BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   BMW M3 and BMW M4 Forum > BMW F80 M3 / F82 M4 Forum > Regional Forums > USA - Northwest

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      01-11-2017, 09:39 AM   #23541
F83
Roofless & Ruthless
F83's Avatar
1695
Rep
2,372
Posts

Drives: 2015 AY 6MT F83
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by (((myzmak))) View Post

Four words: hookers and golden showers.

l.
This sort of thing is an old Russian tactic. Koreans are known for using this sort of thing also for business blackmail as well. If its true its likely that the ladies involved were hand selected by the Kremlin.

Also if its true its inevitable that something will get leaked eventually. As will all the "banned" extra tapes from The Apprentice.

It's going to be a very interesting ride here for the next four years. I've no doubt there's dirt aplenty that is going to come out.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcades

I blame Lups because of reasons.
Appreciate 2
minn191881
Lups7797

      01-11-2017, 10:03 AM   #23542
Lups
...
Lups's Avatar
7797
Rep
16,183
Posts

Drives: I don't own a car.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Lost as usual

iTrader: (0)

Reason number 231 to not to be married:

They make fun of you when you're mildly disabled.

The hand is beautifully swollen, my ribs and my hip hurts like mother fucker and ... The robot hoover is down. I think this was one of my bigger fuck ups
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by minn19 View Post
The constant fight for power on both sides means we getting more and more extreme and it seems the common sense stuff or new ideas don't have a shot in hell of passing.
Appreciate 1
      01-11-2017, 11:08 AM   #23543
solstice
Major General
909
Rep
5,057
Posts

Drives: 2015 M3 6MT
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by F83 View Post
This sort of thing is an old Russian tactic. Koreans are known for using this sort of thing also for business blackmail as well. If its true its likely that the ladies involved were hand selected by the Kremlin.

Also if its true its inevitable that something will get leaked eventually. As will all the "banned" extra tapes from The Apprentice.

It's going to be a very interesting ride here for the next four years. I've no doubt there's dirt aplenty that is going to come out.
At least we now know were that unique hair color is coming from
Appreciate 1
F831695

      01-11-2017, 11:46 AM   #23544
(((myzmak)))
Advocatus Douchebagus. Sex Marxist.
(((myzmak)))'s Avatar
Canada
3075
Rep
6,175
Posts

Drives: Lucy.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Canada

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2015 F80 M3  [5.00]
2013 MB E350 Wagon  [5.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by solstice View Post
Clear human rights issues? We legally had higher premium or flat out refusal for pre-existing conditions until Obama care. How is that different other than being way more discriminating and it's bad in every one way. Giving people the option to save money by keeping a healthy lifestyle and an immediate incentive to do so is not bad, it's good. It's not discrimination since it applies to every person and you have every right to eat yourself to death, it won't raise your premium but also not lower it. You don't need to go for a test. And of course there are exception for those who medically can't lose weight of one reason or the other, I'm not sure there are any though. Thyroid issues maybe?
Recognizing my level of certainty is far more certain at Canadian law than American law, at a general level it becomes a human rights issue because, if it is part of tax policy, it becomes a matter of state action and thus state discrimination. It would arguably violate your 14th amendment. It may also violate state or federal non-constitutional human rights legislation.

Its the same section of the constitution that said you can't deny marriage rights to same sex couples.

In Canada, it would very likely violate s. 15 of our charter of rights and freedoms.

Private insurance is different; that isn't about the law treating you differently, that is about access to underwriting coverage based on actuarial data. The law (and thus state) isn't involved at all.

...but even there, insurance companies have to be very careful in how they apply different premium rates (as they do get challenged for violating human rights legislation and there are cases in both countries limiting what and how private insurance can vary premiums)

........and the fact that those who most need insurance are those who are least healthy - a catch 22 that universal health care is partly intended to smooth over.

Even if there were not a legal barrier in your country (there would very likely be one here), it would still be politically toxic to advocate what would be cast as a fat tax. When 3 of 4 Americans are 'overweight' and 36% 'obese', you'd never get a political coalition together to pass through what would, in effect, be an extra tax on them.

In addition, trying to create those 'exceptions' would be a nightmare. Sure, thyroid is one. By whom and to what standard would that have to be diagnosed. As for other reasons, what about people who are unable to exercise for other reasons? (injury, psychological, etc). What about people with low metabolism? What about people with diagnosed eating disorders? What about people who overeat due to depression?

