Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aylan Kurdi is dead because of Hillary.
Trump outright stated he would deliberately bomb women and children.
Peter Thiel, YC, and hard decisions
351–360 of 414 posts
Re: Peter Thiel, YC, and hard decisions
#352Earlier quoted context omitted.
IMO, you can even disregard all of Trump's dirty laundry in this calculation. He is openly calling into doubt the result of this election before it's even happened, asking supporters to intimidate voters, and suggesting the entire election is "rigged". He is attempting to undermine democracy in the country and I'm not sure you need a single additional reason to object to anyone who supports him. Thiel, of course, doe…
Just adding to this, claiming that a democratic election is rigged is one of Umberto Eco's 14 signs of Ur-Fascism [0]: > Wherever a politician casts doubt on the legitimacy of a parliament because it no longer represents the Voice of the People, we can smell Ur-Fascism. [0] http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/
Just curious why everyone loves throwing around the term "fascist" so much. Why not use more precise language to describe what you dislike about a candidate? The term seems ambiguous, and no one seems to have a clear definition of what it is. At most, there seems to be some related factors. For example, my image of Fascists is that they heavily promote war and expanding the empire. But, in contrast, the "fascist" candidate in this election wants to reduce our military footprint, and have other countries defend themselves.
Re: Peter Thiel, YC, and hard decisions
#353Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, I did not. Why don't you provide the full quotes, in context? You didn't even provide a source for your quotes. Convenient. You have absolutely no room to be calling someone else "intellectually dishonest". Edit: if this "1998 interview" exists, Google appears to have no knowledge of it.
> You have absolutely no room to be calling someone else "intellectually dishonest". * You did know that Clinton called Byrd a "friend and mentor" but didn't know that Byrd repeatedly & profusely apologized for his racism. * You did know that Thurmond "apologized" for his racism but didn't know that Thurmond didn't really mean it. * You call me out for not providing a source (which ceejayoz provided below) but ignore…
>You did know that Clinton called Byrd a "friend and mentor" but didn't know that Byrd repeatedly & profusely apologized for his racism.
No, actually, I did know that. I just didn't believe him at the time, and still don't.
>You did know that Thurmond "apologized" for his racism but didn't know that Thurmond didn't really mean it.
According to whom? You?
> You call me out for not providing a source (which ceejayoz provided below)
A source which a) showed that your "quotes" were grossly out of context and b) when tracked back to its actual source showed that Thurmond did repudiate his segregationist stance.
> Not to mention that we started this thread with your (incorrect) claims about Byrd + Clinton but now we're talking about Thurmond.
1) No, this thread started with Thurmond.
2) My original claims about Byrd were:
a) Hillary Clinton called him a "friend and mentor" and a man of "eloquence and nobility". That is correct. I even provided a link to the video of her saying it.
b) Robert Byrd was a Kleagle (recruiter) in the KKK. That is also correct. He was also later the Exalted Cyclops (head) of his local chapter.
c) Byrd once wrote "I shall never fight in the armed forces with a Negro by my side. ... Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds." That is also correct.
I can only conclude that by "incorrect" you mean "100% correct".
If you have any factual links to refute any of those claims, please provide them. Not "Well, he later said he was sorry, yadda-yadda".
Are a), b) and c) above factually correct or not? A simple yes or no will suffice.
> Maybe next time you should try googling for a few minutes before you press submit.
Maybe you should try reading for a few minutes before you press submit.
Re: Peter Thiel, YC, and hard decisions
#354This would be fine if HRC supporters were also going to be marginalized for advocating the use of drone warfare, warrantless wiretapping, and all the many deeply troubling things about HRC's policy ideas. While I could never bring myself to vote for Trump or HRC, I am profoundly disappointed that anyone would advocate marginalizing Thiel for simply participating in democracy. Thiel's donation is a a drop in the bucke…
> drone warfare, warrantless wiretapping
I find myself in a position that there are things that I dislike about both nominee's policies (in that they are the same or both suck), and things that I exclusively dislike about Trump's policies but not the other way around.
Can you give me some examples to balance the scales?
Re: Peter Thiel, YC, and hard decisions
#355Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but that's a consequence of a 2 party system and choosing the lesser evil, isn't it? He's both Libertarian and gay, both are extremely socially liberal. Why do you say he is socially conservative? I'm not seeing that. A lot of Libertarian tend to vote Republican because they feel stronger about economic issues, high taxes, 2nd amendment, freedom of religion, etc, than they do about social issues but that is jus…
> A lot of Libertarian tend to vote Republican because they feel stronger about economic issues, high taxes, 2nd amendment, freedom of religion, etc, than they do about social issues But that's the problem. Who exactly are affected by these "Social issues"? (Hint: It's not rich white guys).
