| Blogs > jiminycricket1 > My Blog |
|
Hacking Cough The Russians hacked US. I have very little doubt. Their reason for doing it, was not about Trump, it was about Russia, even if it was "about Trump". It was a statement that rang with "Russia First" As we look at Tillerson and tie him with Russia and think about his relationship with Russia. No matter what that was. It was "Exxon First" It's always has been that way with businesses, as the advantage gained, by competitors was never judged, but figured out, how to be used for their advantage. It's "Business First" As we judge the actions of wrongdoing. The wrong doer sees himself as right, as the ends justify the means. The end is to gain the advantage. It's "Me first" The negative of Obama's views of the Russia hacking. is about the hacking itself. Reasons people are giving, as to how it's reflects on Trump or Tillerson or even the election is just hogwash. I have no doubt Obama thinks idealistically, his actions prove that, even if people choose to misconstrue them. Trump's view of the Russia hacking, is also just about the hacking itself. But what we may see as a wrongdoing, he will see as a method to gain advantage. Trump is not an idealist. Wrong doing will have nothing to do it, when his actions becomes about "America First" The world is changing, we are changing. almost all media has been diminished with the computer world. A media that once had an obligation not to lie has become a lie. The computer media has no restrictions, both truth and lies, without distinction. Control the computer media and one can control the world. If you don't realize this, look in past and see the science fiction of yesterday becoming the truth of today. "Big brother" is watching. Idealism is the victim. Pragmatism the controlling factor. |
|||
|
Fighting something because it's wrong. is not the current criteria of the way people think People first have to judge... How wrong is it? and what's right about it? Controlled, once by the news media and now by the by the computer media. As those who claim to be idealistic, and none, more so the Christians. Need to stop, and see themselves as being Christian, not just "Christian First". Because Christianity has the power to be our savior, instead it's stomping idealism to the ground, in the name of Christianity. The greatest threat to America First, is a return TO Christianity and NOT the current thought of the return OF Christianity. Prove who you are and others will follow. Prove who others Should NOT be, and no one will follow.
| ||
|
Congratulations, Jiminy. How this blog could have made it through your nonsense filter if beyond me. Volume is the answer to sales problems - not credibility problems. You suffer from the latter. On a positive note, before Hobs or Roxy get here to throttle me, Merry Christmas. Fossil ******** My un-personal view............... I'm not selling anything. You are. You may see me as competition, but I don't see you that way Believe me, or don't believe me. I don't care. I can try to lead it to water, but I can't make a horse's azz drink. You get to decide if you're going to drink it, NOT ME
| ||
|
No, Jiminy, you ARE selling something. You are still trying to convince us of your ability to debate a topic within your own head. It isn't a debate when the affirmative and negative sides of a proposition are advocated by the same speaker, especially when neither side is presented coherently. It is called being "bi-polar," Jiminy. Happy New Year too.  Fossil I do try and show you the debate I have in my own head. that's what i do. I think your reason for why I do that is mistaken. the difference between you and I, is you see positive and negative as opposites. nothing in between I see it in degrees as falling somewhere on a line between the two Positive>------------------------------>neutral<--------------------------------<Negative I just have aversion to the extremes.
| ||
|
Merry Christmas!!
| ||
|
No, Jiminy, you ARE selling something. You are still trying to convince us of your ability to debate a topic within your own head. It isn't a debate when the affirmative and negative sides of a proposition are advocated by the same speaker, especially when neither side is presented coherently. It is called being "bi-polar," Jiminy. Happy New Year too. Fossil I think I'm going to write a blog about our new ambassador to Israel, Friedman. Try and show the debate I'm having, in my own head. I didn't care who we named. In this case. I did care about what it said, what message was being sent. The reasons behind that message, and the justification being used.
| ||
|
Jiminy you've got it exactly! I think most people would probably fall just to either the left or right of neutral in their thinking. That's what makes it hard to resolve the conflict we have with ourselves. It's the extremes that are bothersome....people who think in extremes have no conflict at all. It's all black or white to them, so they never doubt...they can't see grey areas that are always present in thinking.
| ||
|
Good idea, Jiminy. I have already read quite a lot about his obvious pro-Israel position and his confirmation hearing int he Senate might be quite interesting. I look forward to your thoughts on the matter. Also, Katie mentioned in a subsequent post, "...people who think in extremes have no conflict at all. It's all black or white to them, so they never doubt...they can't see grey areas that are always present in thinking," and I agree - in most cases. She is also an extreme thinker in some things, as she should be, and I really don't think examples are necessary. Then, there is Roxy....sigh.  Fossil I'm trying not to offend roxy, but you're right. she brought in the negativism of this blog. seeing things one way. Sometime here it's the certain day, we don't know from which blog the person came, what's going outside of here. So it's hard to take it personal. I also see roxy very reasonable some times. so just call this one a misplaced hair. Although I see you on THIS blog as being very reasonable. You are seldom that way with roxy.
|
×
×