Benghazi Scandal Fizzled To Nothing
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-06-2016, 01:20 PM
RE: Benghazi Scandal Fizzled To Nothing
(30-06-2016 12:21 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  "Calling a spade a spade" is vernacular for speaking blunt truth, in English. I think it's fair to say that you're rather known for your outspokenness here. To then turn around and chastise someone else for exhibiting the same quality seems a bit of a double-standard, to me.
Oh wow, I really misunderstood your comment the first time I read it - thanks for the clarification. I can see your point, but I would say the crucial difference between the two is substance. I hold people to the same standard I hold myself to when they're outspoken, meaning I expect them to do research to make sure that the blunt truth they're speaking is grounded in reality and that they're able to provide something tangible to support it when someone comes along to questions their truth. To give you an example, you criticized the financial feasibility of Trump's border wall in a very blunt and outspoken manner a while ago and when I challenged those statements, you didn't simply assert that it's not feasible - you researched the topic thoroughly, read various cost analyses you found during your research and then cited them in support of your argument.

Now, I don't know about you, but I would say that some of the people who have been equally blunt and outspoken about their views haven't quite managed to measure up to that standard.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-06-2016, 01:27 PM
RE: Benghazi Scandal Fizzled To Nothing
(30-06-2016 01:20 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(30-06-2016 12:21 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  "Calling a spade a spade" is vernacular for speaking blunt truth, in English. I think it's fair to say that you're rather known for your outspokenness here. To then turn around and chastise someone else for exhibiting the same quality seems a bit of a double-standard, to me.
Oh wow, I really misunderstood your comment the first time I read it - thanks for the clarification. I can see your point, but I would say the crucial difference between the two is substance. I hold people to the same standard I hold myself to when they're outspoken, meaning I expect them to do research to make sure that the blunt truth they're speaking is grounded in reality and that they're able to provide something tangible to support it when someone comes along to questions their truth. To give you an example, you criticized the financial feasibility of Trump's border wall in a very blunt and outspoken manner a while ago and when I challenged those statements, you didn't simply assert that it's not feasible - you researched the topic thoroughly, read various cost analyses you found during your research and then cited them in support of your argument.

Now, I don't know about you, but I would say that some of the people who have been equally blunt and outspoken about their views haven't quite managed to measure up to that standard.

What about opinions? Are opinions exempt? You can't very well prove that your opinion is really your opinion. Some things are just opinions and not facts. I usually preface with "I think that" or " My thinking is..." Opinions can be valuable also, they can prompt new lines of thinking.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Dom's post
30-06-2016, 01:32 PM
RE: Benghazi Scandal Fizzled To Nothing
(30-06-2016 01:27 PM)Dom Wrote:  What about opinions? Are opinions exempt? You can't very well prove that your opinion is really your opinion. Some things are just opinions and not facts. I usually preface with "I think that" or " My thinking is..." Opinions can be valuable also, they can prompt new lines of thinking.
Yeah, I would say opinions are exempt. Adding the qualifiers you mentioned is a good way to let other people know that you're not trying to make a statement of fact.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-06-2016, 01:42 PM
RE: Benghazi Scandal Fizzled To Nothing
(29-06-2016 07:36 PM)CosmicRaven Wrote:  [...] Hillary has done stuff that she shouldn't have. I'm not gonna sit here and say that she hasn't or try to make things seem smaller than they are.

Such as? Everybody here seems to be saying this, but as an "outsider" I can't quite ascertain what laws—if any—she's broken. And the FBI investigation has thus far not exposed any wrongdoing (I believe?) on her part.

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes SYZ's post
30-06-2016, 01:50 PM
RE: Benghazi Scandal Fizzled To Nothing
(30-06-2016 01:42 PM)SYZ Wrote:  Such as? Everybody here seems to be saying this, but as an "outsider" I can't quite ascertain what laws—if any—she's broken. And the FBI investigation has thus far not exposed any wrongdoing (I believe?) on her part.
No, it definitely has. There's no way to be completely certain that this wrongdoing is criminal in its nature until a formal trial is held, but the relevant experts in the field currently suspect that she violated the Federal Records Act, the Freedom of Information Act, 18 U.S. Code § 793 and perhaps even the Espionage Act. I would suggest you to start reading this fact checker's evaluation of the Inspector General's report on the Clinton e-mail scandal and then go from there. I can personally recommend this compilation of virtually all major newspaper articles that have been written on this scandal in the past one or two years.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-06-2016, 01:59 PM
RE: Benghazi Scandal Fizzled To Nothing
(29-06-2016 03:49 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(29-06-2016 02:46 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Did I mention that my Government email account is limited to 4 Gb and I have to delete batches of emails regularly to still have email. I'm sure I did.

