rgio wrote:
 
Yep. They are focused upon a court of public opinion (the Trump supporters, conspiracy theorists, Republicans), not the courts of law. 

 steeler wrote:
 
To date, the process is:

1 Get a signed affidavit
2 Hold a press conference
3 File for a hearing
4  Write out the "fraud" for submission to the court, with very little detail but the pressure that the election is being "stolen"
5 Have your "star witness" recant the story.
6 Show up in court, and when asked to detail the fraud or discrepancy, provide nothing (since at this point you could get in trouble for lying).
7 Receive a lashing by the judge wasting the court's time.

The conspiracy theories during steps 1 through 4 flood the internet.  The same channels report nothing regarding 5 through 7.

The entire process is to convince Trump supporters he isn't a loser, and provide a vehicle for Trump to grab money in the name of Democracy.

 sirdroseph wrote:
 

I watched a good chunk of the one in Gettysburg. It was a joke.

Also, one might ask oneself: Why would they be having hearings to present their evidence and arguments and not focus upon doing so successfully in court? 

 westslope wrote:
 
The movement is tied to Trump because it is emotional.  Reason, logic, and science all take a back seat to the feelings associated with his message.   Kurt will say things about honesty, how Trump "finally tells it like it is", yet many of us find Trump to be one of the least dishonest people on the planet.  How is that possible?

I think it's possible because Trump is speaking to Kurt's frustrations.  The government hasn't been there for them (in a way they can see or feel).  Trump is built a reputation as a billionaire....he's not.  He owes more than he has in equity in most of his endeavors. He has failed at more businesses than he's been successful with, primarily because they are all snake oil and empty promises. 

More and more Americans are frustrated by the lack of opportunity they have and in comes a guy who is willing to point fingers and blame everyone in government for their collective lot in life.  He says what many believe...all of the policies and programs to "help" others are hurting me.  You can't get into a good college...blame affirmative action.  You lost your manufacturing job...blame China.  You can't find a good job anywhere...blame immigrants.  It has to be someone else's fault because I started the game and then the rules changed.  What I don't think people understand is that the decisions were all made by their peers, here in the US.  Jobs don't miraculously move offshore, someone in the US moves them.  Companies reward that type of behavior,  and executives can only make more money if the company makes more.  The government couldn't stop it without major protectionist programs.  Trump never planned on stopping it, he just wanted to sell it.

Michael Douglas literally laid out the blueprint for Trump when he made the American President 20+ years ago... 

Replace the girlfriend with Hunter Biden.

Republicans can't find another leader because nobody else will engage at the emotional level Trump plays.  You literally have to ignore reality, which he will do over and over and over.   He will say anything he thinks his followers want to hear, and when called on it he'll double down with lies, conspiracies, and tweets.  The Republican Party is lost.  Mitch McConnell and the Congress sold their soul to the devil for a few judges and a chance to attack the legacy of Obama... and now find themselves in no-man's land.

 sirdroseph wrote: 
 oh good grief.. ever hear about the burden of proof?

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote: 
All of them.  I could look up all of the hearings on you tube and other media outlets, my wife could send you all types of links, but I don't really want to since that would involve a bunch of clicking that you should really do for yourself.

 sirdroseph wrote: 
any particular ones you suggest?

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote: 
Perhaps you should have watched the hearings.  You still can if you want to. You have free will.

 sirdroseph wrote: 
once again, I'd really like to see some hard evidence. Just because you think it is true, doesn't make it true.

 Jiggz wrote: 
Glad someone brought this up; my wife is a conservative so these hearings have been background din for the past couple of weeks and if there is anybody other than a conservative that had to seek out any media that would cover this stuff happened to see and hear these cases if they have even a smattering of objectivity and open mindedness would be taken aback by all of the evidence, hard data and testimony.  The well known conservative corruption of gerrymandering and all the means of voter suppression to alter election outcomes is now joined by out and out vote manipulation by all of those with the means and intent to stop Trump this time around.  Will not be long before conservatives who have intently studied exactly how they did it in these key locales, land some different software contracts and get in on the action.  Politics being sport and all works like the NFL, when something is successful it is quickly copied and implemented.   I have absolutely no faith in the integrity of our electoral process whatsoever.

