The Isolated Blurt Thread XXIX: No Whining

[yossi]

I'm dreading what this place is going to be like come November.

 

[removed9556]

 

[Sean]

That's a sad indictment of the American Left. What happened to the nation of Chomsky, Steinbeck, Ellison, Miller?

There is no American left. Hasn't been since the seventies.

 

[Aphro]

When I hold the door for you, I'm not really being a gentleman; I just wanted to check out your ass.

So, do I still smile and say thank you?

 

[removed9556]

 

[Aphro]

When I see "Melania" my brain keeps reading "Melanoma" for some reason.

Melanoma Trump.

It's like cancer, but dressed up.

 

[JohnnySavage]

So, do I still smile and say thank you?

Say thank you before the smile.

Just so I know to look up.

 

[HarryHill]

I'm dreading what this place is going to be like come November.

..
Isn't democracy fun

 

[Hard_Rom]

Say thank you before the smile.

Just so I know to look up.

From admiring her shoes?

 

[Adre]

That's a sad indictment of the American Left. What happened to the nation of Chomsky, Steinbeck, Ellison, Miller?

It was never really Chomsky's nation other than that he resided here. The Left never had a serious foothold here.

 

[Fata Morgana]

When I see "Melania" my brain keeps reading "Melanoma" for some reason.

Melanoma Trump.

It's like cancer, but dressed up.

Haha.

 

[RobDownSouth]

There is no American left. Hasn't been since the seventies.

Prior to this year, I'd have agreed with you. As evil as Reagan was, he successfully transformed the word "liberal" into a pejorative.

But everything old is new again, and the BernieBros this year show a nascent liberal renaissance slowly arising. Lots of ideological passion, and a bit of foamin' at the mouth, reminiscent of the "take no prisoners" approach of the over-reaching McGovernite wing on the Democratic party, circa 1972.

Fun times ahead!!

 

[Equinoxe]

Fuck.

She is literally the only left-wing candidate. By a long, long way. Did she have to be batshit insane?

Sean's being somewhat uncharitable. At least in the active sense, she's neither an anti-vaxxer nor a believer in homeopathy (although the Green Party as a whole is), but rather such an opponent of major corporations, e.g. "Big Pharma", and dependent upon a base which is fairly sympathetic to both ideas, that she largely reframes the discussion, not outright opposing either, and is willing to say enough to give supporters of both hope. So, basically: vaccines are definitely beneficial, but we should be sceptical of how they're regulated; natural medicines are not inherently safe, but we also can't trust the corporate interests who control drug testing to guarantee that medicines are, either.

So, a passive supporter, at best. And very much a politician, to be sure. E.g. here.

 

[Sean]

Prior to this year, I'd have agreed with you. As evil as Reagan was, he successfully transformed the word "liberal" into a pejorative.

But everything old is new again, and the BernieBros this year show a nascent liberal renaissance slowly arising. Lots of ideological passion, and a bit of foamin' at the mouth, reminiscent of the "take no prisoners" approach of the over-reaching McGovernite wing on the Democratic party, circa 1972.

Fun times ahead!!

Bernie would be considered a moderate Tory over here.

 

[Sean]

Sean's being somewhat uncharitable. At least in the active sense, she's neither an anti-vaxxer nor a believer in homeopathy (although the Green Party as a whole is), but rather such an opponent of major corporations, e.g. "Big Pharma", and dependent upon a base which is fairly sympathetic to both ideas, that she largely reframes the discussion, not outright opposing either, and is willing to say enough to give supporters of both hope. So, basically: vaccines are definitely beneficial, but we should be sceptical of how they're regulated; natural medicines are not inherently safe, but we also can't trust the corporate interests who control drug testing to guarantee that medicines are, either.

So, a passive supporter, at best. And very much a politician, to be sure. E.g. here.

That Reddit interview she did was flat out pandering to the anti-vaxxers. As a Harvard medical graduate, she should be jumping all over them with hobnail boots on.

