentlessly pry out all the weaknesses that you might not have previously seen in your own point of view, to correctly place it within the wider context of as many other points of view, to draw upon as many sources as possible and iron out all the counterpoints you'll likely be challenged with in advance, to build the strongest possible position before you even open your mouth - which is basically all I do as a human being aside from see to day-to-day essentials.

So that is asking for forgiveness followed by sarcasm?

The question is WHICH of the opponents in each argument are actually doing those things. And that tends to be evident. Some people rant on with their opinions providing no actual evidence (including mere reasoning) that they might be right. Others state an opinion and provide what evidence or reasoning they have to support why they have that opinion.

Which are you - which am I?

Just examine our posts (from now on if you prefer) to see and self-examine. That is really all I have been saying. And that reveals to the person himself as to whether he really has any evidence concerning his opinion. And that gives clue of possible and probable sly, possibly inadvertent hypnosis.

When I suggest hypnosis it comes from witnessing someone who isn't displaying why he believes things but rather just insisting they are true - especially with vitriol. That is not definitive proof - only a clue - something for the person to question on his own.

Isn't that fair for both of us?

Silhouette wrote:
obsrvr524 wrote:You said those things, right?

Oh absolutely.

Great language, right? I like to use what I find to be a tasteful amount of colour in what I post - makes it more interesting to write, if not to read.

So you don't actually believe what you write. You just like to use "tasteful colour" language to be more interesting. Isn't that being disingenuous? Or perhaps now merely making excuse and being self-forgiving?

Silhouette wrote:
obsrvr524 wrote:The revealing questions are twofold -
• what is your factual justification for those extreme feelings? I don't think that you know him personally so have you factually examined what he has actually accomplished despite your original sense about him? Realize that everything you feel about him came from MSM
• Have you rationally and closely examined the impact of the only alternative being offered - what I believe to be very serious authoritarianism and no more democracy for anyone. Have you made certain that you are not cutting off your nose just to spite your face?

Honestly and rationally answering those at least to yourself is what a person who says "I don't think I've ever failed to maintain rationality here." would do.

There's a bit of "moving the goalposts" going on here - sure in theory I could befriend him and really get to know him, just to really be as sure as possible that my impression of his character as a whole was exactly and entirely justified to the highest possible degree that practicality would permit. But I ask you, is that really a realistic requirement that anyone at all really applies to anyone outside of psychiatry and clinical psychology, just to get a reasonable idea about somebody?

So you exaggerate what I said to extreme then ask me if your extreme is reasonable of me? - "strawman"?

Silhouette wrote:Of course that's an extreme, and of course I could get to know him better to some normal extent, which brings me to the realm of intuition.

Now there's a thought. I should have thought of that. Actually all I was suggesting was to research the facts. I didn't suggest to go meet the bloke.

Silhouette wrote:To clarify on different point though, I think I did make it abundantly clear that however detestable he is, this doesn't excuse "the only alternative being offered". I do keep saying I'm not pro-Biden, surely you've not managed to miss that?

Perhaps YOU missed that you have no choice in the matter and attacking the Allied powers during a world war when the only other option is the Axis powers is seriously irresponsible - "I don't like anyone. Everyone is wrong! I don't like either side". Okay then who cares and shut up because you are not helping anyone and certainly not yourself - actually self-defeating. Try telling Gen Eisenhower, PM Churchill, Hitler, or Mussolini that you are just being "tastefully colourful" and really hoping that no one wins. Go to a sports game and sitting in the crowd (if that is every allowed again) shout insults at both teams. See where that gets you. Which team do you think will win - neither? It won't be yours.

If you can't vote for the clowns at least vote for the circus. Else you are just being another pesky nihilist. Wouldn't that be true of me too?
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

You have been observed.
Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
It's just same Satanism as always -
• separate the bottom from the top,
• the left from the right,
• the light from the dark, and
• blame each for the sins of the other
• - until they beg you to take charge.
• -- but "you" have been observed --
obsrvr524
Philosopher

Posts: 2439
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

### Re: The Abdicate President

phoneutria wrote:
Silhouette wrote:Only with my undeniable charm and temperance. So no.

i see you there little guy
copying my lines
tsk tsk tsk

you be ragging on my style and flair? $$^{[1]}$$

How unbecoming of someone so completely adorable as me $$^{[2]}$$ to not cite my sources.

References:
1. phoneutria (2020). "what Marxism really is.....". p. 35.
2. phoneutria (2014). "Carleas, I have a question". p. 2.

obsrvr524 wrote:Just examine our posts (from now on if you prefer) to see and self-examine. That is really all I have been saying. And that reveals to the person himself as to whether he really has any evidence concerning his opinion. And that gives clue of possible and probable sly, possibly inadvertent hypnosis.

When I suggest hypnosis it comes from witnessing someone who isn't displaying why he believes things but rather just insisting they are true - especially with vitriol. That is not definitive proof - only a clue - something for the person to question on his own.

Isn't that fair for both of us?

