Comments by "Oblithian" (@Oblithian) on "David Pakman Show" channel.

  1. I like that they are taking initiative against false information. However, I don't support censorship and suppression of freedom of speech. I think Twitter has a better approach of flagging false information. It would be easy for google to go one step further and link to correct sources on subjects. Not to mention these last 4 years or so, youtube has been strongly abusing it's abilities to promote narratives of its choosing.
    3
  2. lol
    2
  3. Rapid back-pedalling http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/trump-tariffs-steel-aluminum-canada-china-1.4565892
    2
  4. Who is more to blame, trump, or those (largely innacurate) hate mongering social media pages?
    2
  5. Which means the Republicans didn't interfere either., which is surprising. Though I am not surprised that law enforcement officials took their job seriously.
    2
  6. First and foremost, the president's level of care is in no way indicative of the typical treatment. So even if he does well, it doesn't mean everyone will. (Let alone differences from case to case, and 1 not being at all adequate as a sample size). That should be obvious to most, except he himself is not noting that, and I highly doubt his hardcore supporters will even have the thought fly by subconciously.
    2
  7. No, it is stupid, but in most contexts (ie uses) it is the same as saying "I am not homosexual but...". Followed by something that could draw their sexuality into question unintentionally, not because being gay is bad, but that it maymake things confusing. Which means that the issue would be that merely discussing your sexuality is homophobic... or at least telling someone you are straight is homophobic... Which is over reaching. Now, if someone outstreached their arm with their palm out and said, "No, homo" then they would be using the term homo, as a slurr. No "homo" in itself is not a slurr, unless it is used in a negative context, otherwise it is merely an abbreviation of a long word, and holds meaning in itself as a prefix. ex: One may also say, "No homo, please" or "anything but homo" when specifying their milk preferences to someone buying groceries. Context is significant in the english language. If you don't like it, give one word/phrase only one meaning, and replace inflections with a grammatical particle... or something.
    2
  8. This is similar to the effect of the UK leaving the EU, only there is no indirectness. Tariffs are tariffs, they were created directly and intentionally, not as a consequence of wanting to keep out all the "dirty migrants". (Which was also a poor decision economically. At the very least poorly thought out.)
    2
  9. Notice we couldn't see the size of the crowd this time.
    2
  10. She's trying her best not to make him look like as much of an asshat, while still being truthful.
    2
  11. There certainly can be simple solutions. But there is always a cost.
    2
  12. Didn't Cohen say he recorded all of their conversations?
    2
  13. There are so many other ways to make them invested in the community, and they at the very least should have a vested interest in their job. So if they fix the whole US approach to policing, it wouldn't be an issue in the first place.
    2
  14. Where are all those hypocritical Trump supporters who were complaining about leaving kids out of it, when a woman merely mentioned Barron's name as a quip to Trump's nepotism? (Taking issue with the name, not the child) Unlike her, he is directly attacking a teenager (as he has done many times on twitter). I think they attacked Obama's daughter in the past as welll?.. I don't remember.
    2
  15. In many countries in asia sending someone of lower status to discuss business is considered an insult. Also, Kim Jong Un has comveyed disapproval of Mike Pompeo (however that's spelled). So I could see not wanting to deal with him. If this has any chance of working unfortunately it will have to be Trump (which even if he does seems likely to fail), the president of South Korea, or a submissive seeming replacement for Pompeo who is actually a master manipulator.
    2
  16. We would certainly welcome some of the states with open arms, the others we would still welcome... but only offer them a handshake and some refreshments.
    2
  17. It will be interesting if she admits to lying for him... so much, and goes back to sharing her views pre-trump...
    2
  18.  @jtg1972  it's not even gullibility or stupidity (...entirely anyway), it's largerly polarization. The result of these eye for an eye, stereotypes and straw-man arguments. Anything anyone says in disagreement (regardless of their affilitation) is automatically defined as the extreme of the (left or right) oposing party, and obviously because all leftists are the extreme "SJW" "Socialist" "libtard" "SoyBoys", and all on the right are the extreme "Neo-Nazi" "Incel" "Misogynists", their opinions don't matter no matter if they agree on 99/100 other issues. In fact, any opinion held by them after that over generalization is applied, is abhorrent and absurd, because any opinion by X terrible thing, must also be terrible. Anyone can have useful insight once and a while, be they a dunce or a Nazi. It doesn't mean you have to agree with all of their views, it doesn't validate them either. Take the points of commonality and find points of compromise where you can. You don't have to like an opinion, but even if you disagree with its conclusion, chances are some arguments at least portions of value. But no, no one wants to question the foundations of their view of reality, and it's easier to shout and call people names.
