Coreece

I would like to know who you’ve been talking to who specifically said that their objection to the parade was solely based on the idea that it would have main battle tanks in it.  It would be really interesting to find out who was thinking that. Who said it was their sole objection? This is a thread about a tank parade, a tank parade that was compared to "authoritarian displays in North Korea or China," a tank parade that never fucking happened. "Trump’s plans have caused consternation in the United States, with some people calling the sight of tanks on Washington’s streets grotesque. Around the world, analysts and observers have recoiled at the suggestion that Trump’s spectacle is in line with other democracies that celebrate their military history with gravity and reflection on the horrors of war. " https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/07/03/trumps-july-spectacle-was-inspired-by-france-some-outside-us-it-looks-more-like-china/ "But to the president’s harshest critics, the cost isn’t even the worst aspect of the show. Some have compared the plans for the event to the authoritarian displays in North Korea or China, meant to rally jingoistic respect for the nations and their leaders." https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/07/04/trumps-july-military-parade-is-celebration-himself/

Then perhaps you should be happy that the public got to see these tanks displayed (not paraded) with other military vehicles. Maybe they learned something. The only silly thing here is the misguided outrage.

Those were in the secret Railroad Parade:

Video of scary secret tank parade captured by a fearless pedestrian Tuesday night!

Here's the big fat horseshit nothingburger tank parade that half of all the fucking idiots in this country have been bitching about.

Come on people, it was a fucking 4th of July parade. So fed up with all the bullshit coming from otherwise reasonable people on both sides.

The British Airways are coming!

And that's why conservatives are the way they are and try to preserve what we already have while resisting the uncertainty of change. I just wish we weren't so fucking stupid in the way we go about it. We already have the blessings, now we need the wisdom so that they're not all just pissed away.

This too shall pass, and hopefully sooner rather than later. Until then it's probably best I just hold my tongue.

Fuck this hypocritical christian nation and their fucked up leader that brainwashed my family. Ya, it was a bad night. . . Tired of defending them and their tiresome bullshit.

Meh.....everyone's a critic! And I haven't even read the book yet!

Except for the part in question. I just think it doesn't fit, is far-fetched, unnecessary, and if anything, shows a lack of imagination and perhaps a bit of ignorance - but other than that part it seems like an interesting read.

Well. most likely his main motivation is selling novels. Ok, so number 3 in my previous reply.

All thanks to coal for causing AGW that caused record water levels and stronger winds!

But I think gnostic sects like that died out like 1500 hundred years ago or so, while Christianity flourished and captivated the world. And even before the gnostics, Paul addressed this issue in Corithians: 1 Corinthians 15: 12-19 "But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied." So you kind of get the idea of why that belief system didn't last very long. And I'm still left questioning Stephenson's motive for bringing it back. And that would all make sense except for the part about denying Christ's death and resurrection. So why bring it up? 1. Perhaps he's using it as the reason for how this sect justifies killing those they hate, but Christ's passive nature never stopped the church's barbaric behavior in the past, so why now? 2. Maybe he's just trying to reintroduce an old heresy that Paul addressed almost 2000 years ago. 3. Another reason may be that while he's trying to draw a parallel to evangelicals, he doesn't want to alienate evangelical customers, so by introducing this idea, Christians in general may not feel like it's an attack on their faith and therefore more willing to buy the book. Also, I'm still wondering if the part about killing homosexuals is actually in the book, or is it just the part about mixed textiles?

I don't know about that, but it's certainly pausible:

I'm more concerned with the voting software. Any dedicated homegrown group of political hacktivist can spread disinformation, but you still need a massive amount of morons to believe all the bullshit anyway, and then hope that it actually has an effect. Hacking into voting software is much more direct and offers definitive results.

