Neelix backs North Korean Dictator in insulting Biden

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Darth, does a statement from a Republican congressman on the matter help at all? https://www.newsweek.com/gop-congressma ... un-1436496

It's not that you require more than my "supposition", it's that you seem to think anything short of a full confession signed in blood in the presence of six or more witnesses is insufficient evidence to condemn a man in the court of public opinion. Your standards for plausibility on any implication of bad faith or malice are ridiculously demanding.

Let me also remind you, and I hope at the very least this is without question, that, in his very tweets, not in a conference or a meeting or anything, he BACKED A FOREIGN DICTATOR'S insult AGAINST a member of his own nation just because he considers that man a political opponent!

[Yukaphile]

Hmmmm... to play Devil's Advocate, shouldn't we ignore the source to any statement taken, and just accept the logic or the merit on its own? If the argument still stands up, it stands up. I just find this attitude to be depressingly common where someone will disregard something simply because "this person said it!" And maybe it's a bit slippery slope, but therein lies the path to dehumanization. We don't listen to people. We don't try to understand who seems to be even the worst person alive. Now granted, I don't trust Kim, and as a center leftist, even if I'm not sold on Biden, and have issues with him, I don't think he's a bad person, while Kim is a heartless dictator who wouldn't hesitate to murder millions, and that makes him a monster, indisputably. But at the same time, where does this end? You open the gateway to dehumanizing even a monster, you risk becoming that yourself... I dunno. Maybe I'm just jaded. Been feeling very down lately, as you guys can probably tell. I guess my point is Trump agreeing with something Kim said isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's just this here clearly is not, because of my own political biases as a former Democrat.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Hmmmm... to play Devil's Advocate

The devil has plenty of advocates already. Use your own words or speak with a forked tongue.

[Yukaphile]

No kidding. But you know what I meant.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

You want a longer answer? No.

Authority and credibility are informed by the context of the words origin. If the CEO of Philip Morris says one pack a week won't cause significant lung damage, I will weigh those words very differently than if a doctor tells me the same thing.

[Darth Wedgius]

Darth, does a statement from a Republican congressman on the matter help at all? https://www.newsweek.com/gop-congressma ... un-1436496

It's not that you require more than my "supposition", it's that you seem to think anything short of a full confession signed in blood in the presence of six or more witnesses is insufficient evidence to condemn a man in the court of public opinion. Your standards for plausibility on any implication of bad faith or malice are ridiculously demanding.

Let me also remind you, and I hope at the very least this is without question, that, in his very tweets, not in a conference or a meeting or anything, he BACKED A FOREIGN DICTATOR'S insult AGAINST a member of his own nation just because he considers that man a political opponent!

Not really. I don't see anything that qualifies as praise. Again, where in that tweet did Trump praise Kim, except to say he had "confidence" Kim would keep his promise?

I did not bring up a confession signed in blood anywhere. That seems to be your supposition. You might at least consider that what seems obvious to you may not be happening if you cannot find objective support for it.

And no, the tweet did not establish that "he BACKED A FOREIGN DICTATOR'S insult AGAINST a member of his own nation just because he considers that man a political opponent." He said, "perhaps that's sending me a signal." He never said, "Ha! Good one, Kim!" Nor did he say, "Shame on you, Kim!" He said, "perhaps that's sending me a signal." You understand what that means, right? Not what you want it to mean, but the literal meaning of the words in English, which is presumably the language Trump uses.

"Perhaps" - maybe, possibly
"that's" - what is occurring
"sending" - transmittal
"me" - Trump
"a signal" - information

"Maybe that's transmitting information to me."

[Yukaphile]

This is also the same guy who asked a foreign country to help him beat the Democrats. Our number one enemy.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

smiled when he called Swampman Joe Biden a low IQ individual

A smile. That's what you do when you are happy, when you are pleased with somebody. Given that he called Joe Biden "Swampman", throwing out an insult of his, while describing the tinpot dictator's choice of insult, how do you interpret that as something other than "backing" him, defending what he says, reinforcing it?

[Yukaphile]

There should be no doubt Trump is a loud-mouthed and bigoted bully.

[Darth Wedgius]

smiled when he called Swampman Joe Biden a low IQ individual

A smile. That's what you do when you are happy, when you are pleased with somebody. Given that he called Joe Biden "Swampman", throwing out an insult of his, while describing the tinpot dictator's choice of insult, how do you interpret that as something other than "backing" him, defending what he says, reinforcing it?

That was Kim backing Trump, not Trump backing Kim. That's why Trump took it as a signal, according to Trump, anyway.