I honestly don't know who your previous RP persona was, but

a) that certain young man you refer to is every bit as authentic IRL as he was here and didn't need any mentoring from any of us
b) for someone claiming to be antipodean, you must have very little contact with antipodean women to say the things you do.

quite frankly, I smell a rat.
That said, I think it's cool to grow your own tomatoes and wish you a bumper crop.

 rgio wrote:
 
I appreciate greatly that there are things we can agree on, and I would hope that the same is true for most people. I think people have more in common with each other than not, and that the areas of agreement are an opportunity for building connections that could be enough to make the disagreements less divisive.
By equal opportunity I mean that if a woman wants to be an engineer then she absolutely should go for it, and so on. There should be no hindrance on the basis of her being female, or for anyone else on any other basis.
If a woman wants to be a lumberjack then she should be one, but to exclude men from being lumberjacks because the lumberjack tribe has to reflect the demographics of the country, and as a result no men can become lumberjacks until 50% of the lumberjack tribe are female, whatever percentage black, whatever percentage disabled etc etc....is stupid.  To my mind, that is legislating for equal outcome. There are places where this sort of crazy happens, and worse, and nobody really wins.

Huge kudos to your daughter. And to you for no doubt encouraging and supporting her along the way. Proper well done, because agreed, the obstacles absolutely are institutional and pervasive and should not be there. Sometimes the glass ceiling is actually pressed steel, looks pretty in a coating of "equal opportunity-speak", but is impenetrable. Not good for anyone. Obviously, the same for a male nurse or suchlike - everyone should have equal opportunity. Legislating for equal outcome is silly, because "generally women are more interested in people, men in things".....again, generally. An exception to this generality shouldn't even be seen as an exception. Enforced equal outcome to reflect demographics or current political trends - I can't agree with. Just let people find their thing and encourage them to do it

Climate change caused by people alone - no, I am not fully convinced. I'm just not.
The virus thing  - no I am not fully convinced, certainly not as far as wrecking an economy and livelihoods being just some form of collateral damage we just have to simply suck up.  Sure, take care of the vulnerable. But always, not just for the virus. Surrender your entire life and livelihood, kids education, business, exercise regime, freedom of movement, ability to practice whatever your faith might be? No, I don't agree. In the beginning, we didn't know much about it, so Whoa! OK - we think we have to do it like this. We have a lot more knowledge about it now, so yes, take care and carry on. If you feel sick, stay at home. Get tested (with an effective test designed for the job) often. But lockdowns and being told what shoes you can or cannot buy (this has happened)- nope, sorry.
I think there are narratives being promoted, dissensions being silenced and censored - seems odd to me. I know of instances where deaths are being recorded as virus deaths when they absolutely weren't, why would that be?
So no, not fully convinced of either.
White privilege implies non-white victimhood - take the white and non-white out of it, it's just subtle racism. Inverted but racism nonetheless. I'd rather build people up and teach them how to become anything they aspire to regardless of their original circumstances and irrespective of their race. Rather that than tell them they are perpetual victims and thus suggest they can't rise above those circumstances until someone else accepts blame or pays. It doesn't help the very people the theory is purporting to help, in my mind.

Patriotism - I think I understand where you are coming from. Great discussion topic. I understand the meaning to be 'a love for one's country'. I didn't study Latin so I don't know it's orginal meaning. "My country right or wrong" I don't agree with. There are many instances of this being wrong - Nazism being the first that comes to mind. SO, are the flag waving Trump supporters true patriots in the true sense of the word or are they a group who feel kindred to one another for one reason or another (possibly as a result of a slur like being called deplorables?) ?
I haven't thought of it before in those terms.
I do feel a lack of any sense of patriotism in my own case and amongst most of the people I know and share my homeland with - something is missing.
Having given it some particular thought over the past day or so I am not sure if I can honestly and unequivocally say Trump supporters are simply 'patriots' anymore, not in the same sense that say, Steve Bannon might say they are,. A few days ago I would have done, I would have just said 'yeh, they're patriots'. I wouldn't however call them traitors. Absolutely not.
Interesting. Worth more thought for sure. I think I get where you are coming from. Good question.
 
Patriotism is not blindly and only military, no - again, think Nazism. However, I think it's with a sense of patriotism plus a few other things that one would join the military service. Or the police. Or the Coast Guard. One of those additional things might be a desire to defeat an enemy. Another might well be to defend your right to engage in peaceful protest, however you choose to do it. For sure.
However, your right to protest peacefully, which I might be prepared to defend, does not give you the right to pressurise or force me to join you in your protest, or to 'cancel' me until I do. Not cool. And peaceful protest does not include burning down someone else's home or place of business or whatever. Patriotism can take several other forms than just military or similar service, too. I feel we sort of agree in several areas here. My country burns regularly in 'peaceful protest'. Anarchy and peaceful protest are very different things. Peaceful protest is not the same as making a territory ungovernable. Ghandi showed that peaceful protest can be more powerful than burning and looting. Understandable but inappropriate, yes - and not necessarily excusable. There we might disagree.

I agree with you on "I'll pray for you". Yeh, thanks - you can if you think you must but it's for you that you are doing it, not for me. I'm not asking you to. I'm OK.
The Constitution....I think a country needs something to bind it together and give it its identity, just like it needs borders and perhaps an anthem. I do think that these are a little overdone in the USA but I think these things are of more value and more appreciated in bad times, less so in good times.
I also think it important to remember and honour people who fought battles and died on battlefields and in prisons in the past out of some sense of patriotic duty. For me, an anthem and a flag are a way of remembering them.

My notion of America first.....to me it's like being able to help another out of your relative strength. We may both have been in a liferaft for 20 days and both be starving, but if I am faring a little better than you overall then relatively, I am stronger and better placed to help you, and also help both of us. If America is broke, massively unemployed and weak, then then that needs to be addressed before giving everything away, or continuing to give, to another entity who is quickly becoming stronger than America and does not necessarily have American interests at heart. So I am in favour of America, at this time, replenishing herself again, for a time. You can only help another if you can help yourself. Exporting jobs, intellectual capital, raw materials at the expense of your own labour force does not make sense to me. We did that here. Shut down a healthy manufacturing sector employing millions by granting very favourable terms to Chinese imports. Now unemployment sits at around 40% - nobody has any money to buy those cheap Chinese imports anymore anyway and millions have lost their dignity by being reliant on an ever diminishing number of employed. It doesn't end well. First take care of your own. It's common sense. I think it's the right thing to do.

Wealth redistribution vs wealth creation - nuances there regarding taxes that I have to admit I am not entirely familiar with. To me wealth redistribution means literally taking from those who have to give to those who have not, without paying attention to creating an environment that is conducive to a) those who have not creating some of their own, and thus gaining some dignity and b) those who are able to create wealth create more. It ends badly. To me, America has always stood for the nobody arriving with nothing and creating something and becoming somebody, to himself, his family, his community. Or herself...you know what I mean. The purpose of a business is primarily to create wealth, then other things can flow from that like jobs and taxes and so on. I don't think this is a bad thing.
Wait until your pension (401k I think?) is massively eroded by legislated 'investment' in corrupted, hare-brained government schemes supposed to redistribute wealth. Wait until your business is forced to employ a quota of people who are uneeded, unsuitable and too expensive (minimum wage laws) that you cannot retrench or remove (industrial action or ridiculous severance package requirements legally enforced), all in the name of wealth redistribution. It ends badly. Policies that do not favour enterprise cause enterprising people to take their enterprises elsewhere, until you have Zimbabwe. That is wealth redistribution at the sharp end. Wealth creation is usually a better path though yes, it can be flawed. The lobbyist industry needs a cleanup, I think. In some cases corporate wealth can be extreme and obscene - a lot can be done with that. How much does one person or family need to be forever secure? I don't know? I have heard a billionaire say he was, like everyone else, three poor decisions and two weeks of bad luck away from being out on the street. I don't know.

The populist rise isn't about the opportunity, it's about blame. Very very interesting thought right there. Kinda wow!, in a good way. I have sensed that in Trump speeches and others....always shifting attention towards a perceived enemy who is really to blame for all the ills in the lives of the followers. It has snagged a bit with me. I really need to think more about that. I would say however that it's again about first taking care of your own. Again, I see the results of failure to do so around me. But that is definitely something to think about because I don't believe blame to be constructive. Good point.

What policies are so extreme that we'll collectively call them by name (ie woke), instead of accepting our own personal biases and beliefs? I'd say some of those I mentioned about the extremes of wealth redistribution?  I would say that 'woke' to me refers more to social framework than corporate or financial policy framework, though. If your daughter worked in a beauty salon, how would you feel about a large fella in a frock using silly legislation to force her to wax his genitalia on the basis of her reluctance to do so, for whatever reason, being somehow discriminatory against his right to identify as a woman? Nope, she has the right to choose not do the job, and she shouldn't be forced by silly trends or laws into having to do it, and nor should not doing it open her up to being cancelled, outed, trashed and vilified. Why should she lose her rights to choose? I'd be on her side all the way. I am not woke. I am on the side of common sense.