With all of those, who decides what counts as a valid reason or not? Both on a general and specific level? For administrative efficiency, you'd want have broad/sweeping categories, but that would be unfair to individuals. so if each of the 350 MM americans had to prove why he/she was overweight can you imagine the administrative burden that such a process would create? It would be YUGE.

Again, I really like the idea of tying health to the pocketbook. I just don't think varying a tax rate based on weight is going to be practical or possible.

I expect that rather than a tax expenditure by way of lowering taxes on some, a more efficient and possible-to-achieve use of government revenue would be to promote preventive measures in other ways - including promoting activity and, possibly, by regulating food more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by F83 View Post
This sort of thing is an old Russian tactic. Koreans are known for using this sort of thing also for business blackmail as well. If its true its likely that the ladies involved were hand selected by the Kremlin.

Also if its true its inevitable that something will get leaked eventually. As will all the "banned" extra tapes from The Apprentice.

It's going to be a very interesting ride here for the next four years. I've no doubt there's dirt aplenty that is going to come out.
Indeed, the Russians excel at this.

To divert slightly into something I've been thinking about the last 2 months since the troompa loompa became you PEEOTUS (heh):

Interesting debate online last night as to whether buzzfeed was correct to dump the raw report online when it is still unverified. They likely did it because CNN published the story that this report existed (and that it had been seen by everyone) AND that the intelligence community thought enough of the report that they included a 2 page synopsis of it in the classified version of the report on Russian hacking from last week.

So they wanted the 'scoop' and clickbait of posting it.

However, as an unverified report, it likely has some factual errors in it Though by all accounts the source is fairly respected in the intelligence community, any human intelligence is subject to problems. However, by putting it all out there, it gives Trump the ability to pick off one or two factually incorrect things, deny them and (ideally) prove them to be untrue. By doing so, he can change the narrative and bury the undoubtedly true parts of the report and have the whole thing seen as 'unreliable' by the public.

So it was maybe not smart by buzzfeed.

BUT tied to that debate was a secondary debate on whether there should be more such 'raw data' tossed out for the public for it to decide. Clearly, that has become the norm - thru wikileaks or whatever. Raw info without context is put out there for the public to read (and misread). And the results of that can be disastrous (see: Trump, Donald J, passim)

At the end of the day, the public probably isn't equipped to handle the raw data because they can't be. Everyone has a day job and lives to worry about. The average person doesn't have time to understand what a report like this means, its level of reliability, etc. This is why we have intelligence experts. Its like when an average joe reads a single case out of context and thinks they know all there is to know about the law of contracts or the law of human rights or the law of murder. (which happens, oh, every time there is any high profile case in the news)

What is different with the law, though, is that the only people that can actually call themselves lawyers and practice the law all have to be members of a self-regulated profession, and thus subject to certain enforceable codes of practice. So no average joe can go to court and play 'lawyer' and try to mislead the court about the law - if you did that, you'd be prosecuted for practicing law without a license.

BUT in the world of journalism, it is still an open game. They aren't self-regulated - they aren't regulated at all.

What this means is that any idiot CAN start a website and claim to 'report' news. The results of that are 63 MM voters voting for Trump at least in part on the basis of a bunch of fake news, lies and half-truths. And when you tell them that, they rant back at you about 'elites' and the 'lame stream media' and what not.

In the information economy to which we are transitioning, there is SOOOOO much information that is out there, some good, some crap. There likely needs to be some way to control what is put out to the public that does not have the time, ability or inclination to process and understand the information in context.

All of which is a really long winded way of saying I think that one way or another the journalism profession needs to somehow formalize itself. In the same way that you cant be a lawyer or a doctor or an architect or an engineer without being a registered member of a legally recognized profession, those who gate keep information should also be subject to enforceable standards

I also think that profession and those standards should be self-regulated, like the legal profession is. Let journalists decide what the proper ethical conduct is.

....but one way or another, a MAJOR issue (and perhaps THE major issue) in public discourse over the next 20 years will be dealing with the sudden glut of information that our linked up/online world allows.

