Who is Bill Palmer?

[Elvis]

Marionumber1, thank you for the intelligent and objective reply! This example of Palmer's heavy slant is exactly why I started the thread.

Aside from my disagreement with Bill Palmer's support for Clinton, I don't have much of an opinion on him or the Palmer Report. However, there is one particularly egregious aspect of Palmer's reporting that sticks in my mind. Following the 2016 election, he embraced the belief that electronic vote counts were rigged in favor of Trump, which the evidence certainly indicates. I actually appreciated his coverage of the recounts in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Nevada. Yet Palmer also refused to believe that the Democratic primaries were rigged for Hillary Clinton, something the evidence also points to. In fact, he argued the opposite: that Bernie's upset win in Michigan was the result of fraud: http://www.palmerreport.com/opinion/mic ... ssia/2624/ Literally no credible election integrity expert holds that position, and his claim that "No other state in the democratic primary race had results that were anywhere near that far off from the polls" conveniently ignores the exit polls, which showed Bernie winning Michigan, and doing better than the official results in countless other states. (It was the exit polls, by the way, that provide a major piece of evidence for pro-Trump fraud in the general election.) In that regard, he showed the same kind of hackery as Richard Charnin, just for the opposite candidate. I don't think this points to some nefarious agenda, but it shows how Palmer's partisan bias causes him to take a massively flawed and contradictory view of election integrity. What matters to Palmer is not the legitimate winner but who he wants to be the winner.

[Elvis]

Okay—I have tried so hard to be friendly and reasonable and give you every benefit of doubt, but my patience is gone.

This is about you:

of course this fucking thread is about me since I am the only one to link to Bill Palmer here and of course you know that

You're a rude, dishonest, abusive, profane, paranioid bully with no real argument here. Just read your post. Your only response is a fight response filled with straw men and far-reaching smear attempts. And no, I don't track who posts what. If you're the only one, so what? Maybe everyone else sees through Palmer's heavily slanted writing and wishful-thinking clickbait titles.

......still waiting for your "mod" to chime in if he is so worried about Palmer destroying this place...jesus H. christ

This bogus straw man is dead. Who said Palmer is destroying this place? Nobody.

.....he is one link out of hundreds that I post here...get over yourself...Bill Palmer is NOT WND.... Alex Jones....Sean Hannity or Caitlin Kissy Face

More straw man. This thread has nothing to do with you, WND, Alex Jones, Sean Hannity or Caitlin Kissy Face (whoever that is). Only you make those mudslinging connections. This is typical of how you try to smear people with the "hannity lover" brush. It's dishonest and you know it.

yes I remember Womby saying something "bad" about Palmer in another thread but I don't think he has banned linking to him yet

This is another straw man that doesn't reflect reality: Who said anything about banning Bill Palmer links? Only you have extended this to the ridiculous extreme that anyone wants to ban Palmer links, and you're doing it to insinuate that I called for banning Bill Palmer links.

Palmer is NOT a fucking fasicst ...he isn't out to destroy the world

More inflated straw man. This is your strongest defense of him.

yea he is political but he is not a preveyor of crap he just summarizes what is happening....

We can disagree about that. Just not in any actual adult discussion, which is impossible with you.

let's get down to exactly what Palmer has posted that is a lie or incorrect ...we can go statement by statement if you want ....I don't believe he has ever promoted playing kissy face with fascists like Caitlin

You keep bringing up this Caitlin person as a diversion. Read Marionumber1's post for an example of Palmers misleading writing. Marionumber1 is very good at discernment. Try it sometime. Or are you going to shout down and run off Marionumber1 too?—like you have with so many good members here, sadly now gone.

derailing the Assange thread with Syria for two pages was not good enough for you now you're going to do it with Palmer?

You glibly tell people to "start another thread," and when they do, you invade and derail it with this same paranoid, accusatory crap, every time. You are the number one thread wrecker.

I haven't had time to analyze much (there's a lot of material), hence this exploratory thread.

Analyze away Elvis.......you've had time...you've had almost a year to figure out what Palmer is ...just what is Palmer's deeper agenda? what's the problem did you lose interest? I am sorry he doesn't hate Clinton enough for you or is your problem with Palmer is that he doesn't hate Clinton at all and for that reason his site should be banned from here?

