Jump to content

nanana

Members
  • Posts

    343
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by nanana

  1. Nixon was set up by Deep State operatives because he was going soft on Viet Nam and China.
  2. Some doctors are phenomenal communicators and are able to integrate their expertise and their humanity and tell a credible humble grokable explanation of why they are making a recommendation. Unfortunately, many are not. Furthermore, being aware of their rhetorical (and maybe ethical) limitations, many fall back into their expertise to try to over generate trust in their recommendations. Even furthermore, the amount of detail to master in any one subject is so great that everything involving experts becomes a trust game. So, the real question is, WHAT makes a medical professional trustworthy?
  3. P.S. the first Paragraph or two are such delicious writing that I don’t even CARE if I agree OR disagree with the author, who has given me such a brain erection that I want His cum.
  4. Thanks for the lead TT2025. Here’s one of many links to the essay to make it a bit easier to find: [think before following links] http://fs2.american.edu/dfagel/www/Philosophers/Berlin/Berlin_twoconceptsofliberty.pdf
  5. huntnhole, thanks for sharing your views. without wishing to imply that there is ever an either/or, I don't (completely) relate to what you wrote. I think what you wrote resonates with a part of the truth, but for me the real reason the empire consensus is collapsing is because America really can't afford it anymore. we are living on the most imaginary credit, and the lower classes of america have seen their purchasing power destroyed. I think it is somewhat mean-spirited to make our deplorables wrong for feeling the pain of our empire-collapse first. we have had faulty accounting for years; our military industrial complex has paid the lowest possible bribes for civilian benefits to ensure that we overspend on MICIMATT, and our lower classes are totally burnt out on subsidizing this. (not saying that our "deplorables" aren't subject to propaganda that is going to encourage them to advocate for stupid non-universal policies). while "progressive" values are not bad, most "progressives" don't know anything about accounting. our overseas beneficiaries have gotten complacent letting the US be the bad guy and overspend on its military while Europe eats its beautiful farm-to-table food. I am not ENTIRELY happy about the empire crumbling. It looks as if America (the T Admin) is ready to exploit other countries for mineral rights and other semi-abusive relationships. It looks as if a lot of new rackets are being spun up (not yet completely understandable, but certainly visible in their emergence). does anyone here really think US money is best spent on killing people in the Middle East? I think that both Biden and Trump agreed that it may have been a good idea for US industry to build plants overseas, but I think they also would agree its a BAD idea to have shut down local industry. Maybe Europe will wake up and reclaim its power to protect itself, energize itself, figure out how to be friends with US, Russia, China, India, Iran, etc., and stop voting for parties that wish to make it a Eunuch. Maybe the US will remember how to be self-sufficient and celebrate other countries who can do the same. IMHO Best.
  6. Im surprised someone hasn't manufactured a semen scented marker yet.
  7. Hi Tallslenderguy, As I hope you know, I appreciate you and your way of thinking. Though we are currently likely to have different views, I do not wish to debate your views, as in my mental model, it is probably best for the planet that we have people with very different views who are capable of jumping in and saving the day from the last set of leaders with incomplete insights. While you raise an important distinction, I am concerned about this line of reasoning though because it posits that there are only TWO types of people who should gravitate into CAMPS instead of promiscuously shifting alliances depending upon the issue. This quality of being righteous that you distinguish in "fundamentalists" is a quality I have found on both the right and the left. There is another critical distinction in this space: I may be a "fundamentalist" about the way I live but not believe it is my role to impose my views and ways of being on others. (My sister is somewhat like this, her heart is loving, her conversations are very comfortable, AND for her the only way is the way of Jesus.) Similarly, I have found that "open-mindedness" sometimes manifests as lazy-mindedness when it comes to getting any deep insights about the pain points of different tribes we are doomed (or blessed) to coexist with. I run into both open-minded and close-minded people on both the right and the left and share your preference for open-mindedness, though I have come to have a respect for people who hold fast to principles, and I see that it gives them some strengths as well as some weaknesses. This may be a major simplification, but I personally have a hard time understanding why sodomites and fundamentalists cannot coexist if they are capable of minimizing aggression and respecting each other's spaces. In reality it is way too messy since most of us are in multiple, sometimes contradictory tribes. In your example, which may just be a case of having to be efficient with words, you seem to be implying that it is sufficient to classify Trump voters as "fundamentalists" and non-Trump voters as "non-fundamentalist." I bet that I am missing a nuance in what you write, as this would seem to give away all the power you have to convince Trump voters to vote differently next time. (Since we chatted offline before I posted this, I am aware that you liked the distinctions I was adding and agreed that it's okay to think you're right as long as you bring some level of humility to your rightness and some level of peaceful shared space for others to ALSO be right, but please correct me if I mangled your meaning.) Thanks for raising this most interesting topic. Best to you and to all on the site!