True and good point, but couldn't she or her staff, instead of deleting them transferred them to an external hard drive and download them to the government's servers where the data is stored?

That would have been the proper procedure.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like GirlyMan's post
30-06-2016, 02:00 PM (This post was last modified: 30-06-2016 02:21 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Benghazi Scandal Fizzled To Nothing
(29-06-2016 03:51 PM)Vosur Wrote:  I'm not sure what you're getting at. Are you trying to say the Federal Records Act is a poorly enforced law or that it doesn't apply to you?

Is that a rhetorical question? Or a question designed to impugn my character?

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-06-2016, 02:34 PM
RE: Benghazi Scandal Fizzled To Nothing
(30-06-2016 02:00 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Is that a rhetorical question? Or a question designed to impugn my character?
Neither, BrotherMan. I'm genuinely trying to find out what you were trying to say with your post. Tongue

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-06-2016, 03:20 PM (This post was last modified: 01-07-2016 12:55 AM by Thumpalumpacus.)
RE: Benghazi Scandal Fizzled To Nothing
(30-06-2016 01:20 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(30-06-2016 12:21 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  "Calling a spade a spade" is vernacular for speaking blunt truth, in English. I think it's fair to say that you're rather known for your outspokenness here. To then turn around and chastise someone else for exhibiting the same quality seems a bit of a double-standard, to me.
Oh wow, I really misunderstood your comment the first time I read it - thanks for the clarification. I can see your point, but I would say the crucial difference between the two is substance. I hold people to the same standard I hold myself to when they're outspoken, meaning I expect them to do research to make sure that the blunt truth they're speaking is grounded in reality and that they're able to provide something tangible to support it when someone comes along to questions their truth. To give you an example, you criticized the financial feasibility of Trump's border wall in a very blunt and outspoken manner a while ago and when I challenged those statements, you didn't simply assert that it's not feasible - you researched the topic thoroughly, read various cost analyses you found during your research and then cited them in support of your argument.

Now, I don't know about you, but I would say that some of the people who have been equally blunt and outspoken about their views haven't quite managed to measure up to that standard.

Well, I won't waste the time searching up examples of a troll's writing in order to make the point if I lay it -- that'd be dreary work, indeed. He's left thousands of examples scattered around the forum, and his body of work speaks for itself. So I understand a simple dismissal, on the premise that some folk just ain't worth my fucking time.

I come online to have an enjoyable experience, not slog through someone's shitposting in order to demonstrate my points. I trust that the readership here is smart enough to see what I see. It's not like there are very many dummies here, y'know?

That means that sometimes I'll fall into the group you mention in your last paragraph, and that's all good -- I don't care. I'm not going to subject myself to the unpleasant duty of researching an asshat's posting history in order to satisfy a third-party's skepticism You either see it yourself, or you don't. I'm not here to change your mind, but to speak my own.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
30-06-2016, 03:40 PM (This post was last modified: 30-06-2016 03:44 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Benghazi Scandal Fizzled To Nothing
(30-06-2016 01:59 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(29-06-2016 03:49 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  True and good point, but couldn't she or her staff, instead of deleting them transferred them to an external hard drive and download them to the government's servers where the data is stored?

That would have been the proper procedure.

And it should also have been accompanied by extensive documentation of the exigent circumstances and why protocol had to be broken.

(30-06-2016 02:34 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(30-06-2016 02:00 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Is that a rhetorical question? Or a question designed to impugn my character?
Neither, BrotherMan. I'm genuinely trying to find out what you were trying to say with your post. Tongue

Fair enough. I doubt anyone else here other than US Government employees knew how to take it either. I've received extensive mandatory training in ethics in Government, how to handle sensitive information including PII, contract law and protecting IP, suicide prevention, sexual and racist and religious harassment prevention, etc. for 30 years. You know who doesn't have to go through the same extensive training as me? Those same fuckers who made it mandatory for me. .... But it's not like it pisses me off or anything.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: