Trump Calls DeSantis a “Globalist RINO”

[Rust_Cohle]

Oh, I always “pray” for their recovery. The whezzing is hilarious when it’s accompanied by their denials.

It's gonna be funny when you're in your cardboard box wheezing and dying getting pissed on by tweaker bums

 

[Dagosa]

Biden is my pal? When did that happen, Binar?

I’ll take it from here. Biden has turned out to be the best president for the times we are in then anyone, even on the left, thought. He’s a kick ass old fart. Trump would look older then Biden if is wasn’t for his fake hair, fake eye make up, fake tan and stooopid ass responses which makes him sound like an 8 year old. That’s the only thing that makes him appear younger…..stupidity.

 

[Rust_Cohle]

I’ll take it from here. Biden has turned out to be the best president for the times we are in then anyone, even on the left, thought. He’s a kick ass old fart. Trump would look older then Biden if is wasn’t for his fake hair, fake eye make up, fake tan and stooopid ass responses which makes him sound like an 8 year old. That’s the only thing that makes him appear younger…..stupidity.

And this is what insanity looks like

 

[Doug1943]

Using the authority of the state to attack a private company engaging in political speech critical of the state is textbook fascism.

Hmmm... I think genuine 'fascism' is a lot more than that.

But it's true, that it gets close to, and perhaps over, the borderline where the rule of law should govern us. DeSantis' actions have certainly been criticized by some conservatives.
[ Ron DeSantis’s Misguided Attack on Disney’s Legal Status | National Review ]

To be honest, I'm not sure about this issue yet. Big corporations are certainly using their power to push the Leftist agenda, including firing employees who don't go along with it. Progressives gleefully use the power of the state to drive religious people out of business where the conscience of these people doesn't permit them to go along with the latest progressive attack on our culture. On the other hand, because the other side doesn't play fair, is not an excuse for my side imitating them.

But since you're clearly against fascism, and using the authority of the state to attack a private company, you would also condemn, say, a liberal mayor who said that a company that had taken a position on a social issue opposed to the mayor's (progressive) view would not be welcome in their city? (He's not just giving advice about the reaction of the customer base in his city, he's threatening to use his power against the company when it comes to applying for business licenses, etc.) You're against that, of course?

And of course, talking about 'textbook fascism', I am sure you would absolutely condemn the mobs of students who break up conservative meetings on campus. That's pure stormtrooper stuff. So surely you're against it.

Yes?

 

[Dagosa]

It's gonna be funny when you're in your cardboard box wheezing and dying getting pissed on by tweaker bums

You won’t be around. You won’t be invited. People who voted for Trump will be strictly prohibit from out living me.

 

[Rust_Cohle]

Hmmm... I think genuine 'fascism' is a lot more than that.

But it's true, that it gets close to, and perhaps over, the borderline where the rule of law should govern us. DeSantis' actions have certainly been criticized by some conservatives.
[ Ron DeSantis’s Misguided Attack on Disney’s Legal Status | National Review ]

To be honest, I'm not sure about this issue yet. Big corporations are certainly using their power to push the Leftist agenda, including firing employees who don't go along with it. Progressives gleefully use the power of the state to drive religious people out of business where the conscience of these people doesn't permit them to go along with the latest progressive attack on our culture. On the other hand, because the other side doesn't play fair, is not an excuse for my side imitating them.

But since you're clearly against fascism, and using the authority of the state to attack a private company, you would also condemn, say, a liberal mayor who said that a company that had taken a position on a social issue opposed to the mayor's (progressive) view would not be welcome in their city? (He's not just giving advice about the reaction of the customer base in his city, he's threatening to use his power against the company when it comes to applying for business licenses, etc.) You're against that, of course?

And of course, talking about 'textbook fascism', I am sure you would absolutely condemn the mobs of students who break up conservative meetings on campus. That's pure stormtrooper stuff. So surely you're against it.

Yes?

Go look up what Italian Fascism is. It's the merger of the political and corporate states

 

[Dagosa]

And this is what insanity looks like

Nope. It looks like your avatar.

 

[Rust_Cohle]

You won’t be around. You won’t be invited. People who voted for Trump will be strictly prohibit from out living me.

That's too bad cause I'm going to do it anyway

Get boosted

 

[Rust_Cohle]

Nope. It looks like your avatar.

Is that suppose to insult me? You're really bad at this dude

 

[Dagosa]

That's too bad cause I'm going to do it anyway

Get boosted

I told you what I get boosted from. All the fat ass deniers on ventilators. When ever I get covid, I now use it as an excuse to mow the lawn.

 

[Dagosa]

Is that suppose to insult me? You're really bad at this dude

It wasn’t meant to funny, just factual. Dud.

 

[Rust_Cohle]

It wasn’t meant to funny, just factual. Dud.

Yawn

 

[Doug1943]

The way simpleton conservatives use it, no. You don’t even know why it was invented, and discarded. No one uses it other than money making scams over the net to make people feel good. It’s bullshit for anything but racism and making people feel good about being racist.