Aaand finally ,
I would challenge you or anyone who suggests that the election was rigged to do something our current President can not...provide proof.- I cannot provide proof.
I understand proof to be evidence submitted to a court that the court finds acceptable as proof.
So proof I cannot provide. However, I understand that a sworn affidavit, under penalty of perjury, can be submitted to a court as evidence, and evidence is the requirement.  The court will decide if the evidence submitted is indeed proof.
There are reportedly hundreds and hundreds of sworn affidavits in the hands of not only the Trump campaign, but in others, to suggest that there was NOT widespread voter fraud....but very narrow, very deep, very effective election fraud. I don't believe that people who genuinely and honestly voted for Biden committed fraud. I have watched video of a panel of apparently respectable people, some Democrat, give testimony that left me in no doubt that there was jiggery pokery at play in certain very carefully selected and very key places, some involving election officials of various levels and some involving election machines in various ways. I find it hard to believe they were ALL lying.
There are many many clips, witness statements, affidavits, data engineer spreadsheets and such that leave me without doubt that something went down. State Constitutions being flouted. Set, strict, long-standing rules for handling the ballot chain of custody being broken. How does a place count thousands and thousands more mail in ballots than were sent out? How can ballots be returned before they were sent out? Why can someone walk into a counting station and insert a USB drive into a voting machine, not once - but 24 times? Was it one of the USB drives stolen, along with a laptop, from a secure voting machine storage facility? What was that all about?
I watched an interview with a data engineer who dissected to granular detail how things just don't stack up. Numbers piling up faster than the voting machines published processing rate. Number spikes that take voter turnout figures to 350%.
I have no skin in the game, no dog in the fight. I am superkeenly interested in how this was done and how it will be unpicked however.  I think there was a plan to put a little bit of thumb on the scale to give biden a narrow victory, but the turnout for Trump surpassed expectations and the thumb had to be turned into a hand, and things got sloppy and became easy to see and forensically examine.
I have seen enough from several sources that leave me without any doubt.
I may be biased, and enjoy having my biases confirmed. I also acknowledge that Trump may lose - it's ok. I am not rabid about it. No dog, remember. I support Trump over Biden, would have supported Trump over Clinton. I would have supported Tulsi Gabbard over Trump.
But I really urge you to go to those dark conservative places on youtube that you really don't want to, that are possibly as distasteful to you as CNN is to me. Spend a little time there. Ignore the clickbaity titles ( I think that is how conservative youtubers think they will get eyeballs on a platform that is left weighted). Tell me what you think?

Whether anything comes of it I don't know. TIme is a consideration. I think lower courts throwing cases out is part of the plan to lodge appeals and get this matter before the Supreme Court ASAP. I think that is the target for really hearing the case. I may be wrong.
But really - I strongly urge you to do some searching. Your mainstream media is not covering it. Twitter is blocking it. Youtube is not making it easy. The burden is to provide evidence, and sworn affidavits are evidence that a court can decide on. There is a lot of evidence.
Swallow your distaste and see Rudi Guiliani's channel. Yes, he's as mad as a box of frogs most of the time. But stupid he is not, I don't think. Find interviews of him. It will be distasteful to you I am sure, but look for the signal in amongst the noise. There is something there, something went down.
Also, Trump is not someone who will simply give up easily. You don't amass that kind of fortune by being a quitter, so don't expect him to. He will fight it all the way. And if he fails, if he loses, he will try again.

That is all. Good chat.
I have many tomato blossoms to .....masturbate.

 westslope wrote: 
I kind of like the way Obama put it:
Of all the strong male stereotypes in American culture that the Republicans could have chosen to compete against his legacy he never would have thought they would choose Richie Rich.

 rgio wrote:
 

That is what is so odd about Trump and his movement.  I have known many, many conservatives over the years, secular and social.   All of them without exception would be alienated even disgusted with Trump's behaviour, private and public.  All would place value on a political leader's character and integrity.  

Why the love, why the consistent, growing support?   Why the constant defence of his boorish behaviour by so many?  Why does the Trump movement seem so obsessively attached to the personality of Donald Trump? 

Why can the Trump movement not find another leader?  A leader of character, a leader of deep, firm moral values, who exudes compassion, a leader who seeks to inspire.  A leader who does not see the world as just a zero sum-game. but rather understand that outcomes improve with better  cooperation.

Perhaps the the pointed question is:  why has the Trump movement failed to develop other strong, articulate and influential leaders?  Why are so many Americans clamouring for charismatic authoritarianism at this stage in US history?

 islander wrote:
 


Islander: 


I don't believe Kurt has ever claimed to be an ophthalmologist. AFAIK he's an optician. Ophthalmologists are qualified to conduct surgery. Kurt is not and AFAIK has never claimed that he operates on people. I don't think Kurt ever stated that the work he does is the equivalent of brain surgery.