Did you not read my last reply about Palmer? Apparently not, because the answer is there. Plus you once again try to claim that I called for banning Bill Palmer links—got a link to that? No, you don't, you're just telling a lie.

sorry Palmer wasn't pushing pizzagate shit

Straw man. You're desperate. You have no argument, just more facile "hannity lover" smear tactic. It's getting really old. Don't you have any new tricks to reframe an argument you can't win?

am I correct to assume you are an accepter of Ms. Pizzagate Caitlin (I have legitimate concerns about child safety) since you did not seem to find the need to start a thread on her?

Weak straw man attempt at deflection. I don't even remember who Caitlin is.

maybe it's time for a Caitlin thread...or you Caitlin lovers can keep her

You know what? Go frack yourself. You are so dishonest and you waste so much of people's time (including your own) with this kind of disinegenuous garbage.

and I can post Palmer links once in awhile

Nobody ever said you should stop posting Bill Palmer. Ever. You don't need my permission.

and we can call a truce to this

No, because the abuse never ends. You childlishly sling mud at people, you dishonestly exaggerate people's views beyond recognition so you can smear them, you stretch the truth to assign guilt by association, you won't take to heart the slightest, occasional criticism of your arguments and sources, and you especially defy criticisms of your rude, dishonest, reactive style of engagement with those who have a view different from yours.

I have a very busy life and you have wasted enough of my time.

[Jerky]

SLAD, just do like I did and block Elvis. He's just hurling ban-worthy invective at you, nit-picking tiny morsels from your flood of (very valuable) curated information, projecting his own shortcomings onto you (when you don't share those shortcomings), and essentially behaving like someone created him from whole cloth to be a time and attention-sucking drain on your time and your psyche.

I know you don't like to block, but trust me. You should block him.

Jerky

[peartreed]

I agree with Jerky that SLAD is a valued, respected and productive contributor here of current event coverage and commentary that is timely, accurate and complete in its comprehensive coverage of the political and presidential crisis in the news here. She always adds insight into the articles with personal commentary that is incisive and honest, whether or not you agree with it. No other participant here is as productive a source of quality information that draws the rest of us to this site.

Critics, nit-picking naysayers and nihilists who prefer to bully, bleat and bemoan SLAD and her posts reveal themselves for the jealous jesters and jerks they are. Since they cannot compete nor compare by their own contributions, they criticize and complain.

[Sounder]

I agree with Jerky that SLAD is a valued, respected and productive contributor here of current event coverage and commentary that is timely, accurate and complete in its comprehensive coverage of the political and presidential crisis in the news here.

SLAD is ok for when one is in need of a little mind molding, care of the great Wurlitzer. To be fair, I do read and appreciate a small sampling of SLAD's posts, but the agenda colored 'information' is often a turn-off. Truth is, given the current human mentality, we have too damn much information, and very poor concepts on how to better arrange and achieve understanding through proper use of the information.

That is the point, flood the population with various forms of salacious 'information' and people will be too busy trimming branches to notice that the bush needs to dug up, by the roots, and discarded.



I feel your frustration Elvis. Extending straw-men is now considered to be useful form of rhetoric.

Strange times, strange places.

[BenDhyan]

I don't know who's presently paying the bills, but I think Jeff Wells intended this place to be a reasonably free flowing exchange of ideas and perspectives without it being anchored to any one political ideological position.

[Cordelia]

SLAD, just do like I did and block Elvis. He's just hurling ban-worthy invective at you, nit-picking tiny morsels from your flood of (very valuable) curated information, projecting his own shortcomings onto you (when you don't share those shortcomings), and essentially behaving like someone created him from whole cloth to be a time and attention-sucking drain on your time and your psyche.

Critics, nit-picking naysayers and nihilists who prefer to bully, bleat and bemoan SLAD and her posts reveal themselves for the jealous jesters and jerks they are. Since they cannot compete nor compare by their own contributions, they criticize and complain.

Unfortunately, the value is drowned in the floods of repeated c/p. But more troubling is the continued taunting, insulting and deriding of other members who disagree. That's destructive, disorienting trouble-making (bullying).

You glibly tell people to "start another thread," and when they do, you invade and derail it with this same paranoid, accusatory crap, every time.

That seems like stalking.

[Belligerent Savant]

^^^^^^^^^

Spot-on.

[Burnt Hill]

I know it is a lot of this .
But the fact that elvis's fussilade against SLaD came right after the recent indictment spree is something I am considering.

I don't know who's presently paying the bills, but I think Jeff Wells intended this place to be a reasonably free flowing exchange of ideas and perspectives without it being anchored to any one political ideological position.

This is an anti-fascist discussion board, isn't it?
That has been SLaD's point from day one, Trump is a fascist.
Trumps supporters can be fascists too.
That Obama, Bush and Clinton had fascist tendencies is irrelevant at the moment.

[Sounder]

This is an anti-fascist discussion board, isn't it?

Yes and it will remain so, would be nice if it were more of a discussion board though.

That has been SLaD's point from day one, Trump is a fascist.

Fair enough, but some will suggest that the anti-Trump tactics are misplaced and therefor not working very well. Time will tell and however things pan out, I only hope to be entertained rather than horrified at the results.

Trumps supporters can be fascists too.

They are all over the place.

That Obama, Bush and Clinton had fascist tendencies too (is) irrelevant at the moment.

Fair enough.

[Rory]

I know it is a lot of this .
But the fact that elvis's fussilade against SLaD came right after the recent indictment spree is something I am considering.

Italian chef air kiss

[Burnt Hill]

Ha! That's funny, and fair I suppose, but I like elvis.
Probably unfair of me to question his motivations that way.
And you kinda change the context when you bold and redden the quote, but I hear you.

[peartreed]

The purpose of a discussion forum is an exchange of information, analysis and opinion on a variety of subjects of common interest being reviewed with the objectives of providing better understanding of the issues and the perspectives of people participating to discuss the news and views. The education, interest and entertainment also is enhanced by colorful personalities participating with a sense of friendly interaction in the process. It is much like a school classroom where the learning is enhanced by intelligent presentation and focus on the subject matter.

A forum deteriorates when the participants instead focus on one another in competitive personal combat and criticism, like an immature kindergarten that has lost the focus on the subject matter and substance in favor of fighting over form.

RI has become a playpen for petty personality politics and rivalry rather than the original intent Jeff Wells created as a rendezvous for rigorous intuition.

The most prolific source of information provided here for discussion has been SLAD, much like a teacher-gatherer presenting the data to develop, discuss and dissect as our focus. The distracting class clowns and dunces have instead decided to attack the source, the form and the personal idiosyncrasies of the informant, rather than the actual topics and news being presented. It is literally stupid, childish behaviour. The sadistic glee on the sidelines illustrates who is here to undermine instead of contribute.

Anyone who is here only to incite interpersonal acrimony and animosity needs to be evicted. Otherwise let the adults conduct the forum as it was designed to function. Try some tolerance and human compassion for colleagues attempting rigorous intuition.

[Belligerent Savant]

.
What sort of madness is this? To imply, in any way whatsoever, that SLAD applies "tolerance and human compassion" with those she disagrees with is absurd on its face.

It does not absolve the detractors, of course, but Elvis in particular has consistently acquitted himself with class relative to others here.

Agreeing with whatever SLAD may copy/paste does not excuse the behavior that often accompanies said copy/pasting, which has reached the point of hysterics since the election of the latest stooge in the white house (a markedly more insulting stooge than his predecessors, but another stooge nonetheless).

The hysterics comes from all sides, of course, and SLAD is not the only perveyor, but one of the more egregious of late, particularly given her pervasive presence here.

To imply anything otherwise is lunacy.

[peartreed]

It's not "madness" to suggest we all practice more tolerance and compassion and empathy for our colleagues here. That was not attributing the virtues to SLAD as you erroneously interpreted defensively.

Elvis does illustrate some class as his usual character in his posts but when he departs into vicious vitriol he loses any residual respect.

Copy/pasting is actually appreciated by many of us who do not have the same access to mainstream news items as you enjoy. The volume SLAD posts is overwhelming to some, but is invaluable to others who are off the media grid that generates that coverage.

If you were subjected to the degree of attack that SLAD is routinely faced with, despite her impressive efforts to inform this forum, you might unleash some retaliation and intense emotion too. That's how humans react to unfair, unwarranted PERSONAL criticism.

The "lunacy" you seem to extract from my message is, perhaps, a more introspective subconscious reflection of your reaction to it.