  8. Hi viking10x10 (a conflation of truths and elongations, exaggeration, hopefully I won't be banned or even suspended for inflation...), A favor to ask. Since the editorial board of this wonderful site puts a high level of trust that its moderators actually have the facts, would you do us all a favor and make your next banning for "false statements and conspiracy theories" transparent and cite your sources? It will help educate those of us that are vulnerable in our mastery of facts and our ability to avoid being prey to "conspiracy theories" and the vicious wolves in sheep's spandex that propound them. It will help us all do a better job of staying on the animal farm. Thanks in advance for any less tortuous path to your truths and coincidence theories... Best, nanana
  9. A WARNING about VPNs in that they may enable geo-restricted access but they are unlikely to provide significant privacy.
  10. Nice analysis TT2025. My main principles that drive my interest in both right- and left-wing politics are voluntarism and non-aggression. I think of taxation as theft (though potentially “necessary” in small doses) but would be content to see the government moving ever more toward consensus activities and reducing activities that don’t share broad support. I like the broadly compassionate aspects of leftism but leftists rely too much on involuntary means to express their compassion. As Margaret Thatcher said, socialism is wonderful until you run out of other people’s money. I am also not fond of the government as purchaser and lender of last resort, breeds too much corruption (war-as-money-maker for MICIMATT both right and left). It seems like a much better use of humans’ collective energy to produce things that improve quality of life rather than having psychopathic leaders foment race-and-nation hatred just to make money off of blood flow. Not exactly responsive to your points made above TT2025 but I take away from your writing that nothing is as simple as our political brains might try to make them, and even solid principles bring unintended complex consequences.
  11. Every one wants an unassailable savior. The US is amazing and corrupt. Please people stop looking to others to be better than you are. Either you are your savior, or God is. The US is complex and has wonderful and fearful qualities.
  12. …pledges my allegiance to not a Koran/Talmud/Bible but to a cumslut taking 350 million loads from every citizen. I’ll be your Nero fiddling deep up your anus. I’m going to choose a cumslut queen that makes Melania look more like an abbess. Please write to me if you want me to intervene on your fuckhole’s behalf to be a sperm-centric ballot box for the next Presidential ballot box. Let’s send you up the pop charts.
  13. Greetings: im in a terminal relationship with a narcissistic but reasonably nice guy. I hope We’re friends for life but I want A good divorce. Thus we decided to navigate the unwinding via monogamy lest the probate courts fleece us. But I want To fuck everyone now. Any similar combos of sluttery and despite it all self control?
  14. Me too, ready to host quadrillions in my indoor swimming pool and put 400 faggots on cocksucking duty. Maybe sponsor a cumhole contest to see which slut can be submissive enough to my dick to turn me into a top.
  15. NWUSHorny, an interesting point but I’m having a hard time seeing any similarity. MAGA ostensibly wants to shrink government and is firing a lot of bureaucrats, something the far left is much less likely to do. I’d have a hard time seeing leftists deport a bunch of illegal aliens either. Putting “America First” also seems counter to leftist universalist aspirations. I’d love to understand what you’re seeing that makes MAGA seem far left. Maybe Trumps willingness to make relatively radical change? Maybe his chaotic approach to the rule of law? Interested but still unclear about the commonalities you see.
  16. Thanks for sharing how this hits you BootmanLA. I on the other hand am frequently amazed by how many people prefer "curation" of the news by some "authority" that likely has an unquestioned and unexplored editorial agenda. I used to like "curation" of the news, but now I prefer to read a diverse set of sources and bounce the imperfections off of each other to see a diversity of opinion on subjects, lest I simply be a good parroter of somebody else's editorial agenda. It does take a lot more judgement to do this than I used to need when I simply placed by faith in an editorial authority, but it seems more realistic to be aware of bias. It has also become more interesting to me to hear a wide variety of views on subjects than to quibble over sequestered fact bases and be unsatisfied with anything less than an unassailable monopolistic interpretation. I am definitely one of those who has seen newspapers spin facts and it is hard for me to read what they write without skepticism, certainly without the same amount of skepticism I apply to any source. If you have never been burnt, it is understandable that you may not be present to flame. I think of you as a formidable debater, but this is a classic example of using a strawman. There was nothing in rawfuckingonly's remarks that had anything to do with the Civil War. Yet your remarks generalized about a group of people you conjure into rawfuckingonly's remarks, and then you have a debate with yourself about this cohort, and surprisingly enough, win your own argument. I am definitely a big fan of doing primary research and citing sources, but I also think we're all entitled to our own opinions, and if you always need to be right and cannot coexist with alternative views... Your commentary is very appreciated, as you seem to be able to channel a lot of the homos on this site and give voice to the way many of us think.
  17. Greetings dear phallic risk-takers: A Democrat friend of mine at the agency I used to work for until the fork in the road and the offer of early retirement commended the book "The Righteous Mind" by Jonathan Haidt, to me ([think before following links] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Righteous_Mind) and suggested that it may be a basis for rebuilding lowest-common-denominator-based cooperation between people that are currently in the grip of either the Republicans or the Democrats (or the Libertarians or Greens, for that matter) (or international equivalents). As a semen-committed American, I thought it was a beautiful intention. Jonathan Haidt argues that "good" people of various political persuasions place different value on the following morality groupings: care/harm, fairness/cheating, loyalty/betrayal, authority/subversion, sanctity/degradation, and liberty/oppression. My friend's view was that the Democrats had moved too far away from the concept of benefits for contributions. He thought that he could potentially reclaim some deplorables by helping the Democratic Party generate policies and programs at the local and state level that better aligned benefits to contributions. What say you latex-free Americans and citizens of the world? Could this rescue the Democratic Party, or will Democrats simply forgo generating anything until the Republicans self-immolate? Also, any interest in ranking these morality groupings for yourselves? Also, where if at all could Republicans and Democrats de-demonize each other by doing things that could allow each other to model the sexy-best in each other? I'll start. Anyone who wants to move past demonization and partisanship and wants to have joy with others of different political persuasions please jump in: Ranking: 1) liberty/oppression (maybe because I have been in some abusive relationships and wish(ed) to find a superior man who would enjoy seeing me realize my gifts, also brief stints in countries that were in the middle of violent revolutions and where there was frequent murder, also have found joy beyond my original submission, so can play roles that were not given to me as an insecure youth wishing to be saved from isolation by an experienced older man, but this has been consistent since high school, when I started a geek-club for the 9th and 10th amendments) 2) fairness/cheating (was a liberal-leaning libertarian until I saw big tech silencing and de-platforming conservatives. at the time [late 2010's] I was likely to be horrified by conservative views, but I was even more horrified that fragile people would silence them rather than simply win arguments...) 3) care/harm (for me this is muddier, as care can be smothering, and "harm" can be erotic; but I still think that GOD [or the great genetic instinct to be alpha-species] meant for us to discover the best in each other and lift each other up. perhaps some of us count our cocks or our holes as our best quality, and to that I say, let's all retire to a promiscuous island). but seriously, lets all help each other learn from adversity and diversity of soul. 4) authority/subversion (for me, this is muddier, because the only real authority is the non-dogmatic GOD that whispers all sorts of contradictory sweet nothings into all of our ears [or truth for my dear atheists and scientists]; I am putting this above others only because I FINALLY believe in EVIL. It gives me a backbone and makes me ready to die for others' well-being. 5) loyalty/betrayal: I put this relatively low, because I know how much regret I have about times when I couldn't see what people were up there trying to do. I'd like to think I was rooting for all, but I am sure that I failed many people in my journey. My awareness of my own lack of understanding makes me sure that GOD intended all of us to live long enough to see our (my) own mistakes and to forgive our betrayers. (And, to be crass, Judas had a big dick.). 6) sanctity/degradation: I put this lowest because like many homos who are forced to confront the YING-YANG of being a man and wanting to fuck other men, to be a hole, or to be a fucker-hole, I really cannot tell the difference between sanctity and degradation. (I will say that Jordan Peterson, as much as he has flaws, showed me a path toward appreciating why GOD may punish people who violate taboos, simply because it is a beautiful mental concept to preserve an inviolable.) for those who feel that I have cut you off at the knees in my past comments (perhaps a mutual feeling), maybe we both could look beyond past rancor to create some non-partisan fun.
      • 2
      • Like
      • Thanks
  18. I fear I will get suspended for "fact-checking" (or, victor-writes-the-history "opinion-checking" which may be closer to what's happening during a "fact-check"), so I am leaving it to others to draw inferences. (fear is a strong word, maybe it is more like a highly erotic suspension, much like breath control in a dangerously close rough trade hookup, or sensory deprivation)
  19. Here is the WHO advisory, for the current Texas outbreak of 378 cases: [think before following links] https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2025-DON561 Here is coverage of the current Ontario outbreak of 572 cases: [think before following links] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-ontario-chief-medical-officer-stands-by-vaccine-exemption-law-despite/ Furthermore, the WHO reported on March 13 that the European region reported 127,350 measles cases in 2024, double the number in 2023, and 300 times more than in the USA. [think before following links] https://www.who.int/europe/news/item/13-03-2025-european-region-reports-highest-number-of-measles-cases-in-more-than-25-years---unicef--who-europe What is the interplay of "fact" and perception here? Any explanation for why one fact-base might get attention, but another fact-base does not? How do the principles of equity, diversity and inclusion play out in this juxtaposition? How do the principles of partisanship play out when over-relying on a specialized fact base and not seeking out a broader fact base? What is the connection between the WHO's focus on the US outbreak in its "Disease Outbreak News" and the US withdrawal from the WHO?
  20. I appreciate that Biden’s evil was and is less visible to many. He did a better job of snowing people, and it took more effort to see that his words and deeds were frequently at odds, especially for his partisans.
  21. I am highly disappointed to see how many how many legal aliens are being deported by this administration just for expressing opposition to genocide, in direct violation of first amendment rights. I thought Biden’s activities against misinformation were bad, but this seems at least on a par. It is sad to see Republicans as poorly equipped as Democrats to critique their own party when it goes off the rails. It is definitely time to find some new non-Zionist parties or at least existing party candidates who are willing to stand up for free speech and not to define it as some narrow American right but as a universal right.
  22. I have a different view that public (or really any) schools are usually there to indoctrinate kids into non-parental belief systems, usually making them overvalue the State and put hurdles in the way of their individual callings. Some good skills sure, but critical thinking happens DESPITE schools not because of them. Teaches kids faith in the VICTORS’ version of history.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Guidelines. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.