Nope. I use other words, NEVER IQ. Skills, intellect in a particular area. You know, relevant shit.

Just use a reference to make a point. Does Johns Hopkins for example. agree with you ? If they do, refer them.

That’s your problem. You decide who you’re going to follow based upon who agrees with you. That’s bull shit.

Whoa, are you really, totally ignorant about IQ tests. And I mean totally ignorant. I strongly suspect you're not one who reads books (or much anything), but if any literate person is interested, I can give you a reading list of books and academic journals dealing with the concept of intelligence and its measure, and all the controversies around it. There is a plethora of books and papers on it. I'd start with the late James Flynn, and the "Flynn Effect", which is, in my opinion, the best refutation of IQ as a built-in you're-born-with-it-and-it-can't-be-raised characteristic.

'Johns Hopkins'??? Do you mean the medical people? As a matter of fact, I do 'use' one of their studies, with reference to the efficacy of broccolli sprouts to counter bladder cancer.

Of course, people who say IQ has no meaning. If they had a choice of being defended by a lawyer who had an IQ of 130, vs one who had an IQ of 80 (not that there could be such a person), they wouldn't hesitate in choosing the IQ-130 one. It's really hilarious to see how utterly hypocritical the Left is here -- as blindly dogmatic as any religious fundamentalist., with this difference: Leftists actually know better, whereas the fundamentalist is a genuine believer.

And, no, I don't 'follow' or read just those who agree with me. In fact, here I'm a Popperian, and seek out 'disconfirming evidence'. The best way to test whether someone (including oneself) is a rational thinker, basing their views on things other than their own prejudices and emotions, is to ask: "Is there any evidence that would change your mind on this issue?" If you can't imagine any such evidence, then your belief is essentially a religious one, beyond proof.

And those French peasants were right, and all those clever French intellectuals were wrong, despite the fact that the latter would have had a mean IQ two or three standard deviations above the former.

 

[Dagosa]

Whoa, are you really, totally ignorant about IQ tests. And I mean totally ignorant. I strongly suspect you're not one who reads books (or much anything), but if any literate person is interested, I can give you a reading list of books and academic journals dealing with the concept of intelligence and its measure, and all the controversies around it. There is a plethora of books and papers on it. I'd start with the late James Flynn, and the "Flynn Effect", which is, in my opinion, the best refutation of IQ as a built-in you're-born-with-it-and-it-can't-be-raised characteristic.

'Johns Hopkins'??? Do you mean the medical people? As a matter of fact, I do 'use' one of their studies, with reference to the efficacy of broccolli sprouts to counter bladder cancer.

Of course, people who say IQ has no meaning. If they had a choice of being defended by a lawyer who had an IQ of 130, vs one who had an IQ of 80 (not that there could be such a person), they wouldn't hesitate in choosing the IQ-130 one. It's really hilarious to see how utterly hypocritical the Left is here -- as blindly dogmatic as any religious fundamentalist., with this difference: Leftists actually know better, whereas the fundamentalist is a genuine believer.

And, no, I don't 'follow' or read just those who agree with me. In fact, here I'm a Popperian, and seek out 'disconfirming evidence'. The best way to test whether someone (including oneself) is a rational thinker, basing their views on things other than their own prejudices and emotions, is to ask: "Is there any evidence that would change your mind on this issue?" If you can't imagine any such evidence, then your belief is essentially a religious one, beyond proof.

And those French peasants were right, and all those clever French intellectuals were wrong, despite the fact that the latter would have had a mean IQ two or three standard deviations above the former.

No one uses them anymore except for racist drivel . Why is that so hard to understand

 

[Dagosa]

Of course, people who say IQ has no meaning. If they had a choice of being defended by a lawyer who had an IQ of 130, vs one who had an IQ of 80 (not that there could be such a person),

You can’t show me the tests of any of these people as related to anyones employment, promotion or anything . None, no where. You just make up shit, say a number, then pretend it was his or hers.

You have five paragons of suppositions and not one reference to a list of IQ tests given relating to the advancement of anyone. You’re making up shit
off the top of your pin head.

I can say Jim Hines was the fastest human once and give you times in his 100 m dash to support it.

You can’t give me IQ numbers cause you just made them up.

 

[Doug1943]

Go look up what Italian Fascism is. It's the merger of the political and corporate states

I know a bit about fascism. I think the word is best used to describe a phenomenon that emerged after WWI: the adoption by a section of what we can call 'the Right', of the social program and organizational methods of the Left.

Before WWI, the Right, especially in Europe, were the 'Throne and Altar' (and Army) people: they were traditionalists, against revolution, for preserving traditional society, generally (not always) against the welfare-state reforms proposed by the Left.

But WWI destroyed a lot, not just people. And with the triumph of the Bolsheviks, a new model for political action emerged. And the power of nationalism, to which the supposedly internationalist Socialists had bowed, impressed a lot of people. (European nationalism, the nationalism of small nations against the big empires, had been a leftwing cause in the middle of the century.)

So Mussolini, who had been a leftwing Socialist -- the editor of the Socialist newspaper -- retained the Socialists' orientation towards the masses, and added the Bolshevik idea of a 'combat party' -- in his case, the squadristi.

Hitler did the same, with the Sturmabteilung. And it was no accident that he called his party the National Socialist German Workers Party. An old-timey Rightist would have been fighting to put the Kaiser, or a descendant, back on the German throne. But Hitler was a revolutionary.

Of course, the 'socialist' trappings were quickly discarded once these movements achieved state power. Corporations and all private businesses were made subordinate to the state, or even nationalized (towards the end of Mussolini's reign). Just like under socialism, in fact.

The demagogic socialist trappings of the fascists/Nazis, and their subordination of businesses to the state, are the basis for a wrongheaded tendency on the Right to say that these movements were really 'Leftist'. But their 'Leftism' was as phoney as the 'patriotism' of today's progressives -- just a label, words, chosen for political convenience.

We do not have a real fascist movement in America yet, but the potential is there. There are some very sophisticated fascists out there, alongside the nut-cases and little boys in Nazi costumes. And some of them are making a bit of headway among 'red-pilled' young white males. This is where genuine patriots ought to get active, to take on these fascists and prevent them from recruiting a base.

The left has adopted fascist tactics, physically attacking conservative rallies and marches, breaking up our meetings on campus. But the extreme nationalism and racial supremacy theories which mark genuine fascism are absent from the Left. They use fascist tactics, but do not have fascist ideology. (In fact, the mainstream of the modern far Left has no ideology at all, not even socialism.)

 

[Doug1943]

No one uses them anymore except for racist drivel . Why is that so hard to understand

I'm laughing now. You really don't know anything at all about the academic study of intelligence, do you? I know you won't do it, but anyone who is interested, should have a look at this journal:
[ Intelligence | Journal | ScienceDirect.com by Elsevier ]

Wait a minute!!! Are you sure you're not a wicked old right-winger, posing as a supremely ignorant young Leftie??? If so, I appreciate your efforts, but, really, it's not fair play. They can discredit themselves without our help.

 

[Doug1943]

You can’t show me the tests of any of these people as related to anyones employment, promotion or anything . None, no where. You just make up shit, say a number, then pretend it was his or hers.

You have five paragons of suppositions and not one reference to a list of IQ tests given relating to the advancement of anyone. You’re making up shit
off the top of your pin head.

I can say Jim Hines was the fastest human once and give you times in his 100 m dash to support it.

You can’t give me IQ numbers cause you just made them up.

No, the correlation of IQ with success in many fields is well-known and not controversial at all. It's even correlated with the chance of being wounded in combat. The stupider you are, the more dangerous combat is for you.

It's actually astonishing to argue this with someone as completely ignorant of the field as you are. Usually, Lefties know a bit about it, and have at least read the late Stephen J. Gould's The Mismeasure of Man. [ Stephen Jay Gould - Wikipedia ] [The Mismeasure of Man - Wikipedia ]

For any literate person reading this, if you haven't come across Gould, you're in for a treat. He was a brilliant writer. If you have kids, get one or two of his books on evolution for them. They're very accessible and make the subject come to life.

On the subject of IQ and intelligence, Wiki is a good place to start, as it often is. Anyone interested should start here:
[ Intelligence quotient - Wikipedia ]
"IQ scores are used for educational placement, assessment of intellectual disability, and evaluating job applicants. In research contexts, they have been studied as predictors of job performance and income. They are also used to study distributions of psychometric intelligence in populations and the correlations between it and other variables. Raw scores on IQ tests for many populations have been rising at an average rate that scales to three IQ points per decade since the early 20th century, a phenomenon called the Flynn effect. Investigation of different patterns of increases in subtest scores can also inform current research on human intelligence."

What is controversial about IQ, and what makes orthodox Lefties wet their pants, is the question of whether IQ is inherited -- ie a function of our genome -- or whether it's a function of the environment. Almost everyone who studies this subject agrees that it's both -- the question is what proportion of each factor is responsible. Attempts to raise IQ by providing an intelligence-nurturing environment have proved disappointing. On the other hand, the Flynn Effect shows that environmental factors of some sort must play an important role, since the mean IQ has been going up by about 3 points a decade for several decades. (Although there is some evidence that this has stopped and maybe even is reversing. But even if that's the case, it's clearly not genes doing it.)

 

[rightwinger]

If they had a choice of being defended by a lawyer who had an IQ of 130, vs one who had an IQ of 80 (not that there could be such a person), they wouldn't hesitate in choosing the IQ-130 one.

Lawyers need people skills which are as valuable in life as IQ.
Many people with high IQs have poor social skills. Something IQ does not measure.

A lawyer must interact with a jury, other lawyers, judges, the media…….something IQ alone won’t accomplish

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

What's a binar? That some tranny code you leftist use?

You're a zero. You assume everyone who doesn't think like you must be a one because you're incapable of thinking for yourself. Your thinking is binary and you're too dumb to even know what that means.