Philosophy Now Forum

"Calling Daesh Islamic is not aiding terrorism,"
Hobbess choice
So, lumping them with the Muslims that are for us , is a good thing?

“Where the fuck do you get your statistical information, about Republican attitude to Muslims and Science?”
Hobbes Choice
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/pre ... muslim-ban
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 ... e-as-ever/

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Walker wrote:Incompetence is the status quo.

Incompetence is the establishment.

Trump is a successful, competent businessman.

A private citizen.

In today's climate, competence and success is anti-establishment.

He's anti-establishment.

Bank on it.

That's why he's feared.

~He's feared because he is a fucking brain dead moron that is good at rabble rousing, like a long line of dictators like Mussolini, Hitler and Caesar.
He is not smart, he is dangerous.

You bet he’s dangerous.

Facts:

Trump is highly intelligent and charismatic. He is playing the media like a fiddle. He answers every question upfront, and he answers a lot of questions.

He stepped into a climate where the groundwork has be laid. The executive office has been corrupted into a cartoonish cult of personality, such as George Washington wanted to avoid. An open democracy is the perfect place for a dictator to flourish, and the fine-tuned propaganda machine is the perfect tool to condition perceptions, so that it happens. The current version of charismatic, personality-cult president has shown the way to bypass Congress with executive orders and departmental regulations.

Downside:
If he was so inclined, a master administrator such as Trump would have a field day in such a climate. He could manipulate public opinion, he could play the media, he could bypass laws and have a legal team extend defenses of unconstitutional acts until the next election.

That's what people have grown accustomed to.

Choice:
All the easy solutions are gone. The buck has been passed down the line too many times. Only hard choices are left.

Trump isn’t appealing to rubes. He is a proven master deal-maker under difficult conditions.

Trump is a successful businessman. Hitler was an artist.

The funny hair and the Ali-like confidence, which is nothing but narcissism in the Kobe Bryant wannabe, is a mockery of the cult of personality.

"If he was so inclined, a master administrator such as Trump would have a field day in such a climate. He could manipulate public opinion, he could play the media, he could bypass laws and have a legal team extend defenses of unconstitutional acts until the next election."

I'm inclined to think he'll do just that.

Even so: he'll still be way better than what we have now, or any of the schmucks running against him, on either (or, any) side.

raw_thought wrote:“Where the fuck do you get your statistical information, about Republican attitude to Muslims and Science?”
Hobbes Choice
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/pre ... muslim-ban
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 ... e-as-ever/

FYI skepticism about the degree of GW is not anti-science.

henry quirk wrote:"If he was so inclined, a master administrator such as Trump would have a field day in such a climate. He could manipulate public opinion, he could play the media, he could bypass laws and have a legal team extend defenses of unconstitutional acts until the next election."

I'm inclined to think he'll do just that.

Even so: he'll still be way better than what we have now, or any of the schmucks running against him, on either (or, any) side.

So are such a moron.

henry quirk wrote:"If he was so inclined, a master administrator such as Trump would have a field day in such a climate. He could manipulate public opinion, he could play the media, he could bypass laws and have a legal team extend defenses of unconstitutional acts until the next election."

I'm inclined to think he'll do just that.

Even so: he'll still be way better than what we have now, or any of the schmucks running against him, on either (or, any) side.

The devious tactics that everyone is accustomed to from the current administration have obviously not been good for business.

The current executive is not a businessman. As an ideologue, he does what’s bad for business.

As a successful businessman, Trump has a mature and realistic point of view about the organization, his role in the organization, and the ways of human beings.

Up until now, he has done what’s good for business. Why should he not continue that?

If elected, he could be the greatest president in history. He could also be the worst president in history.

What are the odds of either?

Malcolm X, Hospital Scene
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Uoy6xy5AFM

Trump was a funder of terrorism.

He befriended Mummar Gaddafi who used Trump's influence to make money for terrorists.

The Gaddafi tent became a symbol of his rule and was taken on his travels. On occasion, during a trip to the UN in New York, it was pitched on Donald Trump’s Westchester County estate.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:Trump was a funder of terrorism.

He befriended Mummar Gaddafi who used Trump's influence to make money for terrorists.

The Gaddafi tent became a symbol of his rule and was taken on his travels. On occasion, during a trip to the UN in New York, it was pitched on Donald Trump’s Westchester County estate.

Hillary Clinton, in her establishment government position, took care of that bad guy in her official role as Secretary of State, which threw the region into a chaotic exodus into Europe.

Way to go. Lousy deal making.

Donald Trump is a private citizen, and a successful businessman. He likely has aquaintances all over the world.

I bet you could find a picture of him shaking hands with a bad guy if you looked.

The status quo establishment has made dodging an issue the measure of political acumen.

Those with a well-rounded arsenal of dodges are considered savvy.

Hillary Clinton defends "We Came, We Saw, he Died" - FoxNews 111023

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1fJwS_SWD8

"moron"

dick

"Daesh"

No.

Wahhabists.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Impenitent wrote:why do you think the second was written?

1861

-Imp

What are you talking about?

armed populations and civil war... producers versus leeches...

-Imp

Impenitent wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Impenitent wrote:why do you think the second was written?

1861

-Imp

What are you talking about?

armed populations and civil war... producers versus leeches...

-Imp

No, I meant literally what the fuck are you talking about?

Hobbes' Choice wrote: No, I meant literally what the fuck are you talking about?

history never repeats

-Imp