Difference between an Ophthalmologist, Optometrist and Optician

Kurt does state in his six year-old post that you linked to that "An ophthalmologist is a brain surgeon. The eye is the exposed part of the brain via the most complex part of the brain the optic chiasm. As the eye is part of the brain, it is on the other side of the body's blood brain barrier, which in itself is a most complex system."   


An emeritus professor of ophthalmology at the  University of Leicester seems to back up Kurt's contention that the eyes are part of the brain. 

The eye is the only part of the brain that can be seen directly – this happens when the optician uses an ophthalmoscope and shines a bright light into your eye as part of an eye examination. It shows the innermost layer of the eye (the retina), and the nerve carrying visual messages from the retina to the brain (along the optic nerve) are visible in the back of the eye.

Whether you want to take issue with Kurt's claim that an ophthalmologist is a brain surgeon is up to you. 

Islander, now might be a great time for you to stop picking fights with Kurt. You're coming across as a drive-by bully. Please stick to the issues and dial down on the snarkiness. 

 islander wrote: 
I knew you were going there.  You are simply a brain dead a$$hole, hell bent on f*cking with me for your personal amusement and to try and push my buttons enough to go off the rails to get DD'ed here.  Same as always as you have stalked me on these boards for years.  I really do rent space your head for free.

I am an optician and have never said otherwise.  That you confuse my profession with ophthalmology is beyond belief especially with your father having been an MD, IIRC.

That was in reference to defending Senator Rand Paul, an Ophthalmologist, as to his competency on commenting and judging on things medical. Yes, the eye is the exposed part of the brain.  The optic nerve terminates in the eye.  Should someone's eyeball fall out of its socket the thing that keeps it from falling on the floor is this optic nerve which is a direct extension of the occipital lobe of the brain.  You will see that the globe is part of it not just an attachment to it.

There are the three "O"'s of which I am the third and lowliest of them, the optician. 

In order of skill and importance:

From the post you cited ... Ophthalmologists are a type of physician, and, thus, they are required to earn a medical degree. The process is a lengthy one, with a prospective ophthalmologist having to earn a 4-year bachelor's degree, complete four years of medical school, and 3-8 years of internships and residencies.

and from this handy dandy linky to web md

The second "O" in an Optometrist ... Optometrists take care of primary health care for the eye. After college, they spent 4 years in a professional program and got a doctor of optometry degree. Some optometrists get additional clinical training or complete a specialty fellowship after optometry school. They focus on regular vision care

I am the third and lowliest of the three "O"'s the Optician, or pharmacist who fills the optical prescriptions written by either of the two types of doctors mentioned above. 

Opticians aren’t eye doctors and can’t give eye exams. They get a 1- or 2-year degree, certificate, or diploma. They fill the prescription your eye doctor gives you.  

I have a two year AAS degree, board certified in both spectacles and contact lenses and hold a medical license in my state in order to legally practice opticianry independent of any direct supervision. I am licensed to do contact lens exams and write prescriptions for and fit contact lenses independently should I choose to do so.  With this license I am held to the same standards as every other licensed medical professional in my state.

Your repeated failure to understand my clear representations of what I do is not my fault.  You bitter hatred towards me blinds any contemplation of reason or fairness in dealing with anything I have to say here.  All you do is personally attack me at every opportunity you can find.

I rarely, if ever anymore, initiate any contact with you for this reason.  It is you who initiates first contact with me and jumps to comment on either an open post or a reply to someone else.  I just simply respond to your what are generally personal attacks and false accusations as has been the case this afternoon.  You have stated before that you will not ignore me and that it is your personal mission to keep me "honest" here.  I take that as a continued threat and an exhibit of your actual stalking of me.

You have outright called me a Liar on two separate occasions today.  Two swings and two strikes.  Third one will be the charm, eh ?

 kurtster wrote:
 

Your words...

https://radioparadise.com/comm...

 islander wrote: 
A) Your choice of words was very strange and unclear to me.  And what you quoted is a true statement.

B) That is a bald faced lie.  Never, ever have I said that or anything close to that.  I want to see you explain that one.

 kcar wrote:
 

I might've gone with

WILL IT BE THE SUN, OR A BASEBALL?
THE SUN? OR A BASEBALL?

 steeler wrote:
 

I blame that wascally wabbit.