I just realized yesterday that I haven't had cable TV since January 2014 and I don't miss it a bit. I love being out of touch with the latest TV shows.
I like Trump because he represents a lot of ideas I have. He isn't perfect, but none of them are and the beauty of it is, that no President can hold more than 2 consecutive terms and once every 4 years, you get a chance to boot him out and try again. After 8 years, he's gone for sure - at least for another 4 years and maybe forever unless he ever wants to run again and gets elected.
Of course this is here in the USA. It's the ying and they yang, the back and forth of the 2 parties. It just seems the libs can't be patient like I had to be when that Marxist Obama was in office. I tolerated it for 8 years.
It's my turn.
silent
The Great Impeach.
Moderator: scott
re: The Great Impeach.
I tried to follow the process on C-span. What a mess!
It's like the dress-illusion on deciding it's white/gold or blue/black.
When you're unable to see both, then apparently you need to fight for your opinion to establish that opinion.
But in this case the opinions are about the quality of country-leadership.
What laws..? Opinions it is!
Not only it's about fighting opposing opinions but also about undermining the other to make sure you're right. What we actually miss is a square wrestling ring and an announcer presenting with rolling words the match of one paradigm versus the other.
The obvious thing is that the whole discussion displays two different ways of reasoning that apparently can't be reconciled.
Some seem to have a real problem with the inference on certain clear facts and then be able to complete block understanding - Or they just shut down, I dunno.
Sure, seeing causal effects only works well when one is able to look at the problem from a certain distance.
Apparently, when the cause is too close to home and one's own choices and thus integrity are felt to be at stake then such puzzle starts to interfere with one's very own identity; It needs defending no matter what.
With a predetermined outcome locked in place, such individual (yet as a group) is willing to totally ignore any implication and consequence outside their own realm and for that willing to turn things on their heads in order to try to preserve their own personal coherency.
Then the other group (yet individually) comes along who try to hold to the facts as clear as possible and try to gain the benefit of getting coherency in their own way in order to also keep things consistent.
Almost no difference. Yet the one blames and convinces the other to be in the 'wrong' group and as such create two opposing vantage points.
Among 'you the people of the US' there exist just a tiny different perspective on the notions of self, self-preservation, greater, good and scope.
Seen from a far, far, far away distance it's amusingly interesting. A perfect case study for the books. We can all learn from this.
Rien ne va plus!
Carry on, but I guess that shouldn't be a problem.
It's like the dress-illusion on deciding it's white/gold or blue/black.
When you're unable to see both, then apparently you need to fight for your opinion to establish that opinion.
But in this case the opinions are about the quality of country-leadership.
What laws..? Opinions it is!
Not only it's about fighting opposing opinions but also about undermining the other to make sure you're right. What we actually miss is a square wrestling ring and an announcer presenting with rolling words the match of one paradigm versus the other.
The obvious thing is that the whole discussion displays two different ways of reasoning that apparently can't be reconciled.
Some seem to have a real problem with the inference on certain clear facts and then be able to complete block understanding - Or they just shut down, I dunno.
Sure, seeing causal effects only works well when one is able to look at the problem from a certain distance.
Apparently, when the cause is too close to home and one's own choices and thus integrity are felt to be at stake then such puzzle starts to interfere with one's very own identity; It needs defending no matter what.
With a predetermined outcome locked in place, such individual (yet as a group) is willing to totally ignore any implication and consequence outside their own realm and for that willing to turn things on their heads in order to try to preserve their own personal coherency.
Then the other group (yet individually) comes along who try to hold to the facts as clear as possible and try to gain the benefit of getting coherency in their own way in order to also keep things consistent.
Almost no difference. Yet the one blames and convinces the other to be in the 'wrong' group and as such create two opposing vantage points.
Among 'you the people of the US' there exist just a tiny different perspective on the notions of self, self-preservation, greater, good and scope.
Seen from a far, far, far away distance it's amusingly interesting. A perfect case study for the books. We can all learn from this.
Rien ne va plus!
Carry on, but I guess that shouldn't be a problem.
I don't have cable TV since 2004...“The motion is instigated by the lightest possible touch of 2 fingers, and continues, with increasing momentum until something breaks or wears out, or a stronger opposing force is externally applied. With these provisos, indeed, the machine would continue its perpetual course indefinitely.� GB 57
Marchello E.
-- May the force lift you up. In case it doesn't, try something else.---
-- May the force lift you up. In case it doesn't, try something else.---
