Posts made by flozen

@Frederick:

As always, you are wrong. 
I can provide them.  Here is one from 2.5 months ago!:
https://forum.gaytorrent.ru/index.php?topic=52326.msg284701#msg284701

No.  Your point was that I "lied" about making a thumbs down – that somewhere I denied it, and you had the ability to prove otherwise:

"I would also point out that you have lied to me several times about giving me a thumbs down. I have my own special way of knowing that."

Your reference link only alleges the giving of a thumbs down.  I've given you a fair share, including in that thread.

Saying I lied about it is, ironically, the lie.  Pony up a citation where I have lied to you regarding thumbs, and stop shifting your claim.

@Frederick:

When you say "A group of mean and women pulled down their drawers, and each one took a steaming shit", are you referring to how the statue of Marion Barry was made?

You're remarkably unfunny, and this scatological allusion to African-American skin color should earn you a warning, but of course, it won't.

Stop deflecting the issue at hand and allow it to be discussed.

@Frederick:

I would also point out that you have lied to me several times about giving me a thumbs down. I have my own special way of knowing that.

I'm afraid I'm going to have to call "bullhockey" on that fabrication.

As we have not "spoken" privately to my memory, can you simply provide the threads where I "lied" in comments about giving you/not giving you "a thumbs down"?

But you can't provide them, can you?  So much for your special ways.  As an aside, you've probably received about five percent "up" from me in the world of thumbs – a number that has clearly reached its plateau.

Would it be free speech if a group of men and women pulled down their drawers, and each one took a steaming shit on the memorial, until it was covered in feces and became a public health issue?

The thoroughly modern liberal says "yes," it should be a punishable offense.

This can be addressed in several aspects.  In the realm of law, almost every municipality has an ordinance against public urination.

Then, in the realm of personal opinion, I find it's a poor example for all citizenry, especially the young.  Make this the norm, and will people soon be peeing on their desks when they leave a less-than-ideal job?  At some point, will kids pee on their cafeteria trays to signal disapproval of broccoli as vegetable of the day?

To me, it's a vulgar action, and there's a plethora of better ways to make your opinions known.  I'm not inclined to license the act as protected political speech, or spray.

In our current U.S. environment, it doesn't take much prodding to bring out the baser behaviors in people.  So I'd like to put a lid (or a zipper) on this one.

I'll travel from the personal to the more general.

My alluring, long red reputation line (and always looking for a little more) was established by two persons.

Meanwhile, I've been assigned 360 "thumbs and emojis" as of this writing, with the top six contributors totaling 222 of these marks, and the sixth position tallying at 21 marks.  Other members assigned the remaining 138 marks, which, while unlisted, must tally from the teens downward through single digits.

Thus, I've received thumbs and emojis from more than a dozen members.  I'll take that larger gene pool over the "reputation" kissing cousins any day.  And for whatever it's worth, my marks run about five-to-one positive.

I wish this thread would act as a long-term catch-all for remarks about either evaluation system.  Unfortunately, so many political topics are diverted and derailed by endless mention of reputation, in particular.  It's a sad and weak refuge when one's argument is being shredded for lack of citations, the poor quality of citations, biased premise, off-topic meanderings, and so on.

That sums it up for me.  Oh, except to say that none of it means much in the grand of scheme of things – for self-actualized people, anyway.

Well, rather than taking individual political topics too far afield, there's now a thread on P&D that can act as a repository for all the chit-chat about GT's "opinion buttons":

https://forum.gaytorrent.ru/index.php?topic=53873.0

This thread was originated to discuss the Portland City Council seat, and once the mechanics of the race were explored (or ignored), it was revealing.  Let's see how that race pans out in 2018.

I'm afraid this will be a really weak start.  The only case I can recall involves straight porn and a case from my home town of Fort Lauderdale:

http://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/shawn-the-milf-hunter-rees-sued-for-breaking-7-year-sex-contract-6521259

(This is a bit of an anomaly in itself, as Fort Lauderdale is much more of a gay porn production mecca.  To the extent that I was once offered money, from a near-stranger with ties to the industry, to use my pool area for filming.)

Wait… there was also one from your city, Tokyo.  Straight, again, I fear:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/japanese-porn-actress-get-contract-828032

Now, can anyone find some contract litigation in the gay world?

@raphjd:

And you are still ignoring that most of the people against him running are only opposed to his campaign because he is white and has a penis.

I'm not ignoring your claim.

I'm dismissing it as the detritus from a long-running, unhealthy obsession with "otherness" as juxtaposed with "whiteness" and "maleness."

@raphjd:

Umm, Portland is also the place that has anti-whiteness seminars at the college.

