thought

Seth says ...
Apparently there are limits to #Trump’s ability to create his own reality …

Washington (CNN)House Speaker Paul Ryan is at the White House to tell President Donald Trump that Republicans don’t have the votes to pass the GOP health care bill.

nullnull

Now for more of #Trump’s #bully tactics …

Bannon Tells Trump: ‘Keep a Shit List’ of Republicans Who Opposed You

The only “gift” i get from Trump is a grand example of what not to do … but i have plenty of those already.

Sorry, but no #thanks  Mr  #Trump.   too bad about confusion lurking beneath the monkey see monkey do happening for the rest of you lovable null blokes.

According to multiple Trump administration officials speaking to The Daily Beast on the condition of anonymity to talk freely, the president is angry that his first big legislative push is crumbling before his eyes—and his chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon is advising him to take names and keep a hit list of Republicans who worked for Trumpcare’s defeat.
The daily Beast

← which, of course, you can believe or not just according to your own biases.

 

Comments


This is an interesting thought, but has absolutely nothing to do with the thought you posted it on. Would you please remove the thread from that thought seth? Thanks.

If you want to talk about the gift to you of Trump as President, or why you are in a reality where Trump is present, you are welcome to do so over there at How to really TRUMP Trump.. If you want talk “about what Trump is doing”, about “Turmps limitations”, or talk “about” Trump in any way, including Trump Bashing. Please do that here or elsewhere. Those are not the topics at How to really TRUMP Trump.. Over there please talk about yourself, not Trump.

Request denied!  That thought of yours had a confusion and a vibration that i do not like,  my responses were, and shall remain, directed exactly against that confusing vibration.  You are free to suppress my respons to your thought  just as you play.

#BTW, i do not believe i have a choice not to be i a reality where Trump is present … even though your #VooDoo imagines that i do.  Or said differently i can choose not to be in such a reality, but then i would be choosing to live in #LaLaLand … but i choose to live in a world in which i can trust my senses to inform me objectively regarding that which is not me. 

So be it. Respecting the requests of the owners of posts was one of the conditions I set forth to utilizing the Three Law system. You agreed to that.

I have always respected your and Mark’s such requests.

I will not have you putrefying the quote of someone I value like this.

#BTW i don’t believe the Daily Beast story quoted above … i think it is just spin.  I still remain without any sufficiently direct knowledge of Trump’s feelings in this regard.

Whatever. You refusal of a simple and respectful request to remove your content from my thought has left me with a bad taste. I have no desire right now to read your content. You crossed a line no one should cross in public dialog.

The comment curation rules (suppression rules) that i agreed to allows for people who oppose thoughts to speak their authentic mind, and yet not degrade the original thought.     My thoughts and actions are completely consistent with my past intentions,  … your judgment to the contrary notwistanding. 
I will not have you putrefying the quote of someone I value like this.
nathan
 
You have not such say in the matter. 

 

← similar to feeling that i have frequently felt about you. … i suggest you get over them.

The 3 Law system is not complete. Part of the agreement for using it as is was to respect requests of other authors. You broke that. Period. If you keep breaking it, according to the agreement, I can limit you from using the existing 3 law abilities.

I would not want to do that. And this is the first time anyone here has broken that stipulation. I am willing to forgive. But in the future, if someone requests that you remove, or change, content from their curated thought … it is your responsibility to do so. This is not open for discussion.

Both of you at times have requested that of me, and I have compiled. I expect the same human courtesy from you. Thanks.   

nathan  … if you manipulate the rules to get your way against me, i will ban you from developing any more at this site.  Agreements rule here … not fights against them.  Do you actually think i would have invited you in, if i thought you would try (or threaten) to abuse my trust in that regard?

There is no love in your message.  That “null” is a lie.

WTF? You are the one who just abused my trust!

In posting here, I have always trusted that “the owner has ultimate say in his content” … and that by the way is the rule both you AND Mark put forward from the start.

That rule is still partially on the honor system here. You fucking broke it and you have the nerve to call me black?

this is not something to argue about.   i do what i do authentically and honestly.  Please accept that and move on to some positive feedback … more negative feedback can only get worse.

When someone requests that you remove or change content you put on their thought, please respect the honor system in place and do that. Obviously if you don’t want to change, you can just remove. And obviously you can always fork to your own space and do what you want.

Thanks.

Someday, as with “tags” now, an author will be able to delete your content from everyone’s eyes but your own. Then the 3 Law system will match the honor system.

Why not you remove the thought entirely?  That would be  the same kind of request.  

That thought in group politics garnered that honest response from me.   You suppressed my initial response.  Okay fine … that was reasonable.  You can even shut off dialogue if you must preach your peculiarities in that open group with no interference from others.  That is the way this site is working … and you even designed it to work that way. 

You trying to force my action against my will under threat of consequences,  will not work, my friend. 

I think we have said enough on the subject. 

Before I even requested you remove the comment, I moved that thought to group nathan. Yes, I realize that making such a request in a public group is not very nice, though still should be honored. Being reasonable, I moved the thought to group nathan before respectfully asking you to remove the comment.

I have followed the rules of honor and good behavior in public dialog in this matter. You have simply been a brat in this. Accept that and move on and in the future, be honorable. Thanks.

i do not agree with that.  speech is not to be suppressed selectively in an open group.

fine, then suppress my comments on it just as you will … or even delete them … i care not.

but i will not unthink that which i have honestly and authentically already thought and still #RingsTrue to me in that context.  that would be telling a lie … a lie that you would be forcing me to tell.

You don’t have to unthink anything … because I respectfully moved your content to a new thought where you can continue to think it, for you. I made this whole thing as easy and painless for you as I could. I simply did not have the ability to remove your content from my thought due to the hole in the current 3 Law system, so I invoked the honor clause.

Your content is safe and sound and even still in group politics where you can do anything you like with it. I only don’t want it associated to my thought where it is not realted. That is all.

then delete it.

delete what? A whole lot of “it’s” in this dialog.

delete my comments on your blog that offend you.

I did. I guess you didn’t notice. And I did so within the 3 laws. i.e. I maintained control of my content AND I did not remove access to you of your content. I maintained the honor system.

In the future, the finial feature will work just like tags do now. You will be able to delete anything from a thought you own and no one will be able to see it except the author. The tag system for that was a test of that protocol meeting the 3 Laws, and it has worked well, so when I get a chance I will port that ideaology to comments.

it  was possible before the changes i the 3 laws.   in this one case i give you a waver to delete them directly with sql bypassing the 3 laws. 

fine, then we are done here.

I did not need your waver.

1) You broke the honor system giving me the right to do as I will in this matter.
2) What I did still complied with the 3 Laws so I, or you, would have had the right to do it anyway.

We just could not have done it in page, yet.

… and #BTW, even after nearly a year, the 3 Laws still hold up very well. Virtually everything anyone has had objection with are well addressed by those 3 simple laws and I have not seen any case to the contrary.

All that is left is to get #SeriTD to fully apply the 3 laws via code and we will have a perfect system.  

incidentally i would dearly love to get the header of this group fixed and more akin to an positively targeted open group on politics.   i have been asking mark fix it again and again and he resists just according to his will.  But it is against my principals to force him to fix it … that kind of force used against others has no place in this space that we share. 

Agreed. If you have agreement with Mark that this is his exclusive group, then you must honor that.

However, if he ever added you in the past as a member, then by the rules of #TD space you have equal right to change anything in it as he does, unless you and him made a specific agreement otherwise … so in that case, just look up the password and log-in and change things. Recovery of a lost password that was not intentionally changed to remove you from the group is honorable.

#hmmm seems that last time i tried, i could not fix the headers because i couldn’t not edit marks sticky thoughts or delete or suppress the extra one. 

but anyway forming a consensus re how to introduce a common group between dueling parties is fraught with a lot of difficulty … i was waiting until there might might be a time of good will when we would have common motives to introduce the group … otherwise whatever i did would be a tug of war of negative feelings.

Okay. As you say that is between you and Mark and is only covered by the 3rd law. It is out of the preview of the 1st and 2nd laws. So do as you will.

thanks, i always do null

… but if you are actually logged into the group, you should be able to do anything.

the only thing specific to an author, and not author rights in a group, is control of own comments.

more gossip about #Trump blaming others for his inability to create his own reality …
 
Meanwhile, back in Washington, Trump was fuming. According to a source close to the president, "Trump is upset that his son-in-law and senior adviser was not around during this crucial week." Kushner did appear at the White House on Friday during the last gasps of the Obamacare repeal effort.
cnn

If this gossip is true, it sure is not a good example of creating one’s own reality … blaming others for one’s failures. 

#Trump is no “gift” and no example for Americans to follow.

Let us not be confused !

as in the follow quote that nathan is touting ...


i love how so many people are more fully launching into their true dreams and receiving the real gift of trumps presidency.


Boy, this is simply not right seth.

First, I did not say that quote. I made it very very clear that one of my close friends said that quote to me. It was an epiphany for them. That is the whole reason I didn’t want things associated to it that don’t relate to it. Please remove my name from it.

Second, I have never ever said Trump was good at creating “his own reality”. In fact, if you had ever asked, I would have said he appears to be rather horrible at that.