As an aside, the other day I was wondering if people even read novels as much as they used to considering the distraction/preoccupation with facebook, twitter, etc. It's frustrating to see so many people seemingly cling to the first story that appeals to their bias simply because they can add it to their online arsenal to further their cause. [rant] And while this happens on both sides, for whatever reason I find myself more troubled by intelligent people on the left that seem to get caught up in all of this because they're so desperate to get rid of Trump - and apparently the end justifes the means. Now while that may be somewhat understandable, I think it's a bad habit to start, perhaps even dangerously addictive, especially when it becomes the preferred method to address all controversial topics like climate change, gun control and some racial issues when people automatically shout "racism" whenever "shit happens" to a minority because some white person is involved. Perhaps I'm being unfair by singling out the left, but they're the ones that are always talking about facts, stats, reason and logic, so it's not unreasonable to hold them to that standard, even if they find that appeals to emotion are (unfortunately) more effective and entertaining. [/rant] Whatever the case tho, this idea of being "facebooked" seems all the more likely today given the amount of effort it takes to acquire an honest and reliable grasp on any heated social/economic/political story these days. It's not like you can just read one from your news feed and call it the day. You need to read a mix of at least 3-5 from both sides in addition to cited sources and published studies, articles, data, etc. It's exhausting, and it doesn't seem that many are up to the task. I typically like these kinds of novels, and I'll probably have to read all 800+ pages to grasp the details, but so far the description of this Ameristan seems a bit too far fetched, and I can't really pinpoint what type of group would evolve into a sect that: 1. Are religious fundamentalists 2. Revert to Levitical Law 3. Stockpile weapons 4. Have Conferate flag bumper stickers 5. Reject the death and ressurection of Jesus Christ. I don't see evangelicals ever collectively rejecting the very belief responsible for their strong social cohesion in the first place. And while conservative millitant athiests could easily reject Christ, they wouldn't need religious fundamentalism to kill people they don't like. I mean who are these people, Southern White Nationalist Jews?

One literally can compare *any* two counties with one another. On any objective metric, you can do side by side comparisons. The differences between political systems and economic systems don’t work that way. One is about how assets and resources are allocated and used. The other is about who decides what policies the counties will adopt. There’s overlap (“what are our policies on how the market will work?”) but there are lots of parts that don’t overlap, as well. So... no I think you can draw more meaningful conclusions from comparing apples and oranges than comparing Norway and the U.S.

Much like comparing the U.S to Norway. . . Hmmm, I wonder which country would be the orange?

You are missing my point. I’m not saying that socialism would make the US better. I’m saying that Kallend, in the case, is (effectively) saying “hey I noticed that another country does things like x, and their people seem to benefit from it”. The response (paraphrasing) “well, if you like it so much you should move there” is an dodge of the issue. Effectively saying “America, love it exactly as it is now or leave it” isn’t patriotic. It’s cowardly - it’s being unwilling to have a dialogue about alternative ways of doing things that may (or might not) make things better. But all Kallend did was say how he didn't see things like beggars and homelessness without explaining the extent of the problem and how they're actually managing it. Norway's homelessness only started to decline in recent years largely due to solutions modeled after successful programs already in place in the United States. And I think others are trying to say that Norway isn't doing well because they're socialist, they're doing well because they're an oil rich free market society with a relatively small population comprised of heavily taxed wealthy people that can provide robust social programs for things like healthcare and secondary electric cars for needy rich white people.

No, he clearly means that conservatives are always saying "hey look at Venezuela, it's socialistic and all fucked up" even tho (he claims) it's not socialist. And so then he basically says "hey, look at "Socialist Norway" and the rest of Western Europe with "social programs" that are doing so well. (and never mind the shit hole parts where it's not going so well) And as usual he does it all in a rather weaselly way - implying that it's all socialism over there where things are all good - but if you call him out on it and say that they're not actually socialist, he can just say "I never said socialism, I said "SOCIAL PROGRAMS." And then you can say, "but you said "Socialist Norway," to which he'll condescendingly reply that you have a reading comprehension problem and that only a moron wouldn't have noticed the sarcasm. . .

Better to encourage her to go on hikes and bike rides with you by telling her how much more fun that is than watching TV! Exactly, there is good technique and bad technique, and the wife would probably respond differently to each. Snarky posts are going to get a snarky response.

Ya, and I suppose one could better their overweight wife by telling her how fat and ugly she looks compared to women in Sweden. . .

Maybe because for a long time begging was banned in Norway, and now they're threatening to ban it again. Just because you don't see them doesn't mean that they don't exist. Not too long ago, Norway's 0.12% homelessness wasn't that far off from the 0.17% in the US. In recent years, Norway has cut it by 30% by implementing solutions modeled after American programs to fight homelessness. What's really sad is that they probably could've eliminated the problem entirely with just a fraction of the money they spend on incentives for needy rich white people to buy secondary electric cars. Yes, I'd suspect that the logistics for maintaining 150,000 sq. miles of land for 5+ million people in Norway is more easily managed than the 3,000,000 sq. miles for 300+ million people in the U.S. Perhaps you're not being 100% honest either? http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/democratic-socialist-countries/ But whatever, so you have about 4 million rich white Lutherans living in harmony with about 1 million rich white atheists. Big fucking deal. Well what do you expect when you continually compare the worst parts of the U.S with the best parts of Europe?