.....anyway....been thinking 'bout that.
__________________
Drivin' Lucy
Appreciate 1
minn191881

      01-11-2017, 01:06 PM   #23545
solstice
Major General
909
Rep
5,057
Posts

Drives: 2015 M3 6MT
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Myzmak I'm not sure if you are aware but in The U.S airlines are allowed to charge obese people who can't fit comfortably in their seat for two tickets. Take that as another clue on the U.S view on this.
Appreciate 0
      01-11-2017, 01:07 PM   #23546
dmk08
Lieutenant General
dmk08's Avatar
United_States
2812
Rep
10,469
Posts

Drives: 16 M4 ZCP
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Atlanta

iTrader: (19)

Quote:
Originally Posted by solstice View Post
Myzmak I'm not sure if you are aware but in The U.S airlines are allowed to charge obese people who can't fit comfortably in their seat for two tickets. Take that as another clue on the U.S view on this.
I cant fit in 1 seat comfortably and it has nothing to do with me being obese. Maybe those clowns should make the seats bigger.
Appreciate 1
Lups7797

      01-11-2017, 01:10 PM   #23547
solstice
Major General
909
Rep
5,057
Posts

Drives: 2015 M3 6MT
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmk08 View Post
I cant fit in 1 seat comfortably and it has nothing to do with me being obese. Maybe those clowns should make the seats bigger.
I'd say you are an exception . If they ask you to pay two tickets of course. If it's up to you then it's another question, that of seat comfort in general which is, well poor. But you are right, this is potentially bad since if you are discriminated for being of large built and still are singled out for higher payment and this is legal, well you make my point even stronger.

It's an example to show that there are far worse policies against physiological types that passes the human rights test and are legal in the U.S. Here the obese people are charged double while an equivalent to my health tax incentive idea would be that they are not charged more independent of how obese they are, instead if you can fit two people in one seat you get a discount.

Last edited by solstice; 01-11-2017 at 01:55 PM.
Appreciate 0
      01-11-2017, 01:43 PM   #23548
solstice
Major General
909
Rep
5,057
Posts

Drives: 2015 M3 6MT
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

The fight between CNN and the new administration will also be interresting to follow. Being the most balanced of the big outlets IMO, I watch it more than the others but there is no doubt from my observation that many of their anchors are strongly anti-Trump and struggle with being objective.
Appreciate 3
minn191881
F831695

      01-11-2017, 01:53 PM   #23549
minn19
Brigadier General
minn19's Avatar
United_States
1881
Rep
3,700
Posts

Drives: 16 GT350, 16 F150, 16 428 GC
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Minnesota

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by solstice View Post
The fight between CNN and the new administration will also be interresting to follow. Being the most balanced of the big outlets IMO, I watch it more than the others but there is no doubt from my observation that many of their anchors are strongly anti-Trump and struggle with being objective.
I don't know if they so much struggle with being objective or just not getting frustrated in general. When you show somebody a video of something they said and they deny it etc (again and again), it has to be hard to maintain your composure.

The weirdness/clown show continues. Trump and his staffers put out a ton of folders by his speaking podium, but won't say what is in them or let the press look at them. WTF kind of bullshit is this from a President? These are the stupid games I'm not looking forward to for the next four years. It could be as simple for Trump's amusement, who the hell knows.
Appreciate 1
      01-11-2017, 01:53 PM   #23550
(((myzmak)))
Advocatus Douchebagus. Sex Marxist.
(((myzmak)))'s Avatar
Canada
3075
Rep
6,175
Posts

Drives: Lucy.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Canada

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2015 F80 M3  [5.00]
2013 MB E350 Wagon  [5.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by solstice View Post
Myzmak I'm not sure if you are aware but in The U.S airlines are allowed to charge obese people who can't fit comfortably in their seat for two tickets. Take that as another clue on the U.S view on this.
I am aware. But, again, airline seats are not the same as government tax policy.

The latter is the state acting, which means it engages constitutional rights. The former is a private business.

To bring it to another example: the right to free speech. Generally speaking, the government cannot restrict your right to free speech but in a private context it can be restricted (eg: bimmerpost can suspend your account based on what you say; the government can't suspend your citizenship based on what you say)

Likewise, generally speaking, the government cannot discriminate in the application of its laws. It can't give you a better tax rate if you are white vs black or straight vs gay. Whether those same limits would apply to discrimination based on weight is the open question and where I suggest there is reason to be cautious in trying to make this a matter of tax policy.

