I am drawn to the idea of Existentialism. That may not line up so well with the "real" rinselberg, but I think it's fair to say that Existentialism is the ethos of the "rinselberg" that appears here, on this forum, via the medium of texts and images.
quote
"Insofar as one can define existentialism, it is a movement from the abstract and the general to the particular and the concrete ..."
That was me, quoting Brent Dean Robbins about Existentialism on the OptiBoard forum. There's just a little more about Existentialism, as described by Brent Dean Robbins, that I put up there. A "teaspoonful's" worth of Existentialist theory. https://www.optiboard.com/f...iewfull=1#post131691
I don't need to settle on whether Donald Trump is (or was, or yet would be) a fascist to know that he's anything but my "cup of tea."
Taking up the idea of Trump as if he were an inkblot in a Rorschach-style exercise, my first thought is that he is a kitschy caricature of the idea of a super-successful businessman or entrepreneur. I've thought of him as a real life example of the bromide that "The easiest way to make a small fortune is to start with a large fortune." Considering his inheritance from his father, Fred Trump.
In the service of objectivity, I remember someone with reasonable credentials saying (not too long ago) that he would describe Trump's success over the years in financial terms as having done slightly better than if Trump's entire inheritance had been invested in a competently managed stock market investment fund from the very start of his adulthood.
How's that for starters?
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-14-2021).]
Originally posted by rinselberg: I see "2.5" being very theoretical on this forum.
Theoritical, I would proabbly consider it the opposite.
"the·o·ret·i·cal concerned with or involving the theory of a subject or area of study rather than its practical application. based on or calculated through theory rather than experience or practice."
quote
Originally posted by rinselberg: I don't need to settle on whether Donald Trump is (or was, or yet would be) a fascist to know that he's anything but my "cup of tea."
I dont either, but this thread isnt really much about cups of tea, or feels, or rhetoric, or boogeymen...except for focusing on identifying and distinguishing what is real and really happening, from those cups of tea, feels, rhetoric, and boogeymen. Specifically as relates to fascists and fascism and its application.
Civil rights, technology, advancements in science, new religions and philosophical concepts, demographic shifts—these specific changes are always new, but change itself is constant. Whether it’s people moving from farms to cities, computers remaking the workplace, or gay folks wanting the right to marry.
This country is a living organism, not a display in a museum.
And while social changes are inevitable, they’re also flammable. Throughout history demagogues of all political persuasions have used these changes to try to create resentment as a tool to amass power.
It’s the inflamers, the arsonists who are responsible for the “war” part of the culture war.
Yes, the scores of millions of people who create cultural change in the daily comings and goings of their lives should be more forbearing with everyone else. That would be awesome. #Endorse #LiveTheChange
But that’s not where the “culture war” comes from. The culture war is the creation of specific, powerful people—whose names we all know—who cynically and intentionally view conflict as a means to increase their power.
I think "2.5" is the kind of person that Tim Miller wants as a reader for this.
I think "2.5" is the kind of person that Tim Miller wants as a reader for this.
I'm not sure who you might be talking to, not me?
But I have no doubt of this corrected by me version of something you quoted from someone else.
"The culture war is the creation of ...people ...who...intentionally view conflict as a means to increase their power."
Yes, I hope it is known to all of us that people enjoy being in power more than being trodden upon. Probably as much as they would rather have more money than less. Have a relaxing life instead of stressful, and other obvious things. I myself prefer individual freedom and responsibility and not so much group identity division and victimhood. But I do clearly see how group identity division is a tool, that is why it is taught.
Originally posted by randye: Shall we tell you what kind of person we think you are?
Is there more than one "randye"..? He keeps saying "we"when he can only intend the singular pronoun "I" and it's very strange--or would be, coming from someone other than "randye."
I make it a point not to look at any of the mindless and ill-tempered "gar-baj" that he endlessly imposes upon this forum--this is another A-1 example--not withstanding the occasional exception. That's usually when I know that he has posted, but I think he posted in a way that doesn't directly involve the "rinselberg" that lives in his head. Like if I think he posted something about race cars.
The "Last Post" field is often a clue. Other times, I just have an anticipation of it, so I can scroll down very cautiously, focusing my eyes to the left, and if I see "randye" that's my cue to scroll past it without focusing my eyes on whatever he's created.
I have a couple of other small "hacks" that I use to make do in the absence of forum functionality that would allow me to automatically keep him out of my sight.
