MovieChat Forums > filmflaneur > Replies
filmflaneur's Replies
No missed that, too true though.
<blockquote> You reduced the government calling for the extermination of white people as a “hot headed” comment. </blockquote>
And you inflated it to a representation of actual white 'genocide'.
<blockquote>Also on a side note, you transitioned your daughter you sick POS. </blockquote>
And on your side note; that was a very low punch, even for you. If you had actually read that thread you would see that he was an adult when he transitioned, on his own cognizance, and is now happily married, validated and well balanced. It's you people who are sad and disordered, not those who try and make a better life for themselves, or those who support them.
Thank you, I certainly shan't disagree with most of your various points about hypocrisy and will check the link. I suppose the proof will be in the pudding, and whether Musk can do the job he has been parachuted in to do. And whether two massive egos can co-exist in the White House.
Thank you for not answering my questions and instead resorting back to the usual personal insults, which is telling.
As I said; there are different standards of confirmation. A simple Google search of' When did Trump Confirm Musk', then one for Hesketh in the same terms, shows up that difference. For Musk we have Sky news who tell us "Elon Musk's starring role in the new Donald Trump administration was confirmed as he appeared front and centre of his inauguration proceedings." For Hesketh it is "The one-time Fox News television host and combat veteran was narrowly confirmed in the Senate late on Friday." See what I mean.
I am not saying the Musk is working for Trump under false pretences or illegitmately (his access to Federal records aside). Just that he is unelected and the whole thing has lacked scrutiny.
<blockquote> There’s some secrecy involved, of course — the true motives, behind-the-scenes machinations, </blockquote>
Not even that; in a lot of cases on this board all of these are fully alleged, discovered identified and condemned, along with the chief culprits with ease, it would seem lol But I hear what you are saying. My chief issue with conspiracy theories, or whatever the 'lesser version' of them is called is that they are very often so all-consuming, sensationalist and melodramatic in their essence while invariably reflecting the confirmation bias of whoever thinks about them. In their defence is often employed special pleading or Arguments from Ignorance. A little conspiracy goes a long way.
<blockquote> I suppose the question is why is one confirmation acceptable while another isn't? </blockquote>
Because, as you put it, the confirmation hearings are a process that firmly add legitimacy to a role through a legal, or at least formal process. The other sort of confirmation is just Trump saying Musk is the guy.
I'm actually a little easier on Musk. For my tastes he has drifted a little too far right in recent years yes; he is a hypocrite in that he positions himself as a champion of free speech and then, for instance closes the account on Twitter of someone who tracked the movements of his personal jet yes; he has crashed X, sure; and he acts like a schoolboy in public. But away from politics he has been incredibly successful in some areas of activity with undoubted expertise. I just wish he would stand for office rather than be seen standing in the Office.
<blockquote> Not all conspiracies are secret </blockquote>
A conspiracy, by definition, involves a secret plan or agreement, making secrecy a core element. Strictly speaking this alone would disqualify some of the more popular ones where not only are the supposed participants known but so is often their <i>modus operandi</i> and motives.
<blockquote> take Project 2025, for example... And it’s happening right out in the open. </blockquote>
That's why I said "One might see Project 2025 a 'conspiracy' using this sort of logic."
I have taken your advice, and edited back in above most as you wrote it, from the request for a process which "presumably adds legitimacy to a role." onto the extended description of the lavatory habits of an oversized - sorry 'fat' - person onto your not bothering to click links, sorry "shit", before then offering one yourself. I left out your recipe reverie, I hope that is ok. I am astonished how much difference it makes.
We are all partisan here, my friend. But thank you for your detailed, courteous and convincing rebuttal.
<blockquote> Then please clarify what you meant by confirmation as a process that presumably adds legitimacy to a role. </blockquote>
https://campaignlegal.org/update/confirmation-hearings-explained
<blockquote>What you're implying here is that you're fixated on cleaning the toilet when you still have a fat fuck roommate that eats fast food every meal and shits all over the inside of the upper part of the bowl to where the water doesn't wash it away when you pull the handle.</blockquote>
Sounds as if Trump's 'draining the swamp' does not cut it with you then lol
<blockquote> We're familiar enough now to where I can just tell you that I'm not clicking on that shit because I don't have to imagine it. </blockquote>
I can see why; it was relevant because similar remarks to yours by a Trumpian Laura Loomer were, rightly, condemned as racist.
<blockquote>He was born in a foreign country ... he even admitted it </blockquote>
Barack Obama was born on August 4, 1961, at Kapiolani Medical Center for Women and Children in Honolulu, Hawaii. He is the only president born outside the contiguous 48 states.
Where did you get your info? Oh sorry, forgot...
I agree; but it keeps us all off the streets.
<blockquote> If confirmation is your standard, much of the weight of your words is lost. Musk was confirmed by Trump.</blockquote>
That was not really what I had in mind. Trump could also 'confirm' an order for his favourite KFC, New York style cheese pizza, Wendy's fast food and ice cream to round things off.
<blockquote>FF "That does not make it ethical."
No, </blockquote>
Then why would one agree with the unethical when knowing it to be so. I thought the emphasis is on 'draining the swamp' not adding more floaters to it.
<blockquote>Imagine if this imaginary person had aloo gobi and dal biryani for dinner last night. </blockquote>
Yes, just imagine
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/white-house-will-smell-like-curry-trump-ally-laura-loomers-racist-comment-on-kamala-harriss-potential-victory-sparks-outrage/articleshow/113309327.cms?from=mdr
Glad you are back and feeling up to things again. We may not agree, but I agree it is a more interesting place with you than without.
MAGret is always fun to see. Much more to come more doubt!
Oh dear.
Thank you for your partisan opinions. The connecting thread appears to be that all these organisations just do and stand for things you do not approve of. There is no evidence that either the ACLU or ADL are on balance less than balanced towards the races. Ironically what you say is itself just right wing propaganda.
<blockquote>You could as well be referencing a Justice on the Supreme Court, or really anyone appointed or potentially even confirmed by anything other than a popular vote of the citizenry. </blockquote>
And who has confirmed Musk? Did I miss the extended hearings and all those tough questions about some of his questionable history?
<blockquote> What's happening with Musk specifically is par for the course conceptually and historically. </blockquote>
That does not make it ethical.
<blockquote> but negativity towards Musk will at best result in another asshole taking his place. And that one might not even be white. </blockquote>
Oh dear.