PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: President in Exile YOLT on June 27, 2019, 01:21:16 PM
-
The Supreme Court found Thursday that the Trump administration did not give an adequate reason for adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census, blocking the question for at least the time being
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/450641-supreme-court-rules-against-trump-administration-over-census
At the same time, they have ruled that CBP can detain you at gunpoint until you declare your citizenship within 100 miles of the border.
-
Thomas’ dissent is spot on:
In a dissenting opinion, Thomas wrote that, "For the first time ever, the court invalidates an agency action solely because it questions the sincerity of the agency's otherwise adequate rationale."
"This conclusion is extraordinary," he wrote. "The court engages in an unauthorized inquiry into evidence not properly before us to reach an unsupported conclusion."
-
Roberts has taken Kennedy's place as the swing vote.
-
Roberts has taken Kennedy's place as the swing vote.
Why is it always a Republican appointee that switches sides?
-
Why is it always a Republican appointee that switches sides?
Brain cells deteriote with age.
-
Brain cells deteriote with age.
Must be true.
Young people are usually naively optimistic liberals.
As they gain experience and education, they often become conservatives.
But then as they age, (especially after retirement and medicare and SS kicks in), they often become liberal again.
Dying brain cells or pure greed? I don't know.
-
It was GWB striking again.
Roberts is the gift that keeps shitting on America.
-
It was GWB striking again.
Roberts is the gift that keeps shitting on America.
The New World Order Globalist, and Trump hater? That GWB?
-
The New World Order Globalist, and Trump hater? That GWB?
and noted savior of obamacare
-
Why is it always a Republican appointee that switches sides?
I don’t think they do. Republicans tend to be thinkers. When you think p, you for pm and sometimes change opinion.
If you have the same ideas you did 10 years ago, you have not thought much about them. I’m sure nobody here is arrogant enough to claim that their ideas have stayed the same because they’ve always been right.
-
If you have the same ideas you did 10 years ago, you have not thought much about them.
wow.... just wow.
so, every 10 years or so, people have to change their views on everything?
10 years ago, racism was bad. so, according to your premise, racism isn't so bad now?
10 years ago, being polite was good. according to your premise, being polite is not long good?
10 years from now, the liberals will be praising President Trump and Anthony will be admiring hillary.
-
wow.... just wow.
so, every 10 years or so, people have to change their views on everything?
10 years ago, racism was bad. so, according to your premise, racism isn't so bad now?
10 years ago, being polite was good. according to your premise, being polite is not long good?
10 years from now, the liberals will be praising President Trump and Anthony will be admiring hillary.
I'm going to defend Flynn a little bit on this.
Nobody is going to change all their views ever 10 years. Putting those words in his mouth is a little far fetched. But people do change their minds and or some of their attitudes over time. Racism was accepted (at least by many white people) when I was a kid. Not so much now. People knew that cigarettes were a "coffin nail" when I as a kid, but nobody really cared like they do now. Nobody is going to change all their views, but everybody is going to change some of their views over time. It is a normal part of life.
-
so, every 10 years or so, people have to change their views on everything?
You didn't do well in English, did you? You also don't argue well, because...excusing the iphone ugly typing that's not comprehensible...that's not at all what I wrote. Please try reading it again without having the conclusion in your head already.
Hint, I believe that you should have changed just one idea. If thought is not your strong suit, then you haven't.
-
Well sure, if you change too much you’re wishy washy, stick your finger in the wind to see which way you should go, or lack the courage to stand by your convictions, or don’t really understand issues well enough to have a deep conviction but just have a shallow idea of it. If you never change at all then you’re rigid and lack the ability to incorporate new information into your world view or arrogantly believe you can never be mistaken and so refuse to even try to look at the thing from a different perspective for fear you might someday have to admit you might have been wrong, heaven forbid.
-
Who said, “We hold these things to be self-evident...’
Maybe he should have been forced to change his mind to suit fucking dickhead liberals, too...
-
You didn't do well in English, did you? You also don't argue well, because...excusing the iphone ugly typing that's not comprehensible...that's not at all what I wrote. Please try reading it again without having the conclusion in your head already.
Ad Hominem aside, I did pretty good English. And you might try taking your own advice.
Hint, I believe that you should have changed just one idea. If thought is not your strong suit, then you haven't.
If logic isn't your strong suit...
hint: under what circumstances should someone not change even one idea?
-
I did pretty good English.
Yep :o
-
Yep :o
well, I were a engineer until I done did retire a couple year ago.
-
Pilot speak good. Go on spirit journey now, travel many moons...….
Oh wait. That's Elizabeth Warren. Never mind.
-
hint: under what circumstances should someone not change even one idea?
They have stopped learning.
They have stopped maturing.
They are arrogant enough to think they already know it all.
They are dead.
Probably a few more along the same lines.
-
They have stopped learning.
They have stopped maturing.
They are arrogant enough to think they already know it all.
They are dead.
Probably a few more along the same lines.
A liberal would always side against absolute truth because it conflicts with their notion that all truth is relative and changeable with changes in pop culture and other asshole pressures..
-
(https://i1.wp.com/hardnoxandfriends.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/w1.jpeg?w=480)
-
(https://i1.wp.com/hardnoxandfriends.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/w1.jpeg?w=480)
That must be one of those triple digit IQ snowflakes that mikey steingar babbles on about.
-
A liberal would always side against absolute truth because it conflicts with their notion that all truth is relative and changeable with changes in pop culture and other asshole pressures..
Maybe. But a wise man would not be so arrogant as to think they already know the absolute truth.
Truth is the truth always. Our understanding and knowledge of the truth can change. 600 years ago everyone KNEW the earth was flat. Then most of us learned about the truth.
-
Maybe. But a wise man would not be so arrogant as to think they already know the absolute truth.
Truth is the truth always. Our understanding and knowledge of the truth can change. 600 years ago everyone KNEW the earth was flat. Then most of us learned about the truth.
Facts are absolute. Truth is not. Man’s perception of both is deeply flawed. Not one of us has a perfect reproduction of reality in our minds. What we think we “know” is never anything more than a story we tell ourselves based on what we gather through our senses and process in our brains. Each one of us applies a different set of filters and assumptions to come up with what we think of as reality.
We may come to agreement about an objective fact. But “truth” takes into consideration our broader feelings and beliefs. These are subjective, vary from person to person and even in the same person at different times.
-
Facts are absolute. Truth is not. Man’s perception of both is deeply flawed. Not one of us has a perfect reproduction of reality in our minds. What we think we “know” is never anything more than a story we tell ourselves based on what we gather through our senses and process in our brains. Each one of us applies a different set of filters and assumptions to come up with what we think of as reality.
We may come to agreement about an objective fact. But “truth” takes into consideration our broader feelings and beliefs. These are subjective, vary from person to person and even in the same person at different times.
(https://media1.giphy.com/media/26FmRKQ6p7gpKekAE/giphy.gif)
-
Facts are absolute. Truth is not.
I guess we simply have a different definition of "truth"
-
Maybe. But a wise man would not be so arrogant as to think they already know the absolute truth.
Truth is the truth always. Our understanding and knowledge of the truth can change. 600 years ago everyone KNEW the earth was flat. Then most of us learned about the truth.
A wise man wouldn’t lecture from a position of abject stupidity while trying to sound hip and current.
The only thing close to true in your bullshit response was that many people were compelled to claim that the earth was flat or face torture, prison and or death by brutal means.
You’ve convinced us all that you lean far left while pretending to be centrist, there is no further evidence needed.
-
Facts are absolute. Truth is not. Man’s perception of both is deeply flawed. Not one of us has a perfect reproduction of reality in our minds. What we think we “know” is never anything more than a story we tell ourselves based on what we gather through our senses and process in our brains. Each one of us applies a different set of filters and assumptions to come up with what we think of as reality.
We may come to agreement about an objective fact. But “truth” takes into consideration our broader feelings and beliefs. These are subjective, vary from person to person and even in the same person at different times.
I was paraphrasing James Cardinal Gibbons - I believe we said the same thing.
“Truth never changes; it is the same now, yesterday, and forever, in itself; but our relations towards truth may change, for that which is hidden from us today may become known to us tomorrow.”
I will extend the esteemed Cardinal's comment by noting that it's also possible for us to lie to ourselves and begin to believe a falsehood.
-
I was paraphrasing James Cardinal Gibbons - I believe we said the same thing.
“Truth never changes; it is the same now, yesterday, and forever, in itself; but our relations towards truth may change, for that which is hidden from us today may become known to us tomorrow.”
I will extend the esteemed Cardinal's comment by noting that it's also possible for us to lie to ourselves and begin to believe a falsehood.
Yes we were saying the same thing. I was expounding on your thought.
-
A wise man wouldn’t lecture from a position of abject stupidity.
From where you are, everyone else looks like a leftist. You don't even recognize that Rush and I said the same words in different form or that we agree on a lot of things that aren't "left"...religious freedom, freedom of conscience, 2A. These are not areas of "far left". Do I believe that everyone should be free to live their own lives, yes - and that includes you.
Going to a specific topic, one which I've learned on, Marriage is an intensely personal thing. You do not get to dictate what marriage means for everyone. I don't get to do it either. But most importantly to me, THEY don't get to dictate it me. To me, marriage means holy matrimony, a union blessed by God. I don't care whether others want to play house, just hookup, jump over a broomstick or align their houses in the stars...that is their business. My marriage is important to me and we - you, me, them - don't get to define it for anyone except our selves. Live and let Live.
If it is stupid to continuously learn, then so be it.
-
Yes we were saying the same thing. I was expounding on your thought.
Good deal - guess so many reflexively disagree with me, that I am starting to do it too. Will try to work on that.
-
Good deal - guess so many reflexively disagree with me, that I am starting to do it too. Will try to work on that.
I’ve done the same thing myself.