destruction of america

[Mattndew76]

 

[difrangia]

This is all in jest: I think the 'Grammar Police' thing, not just here but everywhere, might fall on the 'Spell Check' thingie in many cases. That type shit is turned off on all my devices. Probably on average, in half a dozen sentences, I'll intentionally miss-spell two or three words and don't need anything or anyone buttin' in. As an extension of that, I don't talk to devices and won't have them talking to me. All my personal cars are old enough to miss that bullet and it's all turned off on Wifey's late model Ford. In my world the proper place for a 'fitbit' is bout a foot up someone else's wazoo.

 

Thickening the plot on this 'automation' kick, I almost throw something through the screen when I'm in the room and Wifey has the TV on and that GMC commercial with the 'Champions' clapfest comes on. I shudder to think what destruction one of those behemoths would inflict on one of the sanely sized vehicles that I buzz around in while the shit-head that is supposed to be operating the monster is texting or clapping up a storm enjoying his/her/it's steering/brake automation gadgets. Maybe I'm just gettin' too old and I've been run over by unattentive vehicle owners a few times; got a plastic right foot as a trophy from one of the encounters. AI ya say ?? I'm done; have a happy Sunday !!

Edited June 18, 2023 by difrangia

[datzenmike]

39 minutes ago, difrangia said:

This is all in jest: 

 

Yes, if not obvious, pretty much everything I say in destruction is in jest. Thinks are so fucked up I'm all cried out.

[difrangia]

10 minutes ago, datzenmike said:

 

Yes, if not obvious, pretty much everything I say in destruction is in jest. Thinks are so fucked up I'm all cried out.

 

Works for me; tears (salt & moisture) would only contribute to rust; a major enemy of Ratsun people.

[dhp123166]

15 hours ago, john510 said:

Good question on what happened to the Hillary thing.I just assumed the Republicans (because they won) wanted to take the high road instead of stooping to dirty politics. They got rid of her and were fine with it.The right does seem to be all bark and no bite.

 

This statement strikes me as hopelessly naive and in no way do I believe that the previous president, having proven that he is an extremely impulsive person willing to stoop to any level to win would "take the high road instead of stooping to dirty politics." Especially with allegedly incontrovertible evidence against HRC and a domination of 2/3 branches of government.

 

Remember these truly funny gems from the 2016 and 2020 elections?

 

"Lyin" Ted Cruz ?

 

" Little" Marco Rubio?

 

Elizabeth " Pocahontas" Warren ?

 

"Sleepy" Joe Biden ?

 

I wonder if comedic gold will strike again and we will see some more funny sobriquets;

 

We already have Ron " Desanctimonious" which is an average insult as sanctimonious is a word that may not be used in everyday conversation and is  unfamilar to alot of people.

 

Some easier low hanging fruit could be;

 

"Turncoat" Mike Pence,

 

 Nikki " Dothead" Haley,

 

Tim " Not in This Lifetime" Scott,

 

Vivek " Who the hell are you? " Ramaswamy

 

Chris Christie is such a massive target, it is hard to come up with the most correct nickname!

 

 

 

 

Edited June 18, 2023 by dhp123166

[john510]

10 minutes ago, dhp123166 said:

 

This statement strikes me as hopelessly naive and in no way do I believe that the previous president, having proven that he is an extremely impulsive person willing to stoop to any level to win would "take the high road instead of stooping to dirty politics." Especially with allegedly incontrovertible evidence against HRC and a domination of 2/3 branches of government.

 

Remember these truly funny gems from the 2016 and 2020 elections?

 

"Lyin" Ted Cruz ?

 

" Little" Marco Rubio?

 

Elizabeth " Pocahontas" Warren ?

 

"Sleepy" Joe Biden ?

 

I wonder if comedic gold will strike again and we will see some more funny sobriquets;

 

We already have Ron " Desanctimonious" which is an average insult as sanctimonious is a word that may not be used in everyday conversation and is  unfamilar to alot of people.

 

Some easier low hanging fruit could be;

 

"Turncoat" Mike Pence,

 

 Nikki " Dothead" Haley,

 

Tim " Not in This Lifetime" Scott,

 

Vivek " Who the hell are you? " Ramaswamy

 

Chris Christie is such a massive target, it is hard to come up with the most correct nickname!

 

 

 

 

Funny shit.Yea none of Trump's opposition or competition have ever resorted to name calling and the same rhetoric.And I do think if Trump toned it down quite a bit it would help his campaign.Are you calling me naive ? LOL.What levels did Trump stoop to for the win ? Did he accuse Clinton of being a Russian operative ? Did he hire somebody to create a fictional docier ? Did he eavesdrop on the Clinton campaign ? Let's hear it.

Edited June 18, 2023 by john510

[dhp123166]

31 minutes ago, john510 said:

Funny shit.Yea none of Trump's opposition or competition have ever resorted to name calling and the same rhetoric.And I do think if Trump toned it down quite a bit it would help his campaign.Are you calling me naive ? LOL.What levels did Trump stoop to for the win ? Did he accuse Clinton of being a Russian operative ? Did he hire somebody to create a fictional docier ? Did he eavesdrop on the Clinton campaign ? Let's hear it.

