Summing up the Gates haters
-
wrote on 16 May 2020, 15:10 last edited by
One is based on an incomplete or biased interpretation of Trump’s idiotic comments.
The other one is based on... nothing at all...
-
One is based on an incomplete or biased interpretation of Trump’s idiotic comments.
The other one is based on... nothing at all...
wrote on 16 May 2020, 15:29 last edited by@xenon said in Summing up the Gates haters:
One is based on an incomplete or biased interpretation of Trump’s idiotic comments.
The other one is based on... nothing at all...
They are both equally idiotic but look at your rationalization. One is okay and the other isn’t. Sure.
-
@xenon said in Summing up the Gates haters:
One is based on an incomplete or biased interpretation of Trump’s idiotic comments.
The other one is based on... nothing at all...
They are both equally idiotic but look at your rationalization. One is okay and the other isn’t. Sure.
-
wrote on 16 May 2020, 15:45 last edited by Loki
@xenon said in Summing up the Gates haters:
@Loki i guess my definition of “ok” is interpreting things with incomplete info or bias.
And my definition of not okay is stupid is stupid. You tolerate and advance stupidity one way and you can expect it to come back and proliferate in other ways. I am simply saying those appalled by the stupidity of the Gates thing should study their own possible contribution to the advancement of stupidity in society.
-
wrote on 16 May 2020, 15:50 last edited by xenon
The Trump thing is a bad example because some people took a thing that was already stupid and pushed it further to be even stupider.
It was already stupid, it didn’t need additional fake stupid seasoning salt.
-
@xenon said in Summing up the Gates haters:
@Loki i guess my definition of “ok” is interpreting things with incomplete info or bias.
And my definition of not okay is stupid is stupid. You tolerate and advance stupidity one way and you can expect it to come back and proliferate in other ways. I am simply saying those appalled by the stupidity of the Gates thing should study their own possible contribution to the advancement of stupidity in society.
wrote on 16 May 2020, 19:17 last edited by@Loki said in Summing up the Gates haters:
@xenon said in Summing up the Gates haters:
@Loki i guess my definition of “ok” is interpreting things with incomplete info or bias.
And my definition of not okay is stupid is stupid. You tolerate and advance stupidity one way and you can expect it to come back and proliferate in other ways. I am simply saying those appalled by the stupidity of the Gates thing should study their own possible contribution to the advancement of stupidity in society.
Tu quoque is a tired and unsound internet argument. Always has been.
-
@Loki said in Summing up the Gates haters:
@xenon said in Summing up the Gates haters:
@Loki i guess my definition of “ok” is interpreting things with incomplete info or bias.
And my definition of not okay is stupid is stupid. You tolerate and advance stupidity one way and you can expect it to come back and proliferate in other ways. I am simply saying those appalled by the stupidity of the Gates thing should study their own possible contribution to the advancement of stupidity in society.
Tu quoque is a tired and unsound internet argument. Always has been.
wrote on 16 May 2020, 19:49 last edited by@Aqua-Letifer said in Summing up the Gates haters:
@Loki said in Summing up the Gates haters:
@xenon said in Summing up the Gates haters:
@Loki i guess my definition of “ok” is interpreting things with incomplete info or bias.
And my definition of not okay is stupid is stupid. You tolerate and advance stupidity one way and you can expect it to come back and proliferate in other ways. I am simply saying those appalled by the stupidity of the Gates thing should study their own possible contribution to the advancement of stupidity in society.
Tu quoque is a tired and unsound internet argument. Always has been.
That’s fine. So we are to be alarmed at a fringe Gates conspiracy theory but take seriously that injecting with bleach is what was meant and rational people might do I’ll just put in the hilarious bucket.
-
wrote on 16 May 2020, 19:52 last edited by
And again, terrible false equivalence. Trump actually said his thing. We can argue what he meant but only after we acknowledge that you're saying misinterpretation and just completely making shit up are identical.
-
wrote on 16 May 2020, 19:54 last edited by
No, I have to disagree. What Trump said and how it was presented and interpreted meet my criteria for made up shit too.
-
wrote on 17 May 2020, 04:04 last edited by
Seen on twitter:
Counterpoint: Windows Vista.
-
wrote on 24 May 2020, 02:09 last edited by
NYT: "Bill Gates Is the Most Interesting Man in the World"
Cue another Twitter rant about the failing NYT
-
wrote on 24 May 2020, 02:37 last edited by Larry
Its time you "clorox" guys gave it a rest. If you actually believe that Trump meant you could inject bleach into your body then you are the dumbass, not Trump. Everyone misspeaks occasionally. It is an utter fool who keeps harping it.
-
wrote on 24 May 2020, 02:51 last edited by
Damn it, Larry. Now you tell me.
-
wrote on 24 May 2020, 02:59 last edited by
You realize that if Democrats had their way, Gates would have had 90+% of his wealth taxed away and it would have been used to upgrade Obamaphones to iPhone 11s...
-
wrote on 24 May 2020, 12:28 last edited by jon-nyc
40% of Republicans and half of Fox News viewers believe this shit? Seems exaggerated, if the number were that high we would have seen some of the usual suspects here at least flirting with the idea.
But still, fucking hell.
-
wrote on 24 May 2020, 13:11 last edited by Copper
Use covid-19 as a reason or excuse to track?
Or use the actual virus itself to track?
Is that ambiguity is meant to confuse the issue?
Lot's of people want to track everyone and they use the virus as an excuse to do this. And of course they want to use your obamapho, and the chips in it, to do this.
It's some nice ambiguous headline writing, it could inflame people for several different reasons.
-
40% of Republicans and half of Fox News viewers believe this shit? Seems exaggerated, if the number were that high we would have seen some of the usual suspects here at least flirting with the idea.
But still, fucking hell.
wrote on 24 May 2020, 14:07 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Summing up the Gates haters:
40% of Republicans and half of Fox News viewers believe this shit? Seems exaggerated, if the number were that high we would have seen some of the usual suspects here at least flirting with the idea.
But still, fucking hell.
We'd also see some of the usual suspects post the survey and sneer at at how crazy the right is.
-
wrote on 24 May 2020, 14:09 last edited by
Sorry - this is objectively bonkers.
Don’t feel the need to circle the wagons with these clowns.
-
Sorry - this is objectively bonkers.
Don’t feel the need to circle the wagons with these clowns.
wrote on 24 May 2020, 14:11 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Summing up the Gates haters:
Sorry - this is objectively bonkers.
Don’t feel the need to circle the wagons with these clowns.
So says the group that thought Trump was a Russian Agent.