What I said was that Trump was good at getting people to think about what he wants them thinking about, no matter if it is positive thoughts or if it is negative thoughts. Look it up. That is exactly what I always say. And that goes to collective reality, not Trump’s own reality.

#LOA is very simple. Most likely the simplest systems there is. IMHO your wanting it to look bad or fail somewhere and lately that has been causing you to misread a lot that I say.
 

You folks are free to create your own groups & even move your own shit into it.  May I suggest the group name [Mary Poppins Politics] or perhaps [Bozos Leftist Rag] as possibles.
 null

Well, if you are willing to rename your group “Medievil Politics” or “Last Century Politics” or even “Classic Politics” then the group Politics would be available for what we do, which is what is current.

I guess we could call it “Modern Politics”.

But really, why have more than one? Why are you so staunch on people doing Politics “your way”? How come you are God and Sayer of what Politics IS?

Trump in office 63 days so far & already progress draining the 2920 day swamp left behind by Obama. Culture is changing. 

Yes, I agree. Culture is changing. And the nature of Politics is changing. And peoples beliefs are changing which is changing cultural perception.

So why are you slandering our views which are simply reflective of the changes?

Didn’t slander.  Apparently you folks can’t read: 
[thought 22829] – is the guiding light of this group.

Yes, I agree with [thought 22829]. I have said that before. It is Seth that wants to change it for some reason. I think it very accurately describes the true nature of politics, which as your other thought says, is just a butt fuck. All well said. Those are in fact Politics place in society. I was discussing the #TD ethics of Seth changing the thoughts and the 3 Laws of cooperative publishing, not casting my vote on the thought itself.

The slander is “May I suggest the group name [Mary Poppins Politics] or perhaps [Bozos Leftist Rag] as possibles”.

Even though I would be honored to be associated to Mary Poppins, I know that when you say it, is is slander, because you think Mary Poppins is not a good example of something to strive for. So, as with the thought of a $100 bill yesterday, the energy you are sending out is that of false representation (slander) or a put-down. Or I often just lump all those together and call it a shitting upon, but I didn’t say that this time.

#RWGBoomerang – back to you. No slander.

Technically, slander is to make false statements. But I hardly think it is a stretch to include false representation of energy being sent out … verbal or not, energy sent out is a statement.

So I will still call it slander and I think most would agree.

#RWGBoomerang – back to you. No slander. Get a sense of humor. The group names were just humorous suggestions which represent your folks political leanings. 
Image result for kiss my ass

#done


well that confusion is not my guiding light when i contribute to this group. 

For me politics is the art of getting things  to happen among people … 
an art that is near and dear to my heat null

I will contribute to this group no more under your banner.

cc mark, nathan

Another thing about politics besides:

politics (n.) Look up politics at Dictionary.com
1520s, "science of government," from politic (adj.), modeled on Aristotle’s ta politika "affairs of state," the name of his book on governing and governments, which was in English mid-15c. as "Polettiques." Also see -ics.

Politicks is the science of good sense, applied to public affairs, and, as those are forever changing, what is wisdom to-day would be folly and perhaps, ruin to-morrow. Politicks is not a science so properly as a business. It cannot have fixed principles, from which a wise man would never swerve, unless the inconstancy of men’s view of interest and the capriciousness of the tempers could be fixed. [Fisher Ames (1758-1808)]

Meaning "a person’s political allegiances or opinions" is from 1769.

is that in talking about politics any opinion is as good as any other opinion.  There is no authority nor proof worth any more than any other …. politics levels out equality as the vote. In math & science there may be other things. I think Trump proved in part quite a lot by becoming president. 
No #RWGBoomerang s on this please!

Good Riddance then – you are ignoring a lot – politics is raw people ! (even Obama knew this)

 

Conversation forked to thought 23253

Please do not use full frame videos and images in my posts mark. This is a respectful request. I will tend to hide them as much as possible because they are like “shouting” and hog the whole screen … the above also contains real and valuable content in your words so I hesitate to hide it … but please, be respectful and speak at the same volume level as the others. Thank you!   


i also think sizing your voice when talking in a group is important …  some of the time speaking with even a softer voice that the others can get your point across better.  

ask:   if you were in a real f2f group, would you shout so very loud?

Well in the politics of today the lefties & anti-Trumpies are shouting as much as they can with the M$M using the megaphone to amplify it, lie about things etc. Maybe what you folks want is to write a nice book ABOUT it.
I suspect it is Trump that is taking more action than his predecessor & that is why the lazy politicians object the upsetting of their comfortable, easy job security & swamp.

#KMA