That's democracy in general and one of the problems with it. People will generally vote for whatever is in their best interest at the expense of someone else. The 2 party system exacerbates the problem and steals choice from people by not allowing them to vote on specific issues.
Re: Peter Thiel, YC, and hard decisions
#356Earlier quoted context omitted.
YC gets what 4k applications? You think founders are not going to apply to YC because of who Thiel gives money to? Seems unlikely.
People are known to take principled stands. Which is what this conversation's about.
People do take stands but my reply was to:
> This in turn chills applications from startups working on problems not relating to white western males.
With the crush of applicants now I doubt more than a very few applicants are not going to apply because Thiel is on the board.
Re: Peter Thiel, YC, and hard decisions
#357Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This fabricated outrage created by media & Clinton campaign of Trump's 'alleged' doings is quite concerning. You mean the serial sexual assault which he basically confessed to multiple times unprompted (bus tape, stern show, …), and to which his only defences are a british lunatic (who "confessed" to being a child pimp for british cabinet members at 17) and that his accusers are too ugly for him to assault? Let us…
You mean the time Clinton campaign needed a way to counter Bill's actual sexual assault victims Trump was hammering them on. Wikileaks: 'Democrats prepared fake Trump "grope under the meeting table" Craigslist employment advertisement in May 2016'[0] [0] https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/787060280832380928
If it makes you feel any better, there are many of us that would like to see both Trump and B. Clinton in a court room.
The strategic nature of information dispersal is not lost on people and it's disgusting.
If you accept the accusers claims from both sides (as I am inclined to do in cases of sexual harassment), we have one nominee that is a self reported serial sexual predator and another who is an attacker of victims of her serial sexual predator spouse.
There's no moral high-ground here.
Re: Peter Thiel, YC, and hard decisions
#358Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You have absolutely no room to be calling someone else "intellectually dishonest". * You did know that Clinton called Byrd a "friend and mentor" but didn't know that Byrd repeatedly & profusely apologized for his racism. * You did know that Thurmond "apologized" for his racism but didn't know that Thurmond didn't really mean it. * You call me out for not providing a source (which ceejayoz provided below) but ignore…
>You did know that Clinton called Byrd a "friend and mentor" but didn't know that Byrd repeatedly & profusely apologized for his racism. No, actually, I did know that. I just didn't believe him at the time, and still don't. >You did know that Thurmond "apologized" for his racism but didn't know that Thurmond didn't really mean it. According to whom? You? > You call me out for not providing a source (which ceejayoz pr…
Despite his repeated apologies and support of legislation that helped people of color, you're not willing to believe that Byrd was genuine when he apologized. But you do believe Thurmond was genuine. Okay.
It has become clear that this conversation is a waste of my time.
Re: Peter Thiel, YC, and hard decisions
#359This would be fine if HRC supporters were also going to be marginalized for advocating the use of drone warfare, warrantless wiretapping, and all the many deeply troubling things about HRC's policy ideas. While I could never bring myself to vote for Trump or HRC, I am profoundly disappointed that anyone would advocate marginalizing Thiel for simply participating in democracy. Thiel's donation is a a drop in the bucke…
> drone warfare, warrantless wiretapping I find myself in a position that there are things that I dislike about both nominee's policies (in that they are the same or both suck), and things that I exclusively dislike about Trump's policies but not the other way around. Can you give me some examples to balance the scales?
Vote 3rd party, really
Re: Peter Thiel, YC, and hard decisions
#360Earlier quoted context omitted.
For that to be, Trump would have to win (or have post election influence) and Thiel would have to believe Trump's low education, semi-ludite supporters could be convinced the tech that displaced many of them is good. It's hard to image Thiel could possibly believe the latter but surely it's impossible that he believes the former. >...Liberal newspapers... Like the WSJ?
Trump also has high education, non-luddite supporters or at the very least supporters that could be brought over to considering investing in a future America that makes itself 'Great' through government spending on infrastructure and science. It could be that Thiel believes he is speaking to these people (some of which might only be Trump supporters in 2016 because they always vote Republican). My central point is th…
Strangely, you're now implying that he is trying to buy influence but figured the other party was harder to pay off.
>..There seems to be a very small amount of dirt that has been dug up..
I am unfamiliar with that definition of "small".
>...His donation allowed him to speak at the RNC...
Is the arrow of time also a liberal media conspiracy?