Ok. It's just that it seemed as though you were suggesting something more than that: perhaps that I should be more sceptical about the casino thing.

I was trying to make the point that so much is left out of the narrative, that it is a one-sided story.

No, the state doesn't run it, the Director-General of the BBC does. It's an independently run, but publicly funded, news organisation.

It's nothing like KCNA, for example. They couldn't be further apart.

I appreciate the info. But the director-general is appointed by the Secretary of culture. The Office of Communications, UK government-approved regulatory and competition authority for the broadcasting, regulates the BBC. But you are right, the state doesn’t run it per say.

Where are you getting that information from? It's false. The Director-General of the BBC is appointed by the BBC Board, not the Secretary of State for Culture. And note that Ofcom is an independent regulatory body.

That you’re a poor critical thinker is not a surprise to anyone on this forum. It’s senseless to insinuate that critical thinking is not appropriate or valued here.
- praxis


The bad faith, straw men and ad homs do not help your case. — NOS4A2

You began participating in this topic with:

The anti-Trump cult, who don’t have far to look for consensus and propaganda to affirm their beliefs, have been crying wolf for years now.

Whether it was the next Hitler, economic collapse, nuclear war, the prophecies have all proven false and their fears unjustified.

To cover for their mass hysteria, they have resorted to the worst kind of contextomy and tweet-policing.

And now you’ve got the nerve to talk about bad faith and logical fallacies? Yet another demonstration of poor critical thinking. Even a troll needs to be at least somewhat consistent.

"It’s not illegal to yell fire in a crowded theatre. The principle in current first amendment theory is “immanent lawless action”."

I notice you ignored my point about death threats being illegal. If words don't trigger anything, why do we outlaw certain kinds of speech?

What do you think would happen if Trump tweeted "We're now at war with N. Korea"? You don't think that would trigger anything? Of course it would.

Again, my point is that words do not affect matter in such a way, so it’s wrong to pretend it does.

We already know what happens when Trump tweets something: anti-Trumpists contort themselves into self-induced outrage. Others don’t. Those who do trigger themselves blame Trump for it.

Sorry I was getting the guys mixed up. You’re right. I was confusing the chairman of the BBC with the director general. Apologies.

The chairman oversees the implementation of the BBC charter, the way the BBC is run..

The policies are not much different, but one was fawned over while this one is demonized. — NOS4A2

You claimed it was all about words. I proved you wrong. Now you're changing the topic.

You claimed it was all about words. I proved you wrong. Now you're changing the topic.

That’s not what I claimed. I explicitly claimed “All his critics have are word policing and word politics.” Now you’re building strawmen.

That’s not what I claimed. I explicitly claimed “All his critics have are word policing and word politics.” Now you’re building strawmen. — NOS4A2

Which implies that Trump's critics are only concerned with his words, not his actions. You then made this implication explicit by continuing:

“Trump said...” begins every criticism."

So, why are you lying about things you said, when those things are on an easily accessible public record? It's almost like you're roleplaying as Trump.

I was speaking of illegitimate criticism, those centred around the bogeyman “rhetoric”, and you pretended I was speaking of all criticism.

I was speaking of illegitimate criticism, those centred around the bogeyman “rhetoric”, and you pretended I was speaking of all criticism. — NOS4A2

And I guess that's why your post started with "All his critics have..." and then referred to "every criticism".

But sure, you were only talking about illegitimate criticism. No true Scotsman would just make a sweeping generalization like that.

Hyperbole is a common figure of speech. You do have a point with your rigid hairsplitting and trivial objections, i’ll Give you that, but then again it completely avoids the initial point.

Conservatives tend not to believe in mental illness as a general rule, but they will not hesitate to invoke the mental health crisis every time there is a mass shooting because they would rather place the blame somewhere else when there’s pressure from the NRA about protecting the 2nd Amendment. They believe everyone is mentally healthy enough to work, for instance, and they strongly oppose disability benefits to the mentally ill, believing them not to be a right but a burden on the taxpayer. This is prejudice, not principle. They will even send out their goons to harass the people on disability for mental illness. This is commonplace, and one need only inquire from someone on SSDI or SSI or Medicaid to confirm this fact.