Way ahead o'ya, buddy. We're in no disagreement about examining our own posts as I have been doing for years.
It's actually an achilles heel of mine to go to thorough lengths to explain every point I make - because the posts get too long and people lose interest and/or get frustrated, if they read them at all. You're preaching to the choir here.
Like I said, vitriol is just one of the colours on my pallette - and to abduce that this is a clue that someone is merely insisting without reasoning is insufficient evidence. As you say: not definitive proof.
I manage perfectly fine to be vitriolic, sincere and logical all at once, so I'm afraid I'm going to have to reject your hearing on this case

The real question is how somebody might detect what you're calling hypnosis. Do the hypnotised know that they are hypnotised? Can one be hypnotised that they are good at identifying hypnosis over others? I say it's the real question rhetorically - what I mean is that it's unfalsifiable given that a judgment of hypnosis requires no hypnosis to be affecting the judge, who therefore must be judged by another judge ad infinitum.

obsrvr524 wrote:So you don't actually believe what you write. You just like to use "tasteful colour" language to be more interesting. Isn't that being disingenuous? Or perhaps now merely making excuse and being self-forgiving?

I absolutely believe what I write. Colour and all.
It would indeed be disingenuous to do otherwise.
I don't think opinions require forgiveness.
Forgiveness is for that which can be correct/incorrect, such as rationale for opinion etc.

obsrvr524 wrote:So you exaggerate what I said to extreme then ask me if your extreme is reasonable of me? - "strawman"?

You mistake me. I present the extreme case in order to give appropriate context to what can be expected from any exercise in "factual justification of opinions" such as you're asking of me.
Along with my mention of the limitations of "first impressions", I intended to frame the degree of validity to "actually getting to know him better to some normal extent" - just to highlight how little more would be gained from doing so to "justify my opinion". My point being that there would be barely any.

obsrvr524 wrote:Actually all I was suggesting was to research the facts. I didn't suggest to go meet the bloke.

Ah yes, "attention deficiency" strikes again. mb.

obsrvr524 wrote:Perhaps YOU missed that you have no choice in the matter and attacking the Allied powers during a world war when the only other option is the Axis powers is seriously irresponsible - "I don't like anyone. Everyone is wrong! I don't like either side". Okay then who cares and shut up because you are not helping anyone and certainly not yourself - actually self-defeating. Try telling Gen Eisenhower, PM Churchill, Hitler, or Mussolini that you are just being "tastefully colourful" and really hoping that no one wins. Go to a sports game and sitting in the crowd (if that is every allowed again) shout insults at both teams. See where that gets you. Which team do you think will win - neither? It won't be yours.

If you can't vote for the clowns at least vote for the circus. Else you are just being another pesky nihilist. Wouldn't that be true of me too?

This reminds me of the old Bush-Jr.-ism of "if you aren't with us then you are against us". Remember that I'm not the one who sees the stakes anywhere near so high. You have your reasons for thinking they are and doubting my reasons and vice versa - and we agree that researching the facts is a positive step for all. You're saying pick the lesser of two evils to side against just to avoid oblivion. I'm saying there is no such war just yet, and that we ought to keep trying to succeed in the goal of not being limited to a choice of one of only two evils in future elections - the previous setbacks are recoverable, but I agree that we're on a downhill slope.

That'd make us more pessimists than nihilists. But maybe that's just me being an optimist.

Silhouette
Philosopher

Posts: 4552
Joined: Tue May 20, 2003 1:27 am
Location: Existence

### Re: The Abdicate President

phoneutria wrote:I sexually Identify as an Attack Helicopter. Ever since I was a boy I dreamed of soaring over the oilfields dropping hot sticky loads on disgusting foreigners. People say to me that a person being a helicopter is Impossible and I'm fucking retarded but I don't care, I'm beautiful. I'm having a plastic surgeon install rotary blades, 30 mm cannons and AMG-114 Hellfire missiles on my body. From now on I want you guys to call me "Apache" and respect my right to kill from above and kill needlessly. If you can't accept me you're a heliphobe and need to check your vehicle privilege. Thank you for being so understanding.

wow. same. crazy.
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.

Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian

Posts: 29360
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

### Re: The Abdicate President

Another scheme being examined involves getting Ms Pelosi in as President.

If the electoral college isn't definitive and the election goes to the House Ms Pelosi will try to prevent the matter from being settled. If she can delay it until Jan 21 (and she is very practiced at delaying things) then she automatically becomes the US President. Even Ms Harris doesn't get to be the first.
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

You have been observed.
Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
It's just same Satanism as always -
• separate the bottom from the top,
• the left from the right,
• the light from the dark, and
• blame each for the sins of the other
• - until they beg you to take charge.
• -- but "you" have been observed --
obsrvr524
Philosopher

Posts: 2439
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

### Re: The Abdicate President

phoneutria wrote:I sexually Identify as an Attack Helicopter. Ever since I was a boy I dreamed of soaring over the oilfields dropping hot sticky loads on disgusting foreigners. People say to me that a person being a helicopter is Impossible and I'm fucking retarded but I don't care, I'm beautiful. I'm having a plastic surgeon install rotary blades, 30 mm cannons and AMG-114 Hellfire missiles on my body. From now on I want you guys to call me "Apache" and respect my right to kill from above and kill needlessly. If you can't accept me you're a heliphobe and need to check your vehicle privilege. Thank you for being so understanding.

This ^^^ is just simply an A-class shade of cray. lololol

That concept, should become, your avatar.. forget the whole spider thing, I think you’ve found your niche/your true calling, hahaha!
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ
I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Huh! - MagsJ
You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ

MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek

Posts: 22174
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka / LDN Town

PreviousNext