If T convicted, are early votes for him wasted?

@averagejoe1 said
Huh??
Judging is your middle name, is it not. Self-appointed go-to guy on the Forum.

🙄

@no1marauder said
Could you name another news site that just had to pay out $780 million for repeatedly defaming a business?

Sure, most sites have some sort of bias, but Fox News is in a "class" by itself.

can you name another that has sexual perverts?

https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/10/media/jeffrey-toobin-returns-cnn/index.html

@mott-the-hoople said
can you name another that has sexual perverts?

https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/10/media/jeffrey-toobin-returns-cnn/index.html

Marauder would you please respond to the question, from Mott specifically to you?

@shavixmir said
🙄

The Pseud Known as Shag Doody for Brains said:

"The rational human being?
My God, just look at this forum for your proof.
Objectivism? How heroic are most people in real life, do you think?"

Yes that is obvious, there are irrational people, is this one of your deep thoughts, is this why you're now known as Shatmixer the Pseud? It's not automatic, it takes effort, whatever you think of Rand I recommend the essay "Philosophy: Who Needs It" which is not about Objectivism specifically but rather discusses the importance of philosophy to everyone, that a philosophy of life is integral to eveyone, it's inescapable.

Rand: “Your only choice is whether you define your philosophy by a conscious, rational, disciplined process of thought and scrupulously logical deliberation — or let your subconscious accumulate a junk heap of unwarranted conclusions, false generalizations, undefined contradictions, undigested slogans, unidentified wishes, doubts and fears, thrown together by chance, but integrated by your subconscious into a kind of mongrel philosophy and fused into a single, solid weight: self-doubt.”

Let me assure you again, you will not get a hard sell on Objectivism, that is not the purpose of the essay, it simply states clearly and forcefully the importance of philosophy to everyone. Something that alot of people may not realise. When they think of philosophy they think of Aristotle and Plato but it is essential. Yes there are irrational people, because they have not made the effort to analyse what they believe and why they believe it. Humans are capable of rationality, instead of looking at everything bad around you, try looking at the good, what man has achieved, then you will see what the rational mind is capable of.

@wajoma said
I could name a mega drug corp that's paid billions for all sorts of bad behaviour.

That would be called a "whataboutism" which has nothing to do with the point you were apparently trying to make.

@mott-the-hoople said
can you name another that has sexual perverts?

https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/10/media/jeffrey-toobin-returns-cnn/index.html

Sure:

https://www.thewrap.com/fox-sexual-harassment-jamie-horowitz-roger-ailes-bill-oreilly/

https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/tv/2021/06/29/fox-news-1-million-fine-settlement-sexual-harassment-case/7805330002/

@wajoma said
I listen to a NZ station 'https://realitycheck.radio/' no ads, no goobermint money, entirely listener funded, can't say that is any qualification for being unbiased.

Different funding models give different incentives for news content. If it's listener funded, there's more accountability to tell the truth. Which is why you don't see PBS shelling out hundreds of millions to settle defamation lawsuits.

There's bias, and then there's outright lying. They are not the same.

@averagejoe1 said
I did not say it is a news site. It is mainly for entertainment people, don't much watch vanilla news. It has news programs, a straight down-the-road program at 6eastern, for instance, Bret Baer just reads the news. So, I tell you what he might report. Not so much Hannity who gets in fits, as does Sonhouse. He gives opinions, so get nothing from that. I have my own ...[text shortened]... Bret Baer.
Breitbart also has opinion shows, but I just get the news there, and WSJ. Love WSJ.

The Wall Street Journal has some good reporting even if it's editorial board is at least 100 years behind the times in Economics.

@no1marauder said
Sure:

https://www.thewrap.com/fox-sexual-harassment-jamie-horowitz-roger-ailes-bill-oreilly/

https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/tv/2021/06/29/fox-news-1-million-fine-settlement-sexual-harassment-case/7805330002/

which of those equals masturbating yourself for the public to see?

@wajoma said
kev bamboozle, Joe is referring to the Pseud Known as Shag Doodys quote, here verbatim:

"Greed is what follows from egoism."

So when you say 'simpleton' you are directly attributing that to shatmixer. On this we agree. I implore shag doody, for his own sake, return to the single ijit emoji response.

Well call me pedantic but shouldn’t the quote have been in err quotation marks

@no1marauder said
The Wall Street Journal has some good reporting even if it's editorial board is at least 100 years behind the times in Economics.

You would be very helpful to drop in on those hundreds of WSJ guys, who are on-it every day, with your advice. You should have warned us yesterday that Bitcoin would drop 2.4% today.!

@no1marauder said
The Wall Street Journal has some good reporting even if it's editorial board is at least 100 years behind the times in Economics.

Am I correct, generally speaking, that the amount of money that people have should be more regulated?
Like, if we live on my imaginary island, and I have $300K and you have $75, something is out of balance.....and should thus be balanced?

@averagejoe1 said
Am I correct, generally speaking, that the amount of money that people have should be more regulated?
Like, if we live on my imaginary island, and I have $300K and you have $75, something is out of balance.....and should thus be balanced?

How many times are you going to rattle on about this false BS? I don't know anyone who says the financial position in a society should be exactly balanced for everyone and neither do you.

@mott-the-hoople said
which of those equals masturbating yourself for the public to see?

I'd say demanding sex from a female employee in order for her to keep her job or get a promotion is worse.

Maybe that's why Fox News had to pay $1 million and Jeffrey Toobin $0.

@no1marauder said
How many times are you going to rattle on about this false BS? I don't know anyone who says the financial position in a society should be exactly balanced for everyone and neither do you.

Then, in plain un-linked english, where is the WSJ editorial board behind in Economic writings?