Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Untitled topic

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

651–660 of 766 posts

Re: undefined

#651

Post by cryptical »

douche wrote: post #364
dreta wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no such thing as the "gun show loophole". It's a myth. There already are background checks. I can tell you've never even tried to own a gun.

This. It's admittedly pretty simple if you want to go buy a firearm in a reasonable state, like Maine or New Hampshire. You go to the gun dealer/sporting goods store/Walmart. You pick out what you want. They submit your information to the background checking system. You go get lunch and come back an hour later. Assuming you're a law-abiding citizen, you pay the cashier and walk out the store with your new firearm. No…

That's why universal background checks are considered by many to be the first step down the road to a gun registry.

Re: undefined

#652

Post by snowwrestler »

internaut wrote: post #630
neonbat wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

thiels philosophy is actually deeply technocratic authoritarian. in a lot of ways he is a technocrat and not a true libertarian. hes said on multiple occasions that politics has failed libertarians and that they should try 'alternatives.'

Libertarianism has bifurcated in recent years. Many people including myself have given up on democracy. It just no longer makes sense to be keep playing a game we can never win. For a libertarian in a democracy, the system is perpetually rigged. It is clear that war is coming and it is time to stop playing games. The truth is that democracy has nothing to offer us. It has bought nothing to the table. The new libertar…

You worry about which system will permit you to win, when the reality is that concepts like civil rights are the only thing that are keeping minorities like you from losing badly.

Re: undefined

#653

Post by jphillipsio »

SixSigma wrote: post #629
jphillipsio wrote: post #623

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean what's left that supports your views?

No. When CNN tells you reading things is illegal and you should only listen to their opinion, a line has been crossed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_X16_KzX1vE

It's kind of a silly thing to disclose and people should find truth but the blatant propaganda at breitbart isn't where you'll find it.

This guy is not the solution https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSE-XoVKaXg

Re: undefined

#654

Post by samastur »

samastur wrote: post #408
golemotron wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just like the US this year. This is not an exaggeration. Many people would have professional and personal consequences for supporting Trump in public. People like Peter Thiel and Scott Adams have enough money to not care. Scott isn't even endorsing him and he says that his speaking engagements have dried up. We may see a big difference between the polling and the election results this year. The Shy Tory Effect came t…

Scott Adams in his own words: http://blog.dilbert.com/post/150919416661/why-i-switched-my-...

I hate to respond to myself, but it is interesting how you can get down-voted simply for providing a reference to man's own words.

Re: undefined

#655

Post by CptJamesCook »

josho wrote: post #554
CptJamesCook wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, we should be vigilant against hate speech. But not by banning speech, and not by manipulating it. And saying that we shouldn't allow a specific faith into the United States, even on a temporary basis, is certainly against the American ethos. But it's not Hitler. I would say a more apt comparison to Hitler is the language used in the parent to my comment: "If that's the man Thiel wants to stand with so be it. Bu…

I find it interesting that you went to "banning speech". I don't equate anything the parent said with wanting to ban speech. Further I thought the comparison to Hitler was thought provoking as many German intellectuals looked the other way when Hitler and began instituting their policies. The "First they came.."[1] poem comes to mind. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_.. .

No one is coming for anyone. No one has said a thing about American citizens. Your comparison is unfair. Comparing people whose policies you disagree with to Hitler is McCarthyism.

Hitler:

Before he even gained power, he said he wanted to gas the devil jews. Before he won power democratically, he tried to seize power in a violent coup that left 15 people dead.

Once he gained power, he quickly imposed a series of laws that made it illegal for jews to work in academia, own property, work as judges, work as doctors, etc.

Trump:

Enforce immigration laws that are already on the books, provide extra scrutiny to Muslims ("most of whom are wonderful people") before they are allowed into the country.

Re: undefined

#656

Post by gallonofmilk »

orf wrote: post #602
gallonofmilk wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump is orders of magnitude more qualified than Hillary Clinton.

Well that's just not true is it

Actually, it is. Prove that Hillary's 30 years of being a political stooge qualifies her to lead the largest democracy in the world? When has she ever created an actual job? How did she make her hundreds of millions of dollars? Did she produce anything? Did she build a product and sell it? Did she build a company? Did she follow through on her promise to create 200,000 jobs in New York as a Senator? How have her foreign policy decisions impacted the world in places like Libya and Syria? How did spending $500 million to train 60 Syrian rebels end up? The left is so hyper-focused on trying to assassinate Trumps character that they can't even talk about her dismal record as a career politician and complete lack of real leadership skills. Pathetic.

Re: undefined

#657

Post by snowwrestler »

golemotron wrote: post #392
DominikR wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm in Austria, it was a disgrace. All of media was attacking the right wing guy with no dissenting voices, and you have to be afraid of personal and professional consequences if you endorse him or say anything against the Socialist candidate they are trying to push. It's literally like in the Soviet Union, at least that's what my parents told me as they came from a Communist country.

Just like the US this year. This is not an exaggeration. Many people would have professional and personal consequences for supporting Trump in public. People like Peter Thiel and Scott Adams have enough money to not care. Scott isn't even endorsing him and he says that his speaking engagements have dried up. We may see a big difference between the polling and the election results this year. The Shy Tory Effect came t…

In sorry, I can't let such obvious bullshit pass unchallenged.

There are many thousands of people who are being richly rewarded for supporting Trump, including members of the media like Matt Drudge, Sean Hannity, Corey Lewandowski, Bill O'Reilly, the entire staff of Breitbart, the entire "alt right" media ecosystem, etc.

In addition there are many thousands more who benefit financially from the pervasive coverage of Trump, like Jeff Zucker and other media executives.

Trump is polling above 40% nationally; he is not some secret oppressed political minority. He has received more benefit from media coverage than any other candidate.

However he is almost certainly going to lose, and that is because it is obvious that he would be a terrible president.

Re: undefined

#658

Post by TillE »

audran_marid wrote: post #648
adnzzzzZ wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's disgraceful that you're trying to bully an organization based on the political opinions of one of their partners. You should be ashamed of yourself and of the damage you're doing to your country.

bully : (verb) use superior strength or influence to intimidate (someone), typically to force him or her to do what one wants. i.e. you're completely wrong about what it means to "bully". You should be ashamed of yourself for your abuse of the English language.

I wish someone would tell this to UK politicians/media, where MPs are constantly being "bullied" by their constituents who said a mean thing to them on Facebook.

Re: undefined

#659

Post by idlewords »

pdog wrote: post #522
idlewords wrote: post #429

Peter Thiel is a YCombinator partner, yet YC has steadfastly refused to disavow him. In a Twitter exchange with David Heinemeier Hansson, Paul Graham suggested that to do so would somehow be the equivalent of firing an employee for having a distateful political opinion. YC's silence on a partner's outspoken support of Trump is disgraceful, and sends the most shameful message about our industry.

What are you suggesting that YC say or do? Should they be compelled or forced to make a statement?

They should say whatever they want, but remember that silence looks an awful lot like assent.

Re: undefined

#660

Post by idlewords »

chrissnell wrote: post #493
idlewords wrote: post #429

Peter Thiel is a YCombinator partner, yet YC has steadfastly refused to disavow him. In a Twitter exchange with David Heinemeier Hansson, Paul Graham suggested that to do so would somehow be the equivalent of firing an employee for having a distateful political opinion. YC's silence on a partner's outspoken support of Trump is disgraceful, and sends the most shameful message about our industry.

Unbelievable. I'm disgusted that you would suggest the blackballing of an investor simply because you don't agree with his political opinion--an opinion, I might add, that is shared amongst a large percentage of our country. Trump say a lot of nutty things but he's not far off the mark when he speaks of a liberal conspiracy to ruin him in this election. Your suggestion is a textbook example of this: using out-of-band…

I'm suggesting Thiel face consequences for supporting a sexually predatory bigot.

I'm literally just a guy with a Twitter account, so the idea that I'm strong-arming billionaires with my ruthless tweets is a little hard to credit.

Post reply on HN