    2
  19. Warren is a bit absurd, I wish people would see through such strawman arguments. If someone signs an NDA only the direct parties involved may dictate the terms. If one is a corporation, the owner cannot simply make that decision alone, because corporations are not proprietorships. Also, if it were between two employees then the company does not have the right to share their information, without the consent of both parties. It's just more, "blah blah blah, I am fighting for women" empty rhetoric, rather than measurable and meaningful action. Does that make Bloomberg ok? No. Does that mean bad things didn't happen? No, nor does it make it acceptable for them to continue happening. But not everyone wants to re-live their arguments or traumas either.
    2
  20. I am going to be honest the new California rules sound pretty ageist (as well as the economic barriers mentioned). You can have rigorous hiring, and still have young people without a degree. I suspect they will see the problems merely shift to an older age group, as it suggests an inedequacy in orientation and training. But hey, "know nothing young people" are always a good scapegoat.
    2
  21. Suddenly the crowd has masks (well the "featured" prop crowd)
    2
  22. He sounded very angry that his bubble of applause was broken.
    2
  23. No David, not buying something or buying something else, that's the 'invisible hand' of the "free market". Trying to get a book banned (any book) is not. There is obviously demand for the books. Trying to get someone fired for knowing a person or having dated a person, that's not the 'free market'. I am not saying it should or shouldn't be out of print. But I am 100% refuting your half-baked explaination. This isn't even a good representative example of the 'cancel culture' that the Republicans are trying to pin everything on. At this point you're not even examining the objective merits of the counter arguments, you are simply towing the line. And as an aside, we know the 'free market' is a fallacy anyway, unregulated capitalism has been proven flawed. It has to have some regulation, just as mob justice isn't true justice. Just as Communism as instituted facilitates authoritarianism.
    2
  24. lol david with the flattery
    2
  25. I'm just here because I heard there would be snakes. ...There are no sneks
    2
  26. I would like to hear more about this.
    2
  27. You know what, maybe we should ask China. I can only imagine they will be like "your president is on crack, moving on".
    2
  28. I assumed it was referring to people who were obsessed with trump. Right or Left, labelling is just a convenient strawman argument. Be it David or Fox News, it's unproductive and is facillitating the detrimental hyper-partisanship absurdity that is irrational, narrow minded, and uncompromising.
    2
  29. I mean loosely, if you grab at the things the president says, and fox says, and take them to be whole and truthful but come away with pieces. If you were to string them together the result would be this. If you tried to break down the inaccuracies this argument was based on, you would come across like a fool to this person. As someone who would desperately search for excuses in the technicalities, meanwhile they aren't listening and don't have the background knowledge to connect the dots you set out.
    2
  30. David's take on 'cancel culture' is just willfully ignorant at this point. He deliberately creates the biggest strawman for a set of behaviours anyone can see happening, and he himself was subject to. Only this is on a much larger scale. Fox News' version of 'cancel culture' is also absurd, but I expected better from David Pakman. When a show is cancelled that is literal cancellation. But to be caused by 'cancel culture' (as people are seeing it done) the fundamental aspect is the concerted effort to tear down someone's life beyond merely their job based on objective performance measures or what is reasonably acceptable. There is a widespread trend of hate mobs trying to exact justice of their verdicts based merely on differences of race, opinion, religion, or association. In otherwords discrimination. It's one thing to say, this person is unprofessional, they shouldn't be working, or they should get training. It's another to say Chris Pratt goes to a church I don't like, I am going to harass and bully him and anyone he likes or associates with and actively campaign that he never work again, and they never work again. Even for merely not going out of your way to declare support for something a random user requested can be the trigger. It's objectively a thing, it's visible, and it is measureable. However, neither David nor Fox is reporting on it objectively. Fox is greatly over applying it and using it to suit their political views and false narratives (as Fox does). But in not wanting the appearance of giving them any credibility David is doing the same thing by exaggerating the concept and dismissing the objective truths.
    2
  31. They're spending a suspicious ammount of time on emphasizing that no one trump knew organized it hahaha
    2
  32. They're not driving ...in this plan. The other option would be for the vehicles to hold a specified altitude automatically, and then people could pilot it on an imaginary plane.
    2
  33. There are some solid points in the arguments made by David, very important ones to think about. But it is still extremely important for all of us to bear in mind that every president has made pardons. It is not the pardons themselves that are the problem , rather how they are being used. Always attack exactly the problem, not the simplistic headline. Otherwise you leave your argument open to being dismissed like this.
    2
  34. I thought someone was bringing back sound board prank calls.
    2
  35. If you don't, will anyone else? Every single issue needs to be public knowledge... however many thousands it ends up being.
    2
  36.  @NEIGH6699  It's all about context, hate is hate, period, but some people prefer different words and that is ok (some are squeemish about moist, or coitus). However, if used without malicious context they are simply another adjective or noun. Context is everything, painting your face black or having a dirty face isn't inherently racist. Some dress up as coal miners... or work dirty jobs, or dress as commandos sneaking around at night. If everyone does not have the same motive/context for the action then the action itself cannot be inherently the same.
    2
  37. You'll hear more damaging news about me as we approach the election.
    2
  38. You can decry them just fine without resorting to name calling (which helps invalidate your points to the opposition).
    2
  39. So many things in this world need to be fixed, but so few people even try.
    2
  40. I know a few people who were in... lets say at a vulnerable time in high school, where a few people (close friends) were telling them "oh, the reason you are having trouble in life is because you're a lesbian like me", "the reason you don't find any of the guys in our grade (in our small town) attractive is because you actually like woman". Now most homosexuals don't try to peer pressure their friends and those few were likely unusually low in self confidence. However, they did try being lesbians for a fair number of years before changing their minds. Does this make them bi-sexual rather than hetero or homosexual? Maybe, maybe they never were actually attracted to the same sex. At the very least they thought they were at the time. and all of them attributed their foray in part to nudging from others. There are also instances of some radical feminists (I am not joking YouTube has dozens of videos promoting this) pressuring others to discard men entirely and become lesbians for socio-political reasons. Whether these count or not is for you to decide, but we can't actually know how someone else's true preferences actually are (or were) without being them.
    2
  41. It's not the democrats people should press, but republicans (all of them). Party solidarity or not, they are still people, and they will start giving more consideration to an issue the more it is brought to their attention in a reasonable manner. Perhaps approach it at an angle of requesting another candidate to preserve the integrity of the russia investigation, should the worst be true it is not a possibility we can afford to ignore.
    2
  42. He said "he would be happy to release them, but he can't"... What's his excuse now? or has he just dropped that narrative and his base forgot.
    2
  43. Will I buy a shirt with a zipper? The answer is no.
    2
  44. What happened to Free and independent Business? The invisible hand? Government non-intervention? He is now trying to restrict freedoms any business has to expand internationally by use of the thing republicans hate (Business taxes). I am not a huge fan of Harley, as a company, their product, or as an employer, but they need to be able to make their own decisions. If it's wrong someone else will fill the gap... eventually.
    2
  45. Did I miss something? Don't insideous people try to invalidate the testimony by questioning the loyalty of anyone they disagree with? They are nationalistic and anti-immigrant... so, I am not sure if you can jump to that conclusion based off of what you have presented. Is any question of loyalty viewed as anti-semitism? I mean what if Trump was Jewish? I have to say, in this matter you may have the victim mentality from your personal biases and family history. As justified as that bias may be, I encourage you to re examine this and question if you may merely be doing what you have criticized the "radical left" for doing. If there is more too it, I will happily listen. Obviously if this is the first I am hearing about it, you know more about the topic than I. But if I am unaware, they too may not be. After all, context is king. if it wasn't intended as you interpreted it, the motivation causing insult to the Jewish people never existed.
    2
  46. If Trump doesn't like it maybe he should exploit one of the flaws in his "wall"
    2
  47. That's a bit embarassing for a certain prime minister...
    2
  48. Wouldn't this move make it so that the religion isn't protected by all of the rights afforded to a religion?
    2
  49. Welcome to America, land of the price gouging and home of the fraud .
    2
  50. I don't actually think Bernie is the best candidate this year. There are a lot of alternatives, and none are Hillary.
    2