You are trying to make it sound as though leftist are against him running because he isn't qualified, which is complete BS.   They don't want him to run because he's white and has a penis.

We're not talking about college seminars, we're talking about a City Council seat.

Ski coach Spencer Raymond has no past political or governmental efforts to his credit, he's an eleventh-hour opportunist, and yes, those factors are of concern to Portland citizens of any color who are looking for a serious, committed and knowledgeable candidate.

And you didn't have information about the four candidates' prior qualifications because you write solely to seethe and provoke, using YouTube videos as a primary – and often enough, singular -- source for commentary that you erroneously equate with reporting.

I'll be happy to respond, and to point out some facts that have been conveniently omitted to make your account fit your worldview more snugly.

Portland is a city of 600,000, incorporated in 1851, that has never had a woman of color of the City Council.  In the upcoming race, however, there are three such women running.  And as you pointed out, a young white man more recently announced his candidacy.

Now, in the United States, we enjoy the freedom to run for elected office, as well as the freedom to voice our opinions on those who run, including their experience, qualifications and other factors germane to a political race.

And here's where your strange void of information appears.

Among the female candidates, Jo Ann Hardesty is a former state lawmaker; Loretta Smith is a Multnomah County Commissioner; and Andrea Valderrama is a City Council staffer.

The newest candidate, Spencer Raymond, 30, is a white guy with zero political experience.  His qualification, a term I use loosely, is that he's the Coach of the Lake Oswego Ski Team.

And with that information on the table (though not in your post), one can see why some Oregon political observers have perceived Raymond's last-minute entry in the race as opportunistic.  Raymond is an Anglo "any-man" who figures he's got a decent chance to benefit from a divided field, and can slalom to victory with the "I'm more comfortable with a white guy" vote.

Even so, Spencer has the absolute right to run for City Council, as much as the citizenry and press have a right to question his motivation and qualifications.  People even have the right to suggest he leave the race, as much as he has the right to stay in the race.  And neo-cons have the freedom to support Spencer, the candidate who has never spent a day working in government.

And yes, it seems like ALL sides are playing identity politics, so no one here has the higher moral ground.  In the end, it may hinge on whether the council has a run-off system of the two highest vote-getters, if no one attains a 50 percent-plus-one.  Perhaps you can invest some honest and useful research on that angle.

And while your original post carries all the weight of a YouTube video from renowned political pundit "Wild Smile," here's an example of what an actual news citation looks like:

http://portlandtribune.com/pt/9-news/377206-263279-sources-say-identity-politics-in-city-council-race

When people of any race, religion or orientation make deliberately false statements alleging hate crimes against them, it's a reprehensible act.

But these examples are outliers when viewed on a cumulative, national level.

What I see in this thread, and MANY more like it here in Politics & Debate, is a fixation – bordering on obsession -- with outliers, while the number of real hate crimes has been rising across the United States in the Trump era.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/sorry-hatersa-handful-of-hoaxes-doesnt-debunk-the-hate-crime-reality

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hate-crime-rise-2016-united-states-trump_us_59becac8e4b086432b07fed8

And when people spend such an overabundance of time speaking only of the outliers, it makes one wonder how much they care about the majority of proven hate crimes.  These injustices seem to be of little interest to them.

Congratulations to the Virginia voters for choosing, both up- and down-ballot, to send a message to Washington.

The extraordinarily inept performance in the Executive branch has, um, been noticed, lol:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

And it will be corrected, initially, at the state level, in the purple battlegrounds.  Hang on to your hats.

@Frederick:

I can simplify it for you.   
If a poster has a long green line under their name, that means they have a high reputation, and their posts are informative, accurate, poignant, interesting, and sometimes entertaining.
If a poster has a long red line under their name, that means they have have a very low reputation, and their posts are loaded with fake news, misinformation, lies, omissions, are incoherent, nauseating, and are rarely worth the time it takes to read them.

What you're omitting is that YOU assigned the vast majority of my "reputation" line.  Drawing attention to my "long red one" ( blush) is nothing more than a testament to your pettiness.

Let people click on your Thumbs Down icon if they want to see a much-broader sampling from GT members, and how they feel about the quality and accuracy of YOUR editorial droppings.

I do believe you've finally achieved #1 status – can you point to any active member who has a greater number of the these drooping hand digits?  No?  Then congratulations -- you are #1 Thumbs Down...!

And you STILL have not explained -- via the customary facts and citations -- your rant that constitutes this thread.  It's one more in an unending stream of deluxe nothing burgers, from a man-child who pollutes the board each day with weak headlines, thereby obscuring better political discourse from others.

