"Do you have Aetna? No? Would you like to hear about Aetna benefits at CVS? No? That will be a 20% non-Aetna processing fee. Thanks for shopping at CVS, we know you have a choice healthcare, thanks for choosing us."
You know full well these aren't leaks. Private information was stolen illegally. Don't pretend like this was a whistleblower. This forum needs a rule against this kind of fained ignorance.
I just pointed out rightly so that he was lying. He admitted he "doesn't care about the truth." You think you're protecting the discourse by protecting these unrepentant liers? I don't care if there paid or not, it's just spam. By enabling it you're part of the spam. I'm going to keep calling out this gaslighting crap, because it's a lie. so ban me or whatever.
The above comment is an excellent example of political gaslighting, there is ample, undeniable evidence of some sort of GOP collision with Russia. No sane person looking at the evidence could come to any other conclusion, but by confidently stating the exact opposite of the truth the above commenter seeks to sow doubt in the mind of a potentially disinterested or confused audience. This is a an increasingly common tactic on these boards.
He can't false equivalency is a common tactic used by conservatives to gaslight non-conservatives. You're not crazy, they just lie and don't feel bad about it.
Obama lowered taxes, in fact no Democratic president has raised taxes during my lifetime (I'm 25). It's pretty strange people always claim this is a thing when it's just flat false.
This somewhat anecdotal, but the biggest issue I had when living in the suburbs was traffic. I'm someone who has driven hundreds of thousands miles and never been in an accident, but the extreme levels of fear and stress I got from going even short distances in the suburbs was just aweful.
I didn't always feel this way, but I think the use of cellphones has created and environment where even slow moving drivers are unpredictable. I now walk to work and frequently see people on their phones while driving, if a line of ten cars are stopped at a light at least three people are on their phones. The result isn't an extreme increase in accidents but a constricting deficit of attention which incrementally lengthens every encounter on the road. More short stopping, more people missing green lights or just driving super conservatively and not merging holding up traffic.
Also I never use my phone while driving, but the fact that I can't even look at it when I know someone is trying to contact me is incredibly frustrating and impacts my enjoyment of driving.
The thing is it's not even really an argument, it's a rationalization. It's so strange to me that someone would even try to argue that life expectancy doesn't reflect the quality of health care. what conceivably could be gained by attempting to prove such a counter-intuitive thing?
> Well that's not that exciting or even new. I don't know of other countries, but some of brazilian literature classics from the XIX century were originally published in small pieces at daily newspapers. With intense debate around the paths of the story.
Two questions:
1. What specifically are you referring to?
2. Why did you feel the neeed to express it in Roman numeral?
"By any means necessary", was in retrospect an inflammatory statement, which I should not have used. I don't believe violence is necessary, or even helpful in achieving a moral society.
As for judgements about the morality of others, this is my opinion. I don't apologize for it. I know I'm unlikely to be directly persuasive using this moral judgement as an argumentative tactic, but to make people conscious of the intangible, quasi-spritual ramafications of their political beliefs does at least as much good as simply getting someone to believe what I believe.
I get this is a a technology forum a people generally shouldn't post politically charged stuff.
I am more then happy to never post any political crap here again, but I like to know why/how my recent post was flagged. I apologize, if I violated the etiquette or something.