That one caught me by surprise. Came up on my screen when I wasn't ready to use my Pennock's Best Practices and scroll hurriedly past it with the field of vision hygiene that I have just described.
Anyone who's up to date would think he is suffering from the long term neurological damage of Covid (he said he had it) if they didn't know, as I do (and perhaps others as well) that he was already like this at least several years before Covid was a "thing."
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-14-2021).]
Disclaimer: I'm not a fan of Trump, I do however enjoy facts, truth and clarity.
If you havent blocked politics yet. I'm glad.
The title of that video could have just as easily been: "Steven Crowder interviews 2 people who haven't got a single clue what fascism is."
That's endemic of the Left.
"FASCISM" and "FASCIST" are thought and discussion stoppers that have been added to other words such as screaming "RACIST", HOMOPHOBE and a host of other words that only have power over you if you allow them to. Notably and unsurprisingly, the accusation of "racist" toward Trump also came up in that video.
The vast majority of Leftists have the ideological IQ of a tree stump and don't know a fascist from a football.
The final reaction of that poor, stupid, woman in the first part of the video reminded me of a verse in the song "Goodbye Stranger" by the group "Super Tramp":
"Now I believe in what you say Is the undisputed truth But I have to have things my own way To keep me in my youth"
After she was left unable to logically and objectively argue that Trump is a fascist she finally resorted to emotion, (where all Leftist go), and stormed off after personally insulting Crowder.
No matter what the objective truth is she absolutely MUST see it her own way to keep herself in her illusion.
It is also worth noting how Crowder skillfully refused to allow her to control the narrative, or frame the question, like Lefties do when she tried to tell him that he couldn't bring up Obama in the discussion and when she insisted that Trump was "breaking the law" on immigration but was then forced to confess that she doesn't know what the law is.
It was a very clear demonstration of the kind of willful ignorance, denial and fantasy that Leftists live in.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 07-14-2021).]
Originally posted by 2.5: Maybe this could have be addressed in Private messages.
Absolutely not. Unless you want to send one.
If he has a different reaction to this topic or has different thoughts about it--different than what I've said about it--he could certainly put himself forward in that way.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-16-2021).]
Shall we tell you [rinselberg] what kind of person we think you are?
That should be remarked, disparagingly, as forum member randye lamely resorting to the "Royal We."
It's an obvious tell that he is a very boastful person who thinks he is more than he really is. He's a person who constantly thinks of himself as "hot sh*t" but in reality--as far as the boundaries of this online discussion forum are concerned--he's just "hot sh*t" without the "hot".
He imagines himself as some kind of "spokesperson" for the forum at large, or for some group of forum members within the forum.
Who does he speak for?
Only himself.
He starts his message by presenting some snippets of my previous remarks, using the quote box format, and following that with his put-down line "This thread is not about you [rinselberg]." He uses the large size type font and all capital letters and underscores the word "you" [rinselberg] for emphasis, in his typical "over the top" or "overheated" style of discourse. The snippets of my previous remarks which he presents are all instances where I was being self-referential, or making "I" statements.
Of course. I was talking about MY reaction to this topic, as it has been set up by "2.5".
Why wouldn't I be using "I" statements?
So he's trying to make something out of nothing (so to speak.) Readers may also remark that the message from myself, where these snippets that were taken by forum member randye originally reside, is not a particularly long or verbose message. There's no (good) reason for forum member randye to try, as he did, to disparage that rinselberg message. He just can't stop "hating" on me.
He can't stop "hating" on me, so much so, that there was an instance, not that long ago, when some other forum member was on here, talking about the Covid virus, and forum member randye stupidly quoted that forum member and went on an insolent little rant about it, going on about what "rinselberg" had just said about the Covid virus, because forum member randye stupidly mistook that other forum member's remarks as a message from me.
So with his first message in this thread, forum member randye did not address the topic of this thread in any way--he just "glommed" onto my reaction to this topic.
Did he go on after that, to address this forum topic in any way?
I don't know. I'm blissfully unaware. I read his first message in this thread--as I said, it took me by surprise--and have made it a point not to look at any subsequent message(s) he has created in this thread. Because that's how I roll when it comes to forum member randye.
If he wants me to read his messages on a regular or recurring basis, he needs to think about creating messages that I would actually want to read.
He's constantly trying to boast about himself in an indirect way, by denigrating anyone else who doesn't line up closely enough with his ideas, or even just what he perceives or does not perceive as humorous.