All I am saying is that the bloodlust was turned up against HRC to level 11 by the previous President, his supporters and right wing media...and then nothing.

 

If I was to believe everything the right was spewing, the case against HRC was a sure thing and she was definitely going to be in the can in a very short time.

 

It all quietly disappeared.

 

P.S. Your retorted questions amount to "whataboutism" which is a diversionary tactic and are not applicable to my original query.

[dhp123166]

And really the fact that "none of Trump's opposition or competition have ever resorted to name calling and the same rhetoric" illustrates the coarse ( but still funny) "level that Trump stoop[ed] to for the win."

Edited June 18, 2023 by dhp123166

[john510]

48 minutes ago, dhp123166 said:

All I am saying is that the bloodlust was turned up against HRC to level 11 by the previous President, his supporters and right wing media...and then nothing.

 

If I was to believe everything the right was spewing, the case against HRC was a sure thing and she was definitely going to be in the can in a very short time.

 

It all quietly disappeared.

 

P.S. Your retorted questions amount to "whataboutism" which is a diversionary tactic and are not applicable to my original query.

FWIW I never believed for a minute Hillary would end up in jail or even be prosecuted.Like Trump is doing,she screwed herself and paid the price.I don't believe everything the right is spewing.Hardly any of it.You might try thinking that way about the left because you guys are batting .000 on every attempt to put Trump away.Does that NOT mean anything ? Don't be surprised if the current witch hunt ends up nowhere also.

[Ooph!]

The FBI gave her the pass even though they also stated she DID have classified email on her private server.

James Comey announced that the FBI investigation had concluded that Clinton had been "extremely careless" but recommended that no charges be filed because Clinton did not act with criminal intent. Comey also said in his 2018 book A Higher Loyalty that his decision may have been influenced by the fact that he considered it extremely likely that Clinton would become the next president.

She did skirt the law by having a private email server.

She did destroy evidence after being served a warrant for its return.

She did lie to the Govt. by claiming there were no emails yet after repeated requests for emails by the Govt. a hacker named Gucifer revealed some of them by hacking Sidney Blumenthals account.

Nothing happened to her because the bureaucracy would not allow it - they protected her just as they go after Trump.

Edited June 18, 2023 by Ooph!

[john510]

3 minutes ago, Ooph! said:

The FBI gave her the pass even though they also stated she DID have classified email on her private server.

James Comey announced that the FBI investigation had concluded that Clinton had been "extremely careless" but recommended that no charges be filed because Clinton did not act with criminal intent. Comey also said in his 2018 book A Higher Loyalty that his decision may have been influenced by the fact that he considered it extremely likely that Clinton would become the next president.

She did skirt the law by having a private email server.

She did destroy evidence after being served a warrant for its return.

She did lie to the Govt. by claiming there were no emails yet after repeated requests for emails by the Govt. a hacker named Gucifer revealed some of them by hacking Sidney Blumenthals account.

Hey go easy on the facts.You're going to hurt somebody's feelings.

[dhp123166]

10 minutes ago, Ooph! said:

The FBI gave her the pass even though they also stated she DID have classified email on her private server.

James Comey announced that the FBI investigation had concluded that Clinton had been "extremely careless" but recommended that no charges be filed because Clinton did not act with criminal intent. Comey also said in his 2018 book A Higher Loyalty that his decision may have been influenced by the fact that he considered it extremely likely that Clinton would become the next president.

She did skirt the law by having a private email server.

She did destroy evidence after being served a warrant for its return.

She did lie to the Govt. by claiming there were no emails yet after repeated requests for emails by the Govt. a hacker named Gucifer revealed some of them by hacking Sidney Blumenthals account.

Nothing happened to her because the bureaucracy would not allow it - they protected her just as they go after Trump.

 

 

Thanks for the facts.

 

The fact that the former president has two current indictments against him and another two more possible might illustrate that the former President has engaged in far more alleged criminal conduct than any politician in recent memory.

 

 

[john510]

11 minutes ago, dhp123166 said:

 

 

Thanks for the facts.

 

The fact that the former president has two current indictments against him and another two more possible might illustrate that the former President has engaged in far more alleged criminal conduct than any politician in recent memory.That's been thoroughly investigated with intent on ruining a career.

 

 

I fixed it for you.

Edited June 18, 2023 by john510

[dhp123166]

 Where did you get that fact?

[john510]

38 minutes ago, dhp123166 said:

 Where did you get that fact?

MSNBC

[Ooph!]

56 minutes ago, dhp123166 said:

 

 

Thanks for the facts.

 

The fact that the former president has two current indictments against him and another two more possible might illustrate that the former President has triggered the deep state bureaucracy into action against him to eliminate any risk to its own power and survival...

 

 

 

There, now its fixed.

[john510]

Yes a much better fix.

[dhp123166]

29 minutes ago, john510 said:

MSNBC

MSNBC is a news organization and is biased in one direction or the other. 

 

News organizations do not create news they have sources from which they base their opinions on.

 

What is the source material from which they based their opinion on?

[john510]

44 minutes ago, dhp123166 said:

MSNBC is a news organization and is biased in one direction or the other. 

 

News organizations do not create news they have sources from which they base their opinions on.

 

What is the source material from which they based their opinion on?

That clearly sailed way over your head.If you haven't figured it out yet our media can say anything they want and don't need a source.If they claim to have a source it's usually an anonymous one.When you watch your news providers take that grain of salt while watching.If you haven't picked up on how many times the mainstream media has been wrong or just flat out fabricated stories for ratings I guess there's nothing that can be done for you.Just keep slurping it up.

[dhp123166]

52 minutes ago, john510 said:

45 minutes ago, Ooph! said:

 

There, now its fixed.

 

 

The concept of an evil deep state bureaucracy is a creation of right wing media and is a hysterical interpretation of what a bureaucracy actually does.

 

In my opinion a bureaucracy is neither benevolent nor malicious. It exists as a tool to facilitate the legal dictates of a governmental or business organization.

 

The concept of the " boogeyman bureacracy" may have really gained traction with the famous Ronald Reagan utterance, "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ' I am from the government and I am here to help.'"

 

This phrase seems to indicate prima facie that the Federal government is a malevolent organization and is not to be trusted.

 

When speaking of bureacracy negatively, it seems, generally speaking, that some are taking issue with a facet of bureacracy that is keeping them from making as much money as possible.

 

In the case of some big businesses, they are enemies of the EPA bureacracy that wants to keep them from damaging the environment etc. just so they can generate as much consequence free filthy lucre as possible.

 

Never mind that conservation is an American tradition, I personally, like having clean water and clean air. Having grown up on the east coast in the 70's, I was privy to more than a few local gross polluters and the utter ineptitude and corruption of them, and whom the EPA successfully shut down and punished.

 

Can bureaucracy be useless and actually detrimental to the population at large? Absolutely.

 

I am sure that any number of people on here can come with a story about how a bureaucracy harmed them for no apparent reason. 

 

But is my firm belief that the majority of the Federal Bureaucracy is in place to keep America safe.

 

I like a competent Energy Department which correctly manages all nuclear materials in the US.

 

I like a Defense Department which is not owned by one person. It would be suicidal for this nation to have all that kill power in the hands of one person.

 

In short the Federal Government is one of the only things that keeps the rich and powerful from running roughshod over all us little people.

 

The former president seems to have lived a life where he has pretty much done whatever he wants and suffered little consequences.

 

A bureaucracy exists to keep a person like this ( who debatedly knows how to commit action) from gaining too much traction.

 

In the final analysis, a bureacracy exists to further only itself and can actually keep things from getting done.

 

But in my opinion, a powerful ship of state that moves slowly is much preferable to an anarchic and unstable behemoth of a government.

[dhp123166]

3 minutes ago, john510 said:

That clearly sailed way over your head.If you haven't figured it out yet our media can say anything they want and don't need a source.If they claim to have a source it's usually an anonymous one.When you watch your news providers take that grain of salt while watching.If you haven't picked up on how many times the mainstream media has been wrong or just flat out fabricated stories for ratings I guess there's nothing that can be done for you.Just keep slurping it up.

 

As usual, you offer nothing but opinion and finish off with an attempted insult.

 

Boring.

[john510]

13 minutes ago, dhp123166 said:

 

As usual, you offer nothing but opinion and finish off with an attempted insult.

 

Boring.

I think we all get it.You have complete trust in the media and our bloated government.

[dhp123166]

Your words, not mine.

 

[datzenmike]

55 minutes ago, dhp123166 said:

 

The concept of an evil deep state bureaucracy is a creation of right wing media and is a hysterical interpretation of what a bureaucracy actually does.

 

In my opinion a bureaucracy is neither benevolent nor malicious. It exists as a tool to facilitate the legal dictates of a governmental or business organization.

 

The concept of the " boogeyman bureacracy" may have really gained traction with the famous Ronald Reagan utterance, "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ' I am from the government and I am here to help.'"

 

This phrase seems to indicate prima facie that the Federal government is a malevolent organization and is not to be trusted.....

 

 

 

I don't necessarily think a bureaucracy is malevolent, it's just a bottle neck for getting anything done. Like a tight asshole, things naturally get backed up and congested. There's nothing benevolent about being constipated.

[dhp123166]

50 minutes ago, datzenmike said:

 

I don't necessarily think a bureaucracy is malevolent, it's just a bottle neck for getting anything done. Like a tight asshole, things naturally get backed up and congested. There's nothing benevolent about being constipated.

 To use your analogy, it is a good thing that the EPA keeps big business constipated so they don't take shits all over our environment!

 

Of which we have inarguably only one of.

 

 The rollout of A.I. seems to be ungoverned by any bureaucracy and as I have seen a ton of movies detailing a fictional logical conclusion of A.I. run amok, a little more bureaucracy might be in order.

 

Some things deserve to not get done.