@Frederick:

I realize the moonbats are desperate and must resort to "fake news" to make their "fake points". 
However, posting false statements, distortions of the truth, omitting crucial facts, etc. is unacceptable in a debate group.

Starting a new thread carries a certain responsibility to be clear about the issues being raised.  Certainly, you don't want to appear like an aimlessly fluttering moonbat, or someone who writes any slop just to get thread-creation points on the cheap.

So, per your opening premise…

What are the "fake news" and "fake points" that caused you to rise up and favor us with this thread?

Where are are the "false statements, distortions of the truth, omitting crucial facts" of which you write?

Did you have ANYTHING specific and useful in mind when you extruded this no-content thread?

Do tell.

Yes, more colorful (and disturbing) rhetoric from the little tyrant.

And Trump – at least at this writing -- making remarks in South Korea that are on-point, more measured, and keep the door to diplomacy open, while still projecting U.S. strength...

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-trump-asia-southkorea/at-north-koreas-doorstep-trump-warns-of-u-s-power-while-also-striking-conciliatory-note-idUSKBN1D61YG

All this, a good topic for Politics & Debate.

@Frederick:

Oh, I got it.  That reminds me of a true thing that happened to me.  Disney World typically has their Main Street Electrical Parade and fireworks every night at 9PM and then the park closes for the night.  In other words, the climax to the entire day is the fireworks show.  One time, my grandparents brought my brother and I to Disney World.  They were in their early 60's at the time, but acted like old farts.  I think my grandparents were 90 years old when they were BORN.  Anyway, even though my grandparents were fully mobile, and used to taking walks for miles and riding bicycles, etc.  They just sat around in the park while my brother and I went on rides.  I didn't complain that grandma brought nasty ham sandwiches and warm cans of soda to eat rather than go to the many restaurants in the park.  I didn't complain that they didn't let us go into any of the gift shops (in fact, my brother and I had a little money with us.. I bought a pair of plastic teeth in the magic store which was about the cheapest thing in the store).  I was having fun despite my grandparents.  My brother and I met up with my grandparents when it got dark.  The idea was that you want to get a good spot to watch the parade. 
However, my grandparents had something else in mind.  Instead of finding a good place to sit for the parade and fireworks.. they headed for the EXIT of the park!  Their "brilliant" idea was to get out of the park before everyone else, and beat the traffic.  Who cares if you miss the most spectacular part of the entire day.  What my grandparents did is like having a birthday party, bringing out a cake, and then taking a massive shit on it.

Youtube Video

Well, Mr. Frederick, I see that our hour is up.  Yes, I've been told the couch is very comfortable.

Next week, let's further our discussion on how to make posts that actually belong in "Politics & Debate," and work towards channeling your unresolved, historical family issues elsewhere.

@Frederick:

Uh.. the ladies are known to do things such as poke a pinhole in a condom to get pregnant.  That is quite common.  Also, condoms do break and fall off.  Some bitch could easily take a filled condom and intentionally transfer the sea monkeys in it to her vag.   A lot of males will not or at least hate wearing condoms.

Why do you answer questions explicitly directed to other people?

Shouldn't you, instead, be busy ironing someone's underwear?

@raphjd:

Women have 100% of the say in whether we are fathers of not.

If men opt to wear a condom, they can pretty much rule out unplanned fatherhood.

Why do you make such easily disproved and absurd remarks?

@cteavin:

The Bible (Koran, Torah) don't endorse slavery. They record the history of slavery and the thinking of their day which, if you're talking about the slavery brought into the Americas, was later used to endorse/justify what the Europeans were doing to other human beings through the slave trade.

Hi there, ct and other thread voices.  The bible may not endorse slavery, but it certainly spends enough verses offering guidelines on how to best practice certain facets of the "arrangement," and how to "treat" them.  And that raises all the questions of "implicit endorsement," and, in the NT, begs the question of why Jesus and the apostles didn't make a point to stamp out something so – to the topic at hand -- immoral.

How times change, in that today, I think many might agree that slavery carries the moral weight to stand as its own Commandment.  Alas, the bible of ancient times floats around the topic, its writers knowing that the ruling class would destroy such printings.

In this and many other respects, i see the bible as authored by decent men, writing words that are "practical to the time," rather than "divinely inspired" words that bring you god's hell-fire if amended.  It helps explain why I'm an atheist, as I simply disbelieve its claimed provenance.

Anyway, since I love a citation, OT and NT biblical references to slavery can be found in oodles of places:

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_Bible

@cteavin:  You're one of the few GT members who make thought-provoking contributions to both the Religion and P&D boards.  I tend to prefer the latter, but I don't have your fortitude for the current long-haul topics, currently at loggerheads.  I do like getting out my fly-swatter, now and again.  Carry on!