But politically it would remain toxic. It is easy for airlines to do what they want (they have an oligopoly). Charging for baggage is not popular, but they do it because what are you gonna do? So the fact they can charge for 'size' does not mean it would be politically feasible for a politician to create a tax policy based on size/weight.

edit: as an aside, in Canada the law would likely prevent an airline for charging based on size.
__________________
Drivin' Lucy
Appreciate 1
Lups7797

      01-11-2017, 02:11 PM   #23551
minn19
Brigadier General
minn19's Avatar
United_States
1881
Rep
3,700
Posts

Drives: 16 GT350, 16 F150, 16 428 GC
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Minnesota

iTrader: (0)

I'm watching his press conference and he (or his team) brought in staffers to clap when they say something good about Trump. It just keeps getting weirder. This dude is one thin skinned narcissist.
Appreciate 1
      01-11-2017, 02:15 PM   #23552
solstice
Major General
909
Rep
5,057
Posts

Drives: 2015 M3 6MT
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by (((myzmak))) View Post
I am aware. But, again, airline seats are not the same as government tax policy.

The latter is the state acting, which means it engages constitutional rights. The former is a private business.

To bring it to another example: the right to free speech. Generally speaking, the government cannot restrict your right to free speech but in a private context it can be restricted (eg: bimmerpost can suspend your account based on what you say; the government can't suspend your citizenship based on what you say)

Likewise, generally speaking, the government cannot discriminate in the application of its laws. It can't give you a better tax rate if you are white vs black or straight vs gay. Whether those same limits would apply to discrimination based on weight is the open question and where I suggest there is reason to be cautious in trying to make this a matter of tax policy.

But politically it would remain toxic. It is easy for airlines to do what they want (they have an oligopoly). Charging for baggage is not popular, but they do it because what are you gonna do? So the fact they can charge for 'size' does not mean it would be politically feasible for a politician to create a tax policy based on size/weight.

edit: as an aside, in Canada the law would likely prevent an airline for charging based on size.
I'm not saying that it will be smooth sailing, nothing is when it comes to legislation but "Clear human rights violation" and toxic are strong words which I don't agree with. Again though, you and I aren't U.S human rights lawyers or U.S legislators we can only look at similar cases and experiences and ours differs. I guess that pretty much concludes this topic for me.
Appreciate 0
      01-11-2017, 02:26 PM   #23553
solstice
Major General
909
Rep
5,057
Posts

Drives: 2015 M3 6MT
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by minn19 View Post
I'm watching his press conference and he (or his team) brought in staffers to clap when they say something good about Trump. It just keeps getting weirder. This dude is one thin skinned narcissist.
Agreed, it's seems that the talk that things will be different could really happen this time on good and bad. It's weird, unusual, inexperienced, narcissistic and somewhat offensive but I'm intrigued and I still remain positive and want to see the score card after a year or so to see how things are progressing and judge the new administration on results which to me is what really matters. Trump ain't going to make a good role model or be a beacon of humility and grace we know that but we don't know if he will bring results to improve the economy, job security and national security yet.
Appreciate 0
      01-11-2017, 02:31 PM   #23554
minn19
Brigadier General
minn19's Avatar
United_States
1881
Rep
3,700
Posts

Drives: 16 GT350, 16 F150, 16 428 GC
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Minnesota

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by solstice View Post
Agreed, it's seems that the talk that things will be different could really happen this time on good and bad. It's weird, unusual, inexperienced, narcissistic and somewhat offensive but I'm intrigued and I still remain positive and want to see the score card after a year or so to see how things are progressing and judge the new administration on results which to me is what really matters. Trump ain't going to make a good role model or be a beacon of humility and grace we know that but we don't know if he will bring results to improve the economy, job security and national security yet.
Trust me, I want him to succeed as well for obvious reasons. But, at what cost to a variety of things is what I'm concerned about. He's already playing with fire that could have long lasting repercussions.
Appreciate 1
Lups7797

      01-11-2017, 02:36 PM   #23555
solstice
Major General
909
Rep
5,057
Posts

Drives: 2015 M3 6MT
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by minn19 View Post
Trust me, I want him to succeed as well for obvious reasons. But, at what cost to a variety of things is what I'm concerned about. He's already playing with fire that could have long lasting repercussions.
The only thing we can be sure of is that we will find out
Appreciate 1
minn191881