 

[Equinoxe]

That Reddit interview she did was flat out pandering to the anti-vaxxers. As a Harvard medical graduate, she should be jumping all over them with hobnail boots on.

It is pandering, but that's not quite the same thing as being an anti-vaxxer herself. I'm not surprised. Anti-vaccination positions are pretty common in what constitutes the Far Left of American politics, and that includes her base in the Green Party. So, being a politician, she gives a politician's answer—like the Oracle at Delphi, it can go in either direction and seems to tell people what they want to hear. It also likely doesn't offend the even more common sort who dislike any suggestion that someone might not also be right (with which she may have some sympathies or at least similarities).

(Of course, opposition to vaccination is also common to the Far Right, but for rather different reasons—distrust of government versus distrust of corporations.)

 

[gotsnowgotslush]

Melanomia

Art of Noise

Sadly, the block head that is dancing. is not Max Headroom.

Paranoimia

 

[Que]

It is pandering, but that's not quite the same thing as being an anti-vaxxer herself. I'm not surprised. Anti-vaccination positions are pretty common in what constitutes the Far Left of American politics, and that includes her base in the Green Party. So, being a politician, she gives a politician's answer—like the Oracle at Delphi, it can go in either direction and seems to tell people what they want to hear. It also likely doesn't offend the even more common sort who dislike any suggestion that someone might not also be right (with which she may have some sympathies or at least similarities).

(Of course, opposition to vaccination is also common to the Far Right, but for rather different reasons—distrust of government versus distrust of corporations.)

I think you are alluding to there being a line somewhere that is something more noble than pandering as well. It is called showing a modicum of respect to the firmly held beliefs of others.

Addressing a group of Navajos is she to flaunt her faith in her Harvard medical training over centuries of belief in the healing way of sings, smoke, shamans and medicine pouches?

Should she point out to vegetarians the benefit of including animal protein in their diets?

 

[Sean]

I think you are alluding to there being a line somewhere that is something more noble than pandering as well. It is called showing a modicum of respect to the firmly held beliefs of others.

Ridiculous, dangerous beliefs don't deserve respect, no matter how firmly held they are. Pretty sure the nazis thought that Jews were sub-human and deserved to be exterminated, should we respect that belief?

 

[eyerami]

Ridiculous, dangerous beliefs don't deserve respect, no matter how firmly held they are.

Did some unicorn die and make this wannabe king fart, again?

 

[Pookie]

So Miles is now a "Guest".

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=1333560

Chop! Chop!

 

[pointless]

I'm dreading what this place is going to be like come November.

might i suggest spending a few weeks exploring the depths of reddit?

 

[Aphro]

<<<<--------Anxiously waiting to see if blondes actually have more fun.

 

[Equinoxe]

I think you are alluding to there being a line somewhere that is something more noble than pandering as well. It is called showing a modicum of respect to the firmly held beliefs of others.

Addressing a group of Navajos is she to flaunt her faith in her Harvard medical training over centuries of belief in the healing way of sings, smoke, shamans and medicine pouches?

Should she point out to vegetarians the benefit of including animal protein in their diets?

Well, firstly, vegetarians do include animal protein (dairy, eggs, etc.); otherwise, they'd be vegans. (Because that's what's important here.)

I would certainly hope there's a difference between pandering and respecting the beliefs of others; but they're not necessarily in opposition, either. It's possible for someone to do both at the same time—to be simultaneously cynical and sincere. People may have a multitude of reasons for anything; there's no need for those reasons to be cohesive, or coherent, or in agreement. Moreover, it's possible for someone to agree in part but not in whole—though I would say that two people don't actually agree with each other unless they think the same thing for the same reasons—and to emphasise where they agree over where they disagree, for unity's sake or for some other reason.

We are talking about politics here, so there is unquestionably pandering involved, but it's not necessarily an either/or matter.

 

[Pookie]

<<<<--------Anxiously waiting to see if blondes actually have more fun.

While not completely "scientific" with my research, I personally found the brunette/blonde ratio to be about the same when it came to fun.



*makes note to get another bottle of blonde*