He is so utterly tiresome that I know with 100 percent certainty that I will never be second guessing myself on any of my decisions to NOT read his messages.
I don't quite understand why "2.5" has connected any of this with the idea of PMs or Private Messages.
Certainly, forum member randye didn't go "private" with his first message on this thread. Which is just as well, because if I ever see a PM from randye in my PMs inbox, I will open it, taking care not to read any of it--other than the subject line, which would be unavoidable--and use the forum functionality that would block any second PM from randye from getting to my PMs inbox. (As I understand it, a person would first have to receive a PM from another person and open it, before being able to activate the PM blocking protocol in that way. I don't see any other way to do it.)
There is one post or public message from forum member randye that I would be glad to see.
His last stupid message.
Whether it's his last stupid message, or his last message "period"--no difference to me.
It would be a small pleasure for me to witness that, although I certainly don't anticipate it.
Any further questions?
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-17-2021).]
Originally posted by randye: THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT YOU
Great point. And confirmed by the messages. This thread is about forum member randye.
I made it so.
Just as the YouTube segments that were posted here by forum member 2.5 expose other kinds of people that need to fall back, I exposed forum member randye as someone who obviously needs to fall back. In fact, forum member randye exposed himself.
"Fall back" is a colloquial way of referring to someone like forum member randye that is "out of line." It's an emphatic way of asserting that someone like forum member randye needs to calm down, back off, or STFU.
My messages expose the commonality between the YouTube segments posted here by 2.5 and what this forum is like.
It's in no small measure "on" forum member randye, because he has never fallen back at any moment during the last umpteen years in which he has continually exposed himself as someone who very clearly needs to fall back.
My messages on this thread--all of them--are very much on point with the framing of this topic as set up by 2.5.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-18-2021).]
David Frum is a staff writer at The Atlantic and the author of "Trumpocalypse: Restoring American Democracy (2020)." In 2001 and 2002, he was a speechwriter for President George W. Bush.
This how he closes:
quote
We’re past the point of pretending it was antifa that did January 6, past the point of pretending that Trump didn’t want what he fomented and what he got. In his interview on July 11—as in the ever more explicit talk of his followers—the new line about the attack on the Capitol is guilty but justified. The election of 2020 was a fraud, and so those who lost it are entitled to overturn it.
I do not consider myself guilty. I admit all the factual aspects of the charge. But I cannot plead that I am guilty of high treason; for there can be no high treason against that treason committed in 1918.
Maybe you recognize those words. They come from Adolf Hitler’s plea of self-defense at his trial for his 1923 Munich putsch. He argued: You are not entitled to the power you hold, so I committed no crime when I tried to grab it back. You blame me for what I did; I blame you for who you are.
Trump’s no Hitler, obviously. But they share some ways of thinking. The past never repeats itself. But it offers warnings. It’s time to start using the F-word [fascism] again, not to defame—but to diagnose.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-19-2021).]
That should be remarked, disparagingly, as forum member randye lamely resorting to the "Royal We."
he is a very boastful person He's a person who .. He imagines.. Only himself.. He starts his message.. he's trying to make something out of nothing
these snippets that were taken by forum member randye originally reside, is not a particularly long or verbose message.
He can't stop.. his first message.. he go on after that.. he has created in... he wants me to... He's constantly trying ... He is so utterly tiresome..
Certainly, forum member randye didn't go "private" with his first message on this thread. Which is just as well, because if I ever see a PM from randye in my PMs inbox, I will open it, taking care not to read any of it--other than the subject line, which would be unavoidable--and use the forum functionality that would block any second PM from randye from getting to my PMs inbox.
His last stupid message.
his last stupid message,
Any further questions?
Questions no, suggestion. Take the BS to PMs please. You seem to not only be missing the point of the post, (fascism isnt what they think), but also keep calling out a certain forum member.
Questions no, suggestion. Take the BS to PMs please. You seem to not only be missing the point of the post, (fascism isnt what they think), but also keep calling out a certain forum member.
He has provided a, real-time, perfect demonstration of almost precisely what you titled this thread about.
OPINIONSreplacefacts in the LEFTIST mind.
He's trying to tell us all, via his "rhetoric", that he imagines a "boogeyman" and how he "feels" about it ..... LOL
In a weird, tangential, way THIS THREAD IS ABOUT HIM.... but obviously not in the way he imagines.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 07-19-2021).]