      01-11-2017, 02:44 PM   #23556
TypeM4
HMFIC
TypeM4's Avatar
United_States
141
Rep
372
Posts

Drives: M4
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: USA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by solstice View Post
The fight between CNN and the new administration will also be interresting to follow. Being the most balanced of the big outlets IMO, I watch it more than the others but there is no doubt from my observation that many of their anchors are strongly anti-Trump and struggle with being objective.
CNN (Clinton New Network) most objective?
Geez that is nuts! But, there are no objective news outlets anymore, just editorials which is sad.
__________________
2017 M4, Alpine, Black, ZCP

Appreciate 0
      01-11-2017, 03:42 PM   #23557
(((myzmak)))
Advocatus Douchebagus. Sex Marxist.
(((myzmak)))'s Avatar
Canada
3075
Rep
6,175
Posts

Drives: Lucy.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Canada

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2015 F80 M3  [5.00]
2013 MB E350 Wagon  [5.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by TypeM4 View Post
CNN (Clinton New Network) most objective?
Geez that is nuts! But, there are no objective news outlets anymore, just editorials which is sad.


Rule 1: stop watching TV to get the news.

Rule 2: stop reading online websites sites/blogs/news aggregators (from the Daily Beast to Huffpo to Breitbart) to get the news.

Rule 3: don't listen to AM radio to get the news.

Rule 4: try reading newspapers or other long form, written journalism to get the news.

There is lots of good, thoughtful journalism and analysis out there. But you won't find it in the entertainment world of TV or radio or internet 'journalism'.


For a sample of that, here is a very good piece on what is really happening with the recent leaks of the dossier and what it could mean.

http://observer.com/2017/01/donald-t...michael-cohen/
__________________
Drivin' Lucy
Appreciate 1
Lups7797

      01-11-2017, 03:57 PM   #23558
(((myzmak)))
Advocatus Douchebagus. Sex Marxist.
(((myzmak)))'s Avatar
Canada
3075
Rep
6,175
Posts

Drives: Lucy.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Canada

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2015 F80 M3  [5.00]
2013 MB E350 Wagon  [5.00]
In unrelated news, some support for a long running pet peeve of mine:

Those who don't understand/follow the basic physics of closed lanes (eg: those who insist on merging 3 blocks away rather than at the point of the merge)

Those people who merge early are wrong.

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/e...erta-1.3930747

....while the report doesn't say so, they are probably ugly too.

....with bad hygiene

....and no friends.
__________________
Drivin' Lucy
Appreciate 2
minn191881
Lups7797

      01-11-2017, 04:00 PM   #23559
solstice
Major General
909
Rep
5,057
Posts

Drives: 2015 M3 6MT
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by (((myzmak))) View Post


Rule 1: stop watching TV to get the news.

Rule 2: stop reading online websites sites/blogs/news aggregators (from the Daily Beast to Huffpo to Breitbart) to get the news.

Rule 3: don't listen to AM radio to get the news.

Rule 4: try reading newspapers or other long form, written journalism to get the news.

There is lots of good, thoughtful journalism and analysis out there. But you won't find it in the entertainment world of TV or radio or internet 'journalism'.


For a sample of that, here is a very good piece on what is really happening with the recent leaks of the dossier and what it could mean.

http://observer.com/2017/01/donald-t...michael-cohen/
The Observer and the Guardian are pretty good but they are both liberal news outlets and it often colors their reporting which I agree though are of decent quality. There is hardly any unbiased news, at least with your choice here they don't pretend to be balanced but CNN does. My most read news is a Swedish newspaper deeply rooted in the social democracy or liberal movement. I regard myself as independent and try to be a realist instead of an idealist but when the news are mostly of decent quality and you know the bias you can ignore most of the bias.
Appreciate 0
      01-11-2017, 04:11 PM   #23560
(((myzmak)))
Advocatus Douchebagus. Sex Marxist.
(((myzmak)))'s Avatar
Canada
3075
Rep
6,175
Posts

Drives: Lucy.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Canada

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2015 F80 M3  [5.00]
2013 MB E350 Wagon  [5.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by solstice View Post
The Observer and the Guardian are pretty good but they are both liberal news outlets and it often colors their reporting which I agree though are of decent quality. There is hardly any unbiased news, at least with your choice here they don't pretend to be balanced but CNN does. My most read news is a Swedish newspaper deeply rooted in the social democracy or liberal movement. I regard myself as independent and try to be a realist instead of an idealist but when the news are mostly of decent quality and you know the bias you can ignore most of the bias.
Sure, and that is a bit fair and inevitable. Journalists are people. Like everyone, they have subjective biases. But there are degrees of bias.