Now that there have been two recent high-profile mass shootings, President Trump is calling for the opening of more mental institutions to deal with the “problem” of the mentally ill. This, however, begs the question, “What should we do with a mentally ill commander in chief?” President Trump clearly has narcissistic personality disorder. He is also clearly in the early stages of dementia. Who is going to save women from his long history of sexual assault? Who is going to save the taxpayer from his profiting off of the office of the presidency when he charges the government for security at Mar-a-lago, for example? Who is going to save the nation from his mental illness and reckless behavior? If he is charged with a crime after he leaves office, should he go to jail or a mental institution?

He should be bannished to AM talk radio on the man-made island Perfidious Iowa. We can divert the border wall funding to the building of the island. My solution to what to do with people like Trump is always just to let them live on their own island.

Hmm. Maybe only if we build an electrified perimeter around the island.

Why does he need an electrified perimiter? Let Trump swim. He could eaten by a shark or something. My theory is just that if you let megalomaniacs live on their own islands in peace then that you really just won't need to worry about them anymore.

A better question, I think, would be can we get Trump to do another season of The Apprentice while he is in office?

You mean like Little St. James?

A better question, I think, would be can we get Trump to do another season of The Apprentice while he is in office? — thewonder

Isn’t that what we are watching daily on the news with his cabinet?

Why does he need an electrified perimiter? — thewonder

I guess my worry was that I wouldn’t want him to build a raft like in the movie “The Castaway”.

Yes. Trump is just some guy who needed to buy and live on his own island.


Yes, but can you imagine if there was an actual season of The Apprentice that was set in The White House? The tweets aren't quite enough. He needs to go full cinéma vérité with it.

It'd be like a resort. There'd be no reason to leave. You just have to let people like that spend enough money for it to be worthwhile for the inhabitants of an island to ceaselessly pander to them.

I'm not satisfied with the Trump presidency. It's so banal. I need to be engaged at the level of absurdity. Maybe The Apprentice isn't quite the right format. But, why shouldn't Trump turn his next term into a reality television show? I'm not saying that he'll get elected, but, if he gets elected, then he should do that. I would probably actually watch that show with commercials, and I really don't watch television at all.

I'm not satisfied with the Trump presidency. It's so banal. — thewonder

Right. Dismantling of the American system of government is SO banal. :wink:

Pray, pray and pray and pray even more.

Pray, pray and pray and pray even more. — TheMadFool

Are you mocking me? If so, don’t be a prick. If not, then what?

Pray, pray and pray and pray even more. — TheMadFool

Praying is only good for meditating on self-improvement. It is worthless in influencing others.

You make it sound like a bad thing.

What I mean, though, is that it really is boring. You already know what to expect from the Right. It's just a lot of the same tire old platitudes and thought terminating clichés. The only thing that catches anyone by suprise is that they are somehow successful. Scandals have become somewhat routine. Everything is as if it's all so terribly normal because it's all just too much like what it actually is. You get Trump. You analyze him a bit and then you get bored. He's a megalomaniacal businessman. There isn't anything much more to it than that. It's almost like a dystopian novel written by a Nihilist. It's all just sort of coase, dull, and unpleasant. Your haranguing middle manager is really like the President of the United States of America. It doesn't really go any deeper than that. I want for the next closet despot to come out of the American Right to be charismatic and Existentially unsettling. At least give me something interesting to think about.

Perhaps you should watch the news or read a paper. There’s nothing banal about what is happening here. The foundations on which this country was built are crumbling.

Praying is only good for meditating on self-improvement. It is worthless in influencing others. — Noah Te Stroete

I know but *shrug*

It's always been like this. There was Bush, there was Nixon. I'm an anarchist, and, so, I don't really care about the foundations of the country, but they've always been hypocritical. What I mean, though, is that Trump is like a stock supervillian. The Right needs to pull out like an Archaeofuturist or something to get people really engaged. Megalomania can be so fascinating, but Trump is so dull. I don't want for my political plight to be dull.

Can you really imagine that Trump could effectively deliver Satan's lines from Paradise Lost? Give me someone like that. This is all just too tiresome for me to at all pay attention to.

That’s right. You’re an anarchist. Do you live in the US? Because if Trump has his way, there will be much less freedom for everyone else and unlimited freedom for himself. Is that something an anarchist values?