Originally posted by 2.5: Questions no, suggestion. Take the BS to PMs please. You seem to not only be missing the point of the post, (fascism isnt what they think), but also keep calling out a certain forum member.
It's not hard to find people on YouTube that need to "Fall Back." If you only look for such people in a way that you find them on the "Left"--as that term is used by "2.5", or by "randye"--then that's where you will find them: among the "Left."
There's no shortage of stupidity to be found on YouTube (and elsewhere) among the "not Left."
I hope that "2.5" has read all of my messages on this thread, and all and not just part of each of my messages on this thread.
I have House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy as guest conductor of the Robert Shaw Chorale to take us into the next hour (and also prevent the message that immediately precedes this message from becoming visible to me in my browser window when I use the Submit Reply function to post this message.)
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-20-2021).]
John Bolton blasts Trump: "Being a fascist requires [at least] 10 seconds of thought."
This queues up the moment when Bolton delivers his "10 seconds" gibe, aimed squarely at the former President. https://youtu.be/g-LN2Z2GtgM?t=279
Sarcasm from John Bolton, who was one of Trump's national security advisers.
"Former national security adviser John Bolton questions whether former President Donald Trump was capable of orchestrating a violent coup."
Aired on CNN; July 16, 2021.
John Bolton, certainly no favorite of progressives or liberals.
Key takeaway: The dummies that were calling Trump a "fascist" in the YouTube video that was posted by "2.5" at the start of this thread were giving Trump way too much credit.
So says John Bolton.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-21-2021).]
I have House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy as guest conductor of the Robert Shaw Chorale to take us into the next hour (and also prevent the message that immediately precedes this message from becoming visible to me in my browser window when I use the Submit Reply function to post this message.)
Originally posted by 2.5: Blinders arent a good thing.
Neither are eyesores. But let me try to cut to the chase, as far as the kind of discussion that "2.5" had in mind when he started this thread. I go back to something I already said previously in this thread, that it is easy to go onto YouTube and find people within the videos that need to "Fall Back", that being a phrase that I used previously in this thread.
If you look for such people among the Left, then that is exactly where you will find them: among the Left.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-28-2021).]
If you look for such people among the Left, then that is exactly where you will find them: among the Left.
That is correct. Laws vs feels, facts vs rhetoric, real vs boogeyman and the concern with identifying and discerning refers to anyone no matter their political identification. What a viewer should do if they are wise is see if they are also lacking discernment in a given instance.
Key takeaway: The dummies that were calling Trump a "fascist" in the YouTube video that was posted by "2.5" at the start of this thread were giving Trump way too much credit.
Almost laughable rhetoric abounds. So they say for months he caused an insurrection / coup. Then say he couldn't. Ok, so it seems it was all just fearmongering after all.
Why don't we tackle the Antifa video or the video about "genders" next?
Not "they", but specifically John Bolton. He's the one who said (in so many words) that Trump doesn't (or didn't) have enough brains to "do fascism." I'm sure that John Bolton is not the only public figure who has been saying that.
David Frum, on the other hand--earlier in this thread I posted a David Frum essay from The Atlantic--takes the F-word (fascism) in connection with DJT, more seriously than does John Bolton. Ditto for me. I'm with David Frum on this, not with John Bolton.
This isn't where I want to be right now. It's a shame that the "voices" on this forum have dwindled to so few. I don't think anyone's been in this thread, except "2.5" and "randye" and myself.
Upon review, a couple of "zingers" from Hudini. But that's it.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-28-2021).]
Not "they", but specifically John Bolton. He's the one who said (in so many words) that Trump doesn't (or didn't) have enough brains to "do fascism." I'm sure that John Bolton is not the only public figure who has been saying that.
Yes, but you made the point.
quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:
This isn't where I want to be right now.
So not getting into the other videos?
[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 07-28-2021).]
This isn't where I want to be right now. It's a shame that the "voices" on this forum have dwindled to so few. I don't think anyone's been in this thread, except "2.5" and "randye" and myself.
Upon review, a couple of "zingers" from Hudini. But that's it.
Voices have gone away, as your idiocy does not bear most people wasting their time.
I think you are inflating the importance of the people that come off poorly in these videos.
As far as that remark from John Bolton, I really just threw it in here for comic relief. It was a "dig" at DJT, and I always like that. ...
I dont think I inflated the importance of the public folks in the vid, the voters, their kids, the people they know, or the topics they discuss. However this conversation may have been of inflated the importance, based on your reply. Even though its not just about the two people doing the discussing.