What I was trying to get at (which I don't think is different from your point) is that rather than just watching TV (which is really entertainment designed to appeal to one demographic or the other) you need to read and think from different sources that may or may not be your usual bias. Consider yourself liberal or conservative? Great. Read folks from the other side. Read those who claim to be in the middle.

What I don't like to read is the obviously partisan stuff.

Put another way, if you give me the name of the author and the topic and I can predict with 80% accuracy what the article will say, I usually don't spend a lot of time on those.

I have all kinds of classical liberal biases but fundamentally I call myself dogmatically antidogmatic. If I don't challenge what I am already thinking I am not doing my job when reading the opinions of others. Nothing is worse to me than ideological blindness.

edit: that particular article was from a very-much-not-liberal former NSA / Naval Intelligence security guy who writes rather well on security matters.

oh, and it wasn't "the observer" (eg: the guardian owned paper) - it was observer.com. which is american and published by Jared Kushner. Yes, THAT Jared Kushner. So not exactly a place one thinks of if all you want is anti-trump stuff.
__________________
Drivin' Lucy
Appreciate 1
Lups7797

      01-11-2017, 04:23 PM   #23561
solstice
Major General
909
Rep
5,057
Posts

Drives: 2015 M3 6MT
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Seattle

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by (((myzmak))) View Post
Sure, and that is a bit fair and inevitable. Journalists are people. Like everyone, they have subjective biases. But there are degrees of bias.

What I was trying to get at (which I don't think is different from your point) is that rather than just watching TV (which is really entertainment designed to appeal to one demographic or the other) you need to read and think from different sources that may or may not be your usual bias. Consider yourself liberal or conservative? Great. Read folks from the other side. Read those who claim to be in the middle.

What I don't like to read is the obviously partisan stuff.

Put another way, if you give me the name of the author and the topic and I can predict with 80% accuracy what the article will say, I usually don't spend a lot of time on those.

I have all kinds of classical liberal biases but fundamentally I call myself dogmatically antidogmatic. If I don't challenge what I am already thinking I am not doing my job when reading the opinions of others. Nothing is worse to me than ideological blindness.

edit: that particular article was from a very-much-not-liberal former NSA / Naval Intelligence security guy who writes rather well on security matters.

oh, and it wasn't "the observer" (eg: the guardian owned paper) - it was observer.com. which is american and published by Jared Kushner. Yes, THAT Jared Kushner. So not exactly a place one thinks of if all you want is anti-trump stuff.
Well, we can agree on all of that related to sourcing and evaluating news. But I got to tell you that if you are not a liberal idealist you make a really poor job of portraying that . And thanks for correcting the source, I never heard of the observer.com. Interresting that the name was free taken the Observer news paper.
Appreciate 1
Lups7797

      01-11-2017, 04:47 PM   #23562
(((myzmak)))
Advocatus Douchebagus. Sex Marxist.
(((myzmak)))'s Avatar
Canada
3075
Rep
6,175
Posts

Drives: Lucy.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Canada

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2015 F80 M3  [5.00]
2013 MB E350 Wagon  [5.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by solstice View Post
Well, we can agree on all of that related to sourcing and evaluating news. But I got to tell you that if you are not a liberal idealist you make a really poor job of portraying that . And thanks for correcting the source, I never heard of the observer.com. Interresting that the name was free taken the Observer news paper.
a liberal bias and I like to look at the big picture so, yeah, that is my own starting point.

but I have moved all over on all kinds of issues over the years. voted for most of the major parties in Canada (obviously trending toward the centrist/non-ideological ones).

dogmatically antidogmatic is where I have settled.

Put another way: if half the folks think I am left wing and half think I am right wing (which in most of my discussions tends to be the case), I am probably close to where I should be. Once I find myself on the same page as everyone, I usually get nervous about what we are missing and start to rethink things.
__________________
Drivin' Lucy
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:56 AM.




f80post
f80post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST