POST-TRUMP REPUBLICANISM in ONE BIOGRAPHY

Author: oromagi
oromagi
Trump
Republicans
Corruption
george santos

Posts

Total: 32
Topic's author
#1
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
George Anthony Devolder Santos (born July 22, 1988) is an American politician and businessman from the state of New York. A member of the Republican Party, Santos was elected to represent New York's 3rd congressional district in 2022, a district covering part of northern Long Island and northeast Queens. Both Santos and his 2022 opponent, Robert Zimmerman, are openly gay, a first for a U.S. congressional election. He is the first openly gay non-incumbent Republican and the first Brazilian-American elected to Congress.  Santos is a pro-Trump right-wing extremist who has appeared with MTG speaking to neo-Nazi political parties like Freedom Party of Austria and Alternative for Germany.  Santos attended Trump's Jan 6th rally and claims to have bailed out some Jan 6th arrestees although that has not been verified.

After Santos was elected to Congress, and before he took office, reporting by The New York Times and later other news outlets revealed significant issues with Santos' biographical claims.

  • Santos claims to have been living as openly gay and married to a man for the last decade
    • but according to public records, Santos was a married to a woman until they divorced in 2019.
  • Santos moved out of his Queens address in August but never changed his address and was still falsely registered at that address at the time of the election.  New York mailed Santos' certificate of electoral victory to this old address, where the landlord was throwing out his mail.
  • Santos claimed to have graduated from Baruch College in 2010, earning a bachelor's degree in finance and economics.  Santos also claimed to have received a Master of Business Administration (MBA) degree from New York University, but NYU has no record of his attendance.
    • After, obtaining a high school equivalency at the age of 21, Santos moved with his nurse mother to Rio de Janiero until he was caught stealing from his mother's  patients and fled back to America before his court date.
    • There's no indication Santos actually attended any higher education.
  • Santos claimed to be of Jewish descent, his family fleeing Ukraine ahead of the Nazis. 
    • In fact, his family immigrated from Belgium in 1863.  No evidence of Jewish or Ukrainian ancestry can be found.
  • Santos claimed that his mother was the first female executive at a major financial institute in the World Trade Center on 9/11.  Santos claimed his mother barely survived 9/11.
    • Actually, his mother was a nurse with no known connection to the 9/11 attacks beyond living in Queens at the time.
  • Santos claimed to have made his money as a Wall St. financier and investor at CitiGroup, Goldmans Sachs, MetGlobal, and LinkBridge.
    • None of these companies ever employed Santos in any capacity.
    • Santos clearly has access to million of dollar, he spent much of it on his campaign, but there's now no indication of how Santos actually made his millions. 
    • Not honestly, apparently.
  • Santos ran a charity from 2013 to 2018, claiming to raise money for rescue animals.
    • No application for tax-exempt status was ever filed.
    • All indications now are that Santos simply kept the money.
  • According to his financial disclosures, Santos was sole owner and managing member of the Devolder Organization, which he said was a family-owned company that managed $80 million in assets.  On financial disclosure forms, Santos called Devolder a "capital introduction consulting" firm. Although based in New York, the company was registered in Florida (Santos claimed to be a Fla resident), where it was dissolved in 2022 for failing to file annual reports. During his 2022 campaign for Congress, Santos lent his campaign more than $700,000, and reported receiving a salary of $750,000 and dividends of between $1 million and $5 million from Devolder, even though he also listed the company's estimated value as in the same range.   Despite the claims about the company's size, Santos's financial disclosure forms did not list any clients using the company's services.
  • Santos claimed that one of his companies lost four employees in the Pulse Nightclub Shooting.
    • But this claim, too, appears to be entirely untrue.
  • Santos has made no public appearance since the NYTimes broke this story three days ago and his whereabouts are unknown.
    • It is not known whether Brazil will ask for extradition.
    • It is not known whether police will investigate the source of Santos' wealth.
    • The Republican Party majority is slim and McCarthy is counting on Santos' support for his election to Speaker.  No Republicans are calling for Santos to step down although some are calling for further fact-finding.
    • It is not known how many other Republican candidates won seats without any apparent vetting or background check.



#2
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@oromagi
  • It is not known how many other Republican candidates won seats without any apparent vetting or background check.
You can blame the voters or the party,, but how was this not brought up by other people trying to win that seat? 


Did they just not want to win bad enough or did he run uncontested or something. 
Topic's author
#3
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@PREZ-HILTON

You can blame the voters or the party,, but how was this not brought up by other people trying to win that seat? 

I blame Republican tolerance for, even celebration of Trump's outrageous, blatant corruption of Americans values.  We've caught this asshole red-handed lying about hundreds of secrets meeting with Russian spies, cheating on his taxes, cheating on his wives, stealing from children's charities, cheating in elections, blackmailing foreign governments to invent lies about his political enemies, trying to murder democracy and crown himself king for life, stealing top nuclear secrets for god knows what kind of nefarious anti-America-ness and he's still the front-runner for President for 40% of the electorate.  Yesterday we found out that the reason Trump was so nice to Kim Jong-Un was that he was rewarded $20 million in debt forgiveness, that he paid less than 4% taxes last year and that he illegally bribed and threatened witnesses testifying to a Congressional commission (a felony mandating 20 years in Federal prison) and the Republican party didn't blink once.   Trump could literally promise to process every Republican into canned dog food and Republicans would ask Trump if he'd like a blowjob with that genocide.


#4
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@oromagi

I blame Republican tolerance for, even celebration of Trump's outrageous, blatant corruption of Americans values. 

George Santos is also to blame right, LOL?

If you were running against this guy in an election, wouldn't you have had someone dig up this dirt on him?

Not saying it would have made a difference. I did see that one candidate literally had a stroke which impaired his ability to cognitively function at even a middle school level get  elected, his opponent was a known con artist though. 

Would you as a Democrat running against that guy, do at least one attack and attacking his heterosexuality or any of that other stuff you brought up? 
Topic's author
#5
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
Would you as a Democrat running against that guy, do at least one attack and attacking his heterosexuality or any of that other stuff you brought up? 
  • I would certainly research my opponent and question whether his address disqualifies him.  I would also certainly point out to voters the disadvantages of electing a fugitive from Brazilian law.  The Nazi associations would make good debate fodder in a very Jewish/immigrant district.
  • Ultimately, however, the fault is the corrupt, adrift, conflicted Republican Party.  Lying like a Republican requires an increasing surrender to mental illness, an increasing uncertainty about reality. Normal Republican ideology is such doublethink that attracting and encouraging compulsive lying should be an anticipated hazard that the GOP must monitor for.   Further, the GOP has far less tolerance for independent thought or action.  Since the main quality the GOP seeks in a candidate is useful idiocy, the GOP is more responsible for making sure their idiots  roughly commit to legal conduct and pro-American ideology.

#6
Sidewalker
Sidewalker's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 2,669
3
2
5
Sidewalker's avatar
Sidewalker
3
2
5
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
I blame Republican tolerance for, even celebration of Trump's outrageous, blatant corruption of Americans values. 

George Santos is also to blame right, LOL?

If you were running against this guy in an election, wouldn't you have had someone dig up this dirt on him?

Not saying it would have made a difference. I did see that one candidate literally had a stroke which impaired his ability to cognitively function at even a middle school level get  elected, his opponent was a known con artist though. 

Would you as a Democrat running against that guy, do at least one attack and attacking his heterosexuality or any of that other stuff you brought up? 
Oh, what a big surprise, it's the Democrats fault, you don't even know who ran against Santos, but you do know it's the Democrts fault.  

LOL, this winter storm running across the country, that's Biden's fault, right?
#7
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@Sidewalker
Oh, what a big surprise, it's the Democrats fault
I am suggesting there is plenty of blame to spread, as there usually is. 
#8
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@oromagi
Further, the GOP has far less tolerance for independent thought or action. 

That can't be true. Liberals are even cancelling Bill Maher now for taking the sensible position that maybe 7 year olds with manchausen mothers shouldn't have their penises cut off. 

Nobody is allowed to question anything outside of the official ideology in that regards with liberals. You see the same thing with the attacks on Jordan Peterson who is quite obviously a liberal. 
#9
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,146
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
Did they just not want to win bad enough or did he run uncontested or something. 
He ran in a Biden+8 district 😂😂
#10
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@ILikePie5
The fact he has all this against him and he was still a better option than the democratic candidate isn't flattering to them 
#11
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,958
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
After Santos was elected to Congress, and before he took office, reporting by The New York Times and later other news outlets revealed significant issues with Santos' biographical claims.

Honestly, I thought the discussion was about to turn full speed in the direction of lizards when I read that.
#12
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,146
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Greyparrot
Honestly, I thought the discussion was about to turn full speed in the direction of lizards when I read that.
He lied about his experience working for big banks and being gay? That’s incredibly based
Topic's author
#13
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
That can't be true.
  • We both know you don't understand the meaning of that word "true."  
    • While circumcision is still legal out of superstitious deference to ancient cult practices,  phalloplasty before the age of 18 is illegal and because of strict medical requirements regarding documentation of gender dysphoria and gender stability followed by a couple years of hormone therapy, that surgery is usually performed between 27 and 35 years of age.
    • 99.99% of Americans agree that 7 year olds are too young for phalloplasty.  Pretending like this is some kind of mainstream Liberal opinion is an evil fucking lie oozing from your perverted imagination and also classic "straw man" argument.  Yes, Tucker tells you to believe these things and you obediently believe whatever Tucker tells you to believe but even Tucker will tell you that Tucker feels no obligation to tell the truth.
  • Therefore, you lied when you said that Bill Maher is being cancelled for opposing phalloplasty for 7 year-olds.  What motivated you to tell this twisted lie?
Liberals are even cancelling Bill Maher now 
  • I watch Bill Maher show every Friday when it is on.  I can testify that Maher hasn't spoken about trans issue since last spring and is definitely not cancelled. 
    • Liberals, by definition, don't support govt. censorship against individuals.  Liberals, also by definition, don't support govt. control over corporate autonomy.  If HBO wants to fire Maher because his opinions are losing HBO sponsors, Liberals believe that the government may not intervene on Maher's behalf.  Maher has a right to free speech.  Maher does not have a right to be on HBO.  
    • Let's recall (with real honesty) the last time Bill Maher was cancelled in June 2002 in reaction to Bill Maher's agreement with Dinesh D'Souza that President Bush was wrong to call Al Qaeda "cowards."
      •  Dinesh D'Souza, said “These are warriors. And we have to realize that the principles of our way of life are in conflict with people in the world. And so—I mean, I’m all for understanding the sociological causes of this, but we should not blame the victim. Americans shouldn’t blame themselves because other people want to bomb them.”  Maher agreed, and replied: "We have been the cowards, lobbing cruise missiles from 2,000 miles away. That's cowardly. Staying in the airplane when it hits the building, say what you want about it, [it's] not cowardly.
        • The REPUBLICAN White House press secretary Ari Fleischer denounced Maher, warning that "people have to watch what they say and watch what they do."
        • The arch-conservative Sinclair Media Group banned Maher's show on their 193 stations, about 40% of the TV market.
        • CBS cancelled the show 9 months later saying it was not specifically because of Maher's speech but because it couldn't garner enough revenue to sustain itself.
        • Republicans and Conservatives cancelled Bill Maher.  Notably, they did not cancel Dinesh D'Souza who Bill Maher was only agreeing with.
          • Liberal producers at HBO immediately hired Maher on and place no restrictions on his choice of content or guests.
            • Liberals awarded Bill Maher the 2002  PEN/Newman's Own First Amendment Award and the 2002 Los Angeles Press Club President's Award
  • Therefore, you lied when you said "Liberals are cancelling Bill Maher."  What motivated you to tell this lie? 

Nobody is allowed to question anything outside of the official ideology in that regards with liberals.
  • False.  As we have seen, you don't have a grasp on what is real or true.  You believe as you are told to believe until you are told to believe something different.
You see the same thing with the attacks on Jordan Peterson who is quite obviously a liberal. 
  • Peterson describes himself a Liberal in the classic British tradition, which I assume is probably true.
  • Just because Peterson is Liberal does not mean he is immune to criticism, quite the opposite in fact.
  • Again, you show us that you don't understand what Liberalism means or that the US Constitution is an inherently Liberal document establishing an inherently Liberal form of government called Democracy. 
None of which is relevant to my criticism of the Republican Political Party.  I said that the Republican party has far less tolerance for independent thought or action than any other US political party.  A good example  of this intolerance is Kevin McCarthy who has been caught on tape secretly expressing the belief that Trump is a secret agent for Vladimir Putin and that Trump is responsible for the Jan 6th terrorist attacks on the US Capitol but the Republican Party requires him to speak the opposite of his beliefs in public and even denounce others who agree with his secret beliefs.  Like McCarthy, most Republicans secretly agree with all Democrats that Trump is not loyal or law-abiding  or fit for public office but the GOP prevents most Republicans from speaking the truth out of fear of losing power.
Topic's author
#14
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11

-->@Greyparrot
Honestly, I thought the discussion was about to turn full speed in the direction of lizards when I read that.
He lied about his experience working for big banks and being gay? That’s incredibly based
  • Let's notice how Republicans simply ignore the whole "stealing from sick people while your mother nurses them and running from the law" thing.
    • Fucking over the weak and despising the law are two primary qualification for running for Republican office these days, apparently.

#15
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,958
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@ILikePie5
He ran in a Biden+8 district... 
Well now, it all makes sense. There are definitely lizards involved here.
#16
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@oromagi
  • 99.99% of Americans agree that 7 year olds are too young for phalloplasty. 
That is not what I am seeing on Twitter or TikTok. We have people literally saying it is racist to lose weight and I just saw some posts saying that the actors in avatar are being threatened over doing blue face. 


This is your typical liberal. If you don't believe those things you are probably a Republican and just don't know it because of straw man's the media use which don't seem to support your beliefs. 
#17
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@oromagi
Fucking over the weak and despising the law are two primary qualification for running for Republican office these days, apparently.
You should despise the law. It made slavery legal, the Holocaust was legal. If it weren't for people despising the laws than I would not have the privilege of sharing water fountains with black people and we would have double the water fountains we do now. 

So what is it? Do laws determine morality or is it GoD? 
Topic's author
#18
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
-
That is not what I am seeing on Twitter or TikTok.
Yeah, because those apps are designed to manipulate you and misinform to the maximum extent possible.

Twitter is all anonymous  assholes and twatbots.  TikTok is literally a Chinese attack on the US mental integrity.  US intelligence advises Americans that if you are watching Tik Tok you are begging to be enslaved by foreign powers and you should get a grip on your future right now and delete that attack app.

The fact that you believe what your read on Twitter and Tik Tok explains why you are such a fucking useless ignoramus.   You should fell shame for being so easy to manipulate.

This is your typical liberal.
  • You don't understand what the word Liberal means.  You wouldn't know a typical Liberal if he shone a light into that miserable prison you call your intellect.

Nobody wants to sex change children.  That is just another one of those fucked up voodoo myths Tucker tells you to believe and you lack the work ethic or  the self-respect to wonder why you let those Tucker fucks control your information.



#19
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@oromagi
The fact that you believe what your read on Twitter and Tik Tok explains why you are such a fucking useless ignoramus. You should fell shame for being so easy to manipulate.
I think it's fair to take people on their word and liberal hiveminds include reddit, Twitter and TikTok. It is how I do my research to see what liberals believe. To find out what conservatives believe I usually read economics text books, listen to philosophy lectures and consult with conservative think tanks. 

Nobody wants to sex change children. That is just another one of those fucked up voodoo myths Tucker tells you to believe and you lack the work ethic or the self-respect to wonder why you let those Tucker fucks control your information.
I don't watch Tucker Carlson, though I respect him for telling the truth. I did see a clip recently where he pointed out the mainstream case for helping Ukraine is bad. Pro Ukraine people's argument seems to be Ukraine is a a free country with a perfect democracy and zelensky is honorable and he pointed out the crackdown on a branch of Christianity, the media shutdowns of media criticism of zelensky and his attempt to imprison a political rival.

Now I understand America's foreign policy and why they are waging a proxy war there, but Tucker is right to criticize the majority of media because they are trying to make a moral case for the proxy war that just falls flat, especially when you see similar sieges elsewhere in the world that go ignored if it doesn't serve western foreign policy interests. 

So no I don't watch him but occasionally see a clip I agree with. 
#20
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,164
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@oromagi
Aaaand just like that it becomes a Trump rant. LOL
#21
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,958
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@sadolite
Trumpwins law. Any online discussion will inevitably descend into trump derangement.
Topic's author
#22
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
I think it's fair to take people on their word and liberal hiveminds include reddit, Twitter and TikTok.

  • My point is those aren't people- those are advertising AIs, foreign agents, and anonymous fuckwits.  Those are not real people and in no way whatsoever reflect actual human opinion.

It is how I do my research to see what liberals believe.
  • That ain't research. That's not even curiousity.  That is believing the first critter that tries to manipulate your opinion by reinforcing your ignorant prejudices.

To find out what conservatives believe I usually read economics text books, listen to philosophy lectures and consult with conservative think tanks. 
  • Dude.  We have debated a couple of times.  We both know you don't do any of that shit.  No need to lie.
I don't watch Tucker Carlson, though I respect him for telling the truth.
  • Carlson has argued in court that that "The "'general tenor' of the show should then inform a viewer that [Carlson] is not 'stating actual facts' about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in 'exaggeration' and 'non-literal commentary,  that given Mr. Carlson's reputation, any reasonable viewer 'arrive[s] with an appropriate amount of skepticism' about the statement he makes."
    • That is, Tucker himself swears under oath that anybody who respects Tucker for telling the truth is a fucking fool.

So, let's recap:

You said, it can't be true that "the GOP has far less tolerance for independent thought or action" because [an entirely slanderously false example that Tucker made up and you believe because that lie was repeated on Twitter].

You response confirms my thesis.  You neither know nor care about the origin of the falsehood you faithfully believe.  You don't care if its true.  Somebody on Twitter who reinforces your primitive biases tell you something is true and you believe it is fact without a shred of curiosity.  Republican though is a monolith of faithful followers.

#23
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@oromagi
That ain't research. That's not even curiousity. That is believing the first critter that tries to manipulate your opinion by reinforcing your ignorant prejudices.
Bro I used to read Michael Moore books. I know what liberals believe and it's why I am not one anymore. 


Dude. We have debated a couple of times. We both know you don't do any of that shit. No need to lie.

Generally I lose interest and drop out and we typically focus on things where I am arguing devil's advocate. I would be willing to take pro on the following actual researched positions with 1 month argument times and a reasonable character count. I would leave the site if we pick 5 unbiased judges and I lost on any of the following. These are off the top of my head. 


1.  The fair tax should replace the current tax system

2. The disproportionate use of force against African Americans is the direct result of individual police officers racism on balance 

3. School district funds should be distributed by county (con has to argue status quo)

4. Abortion after the first trimester should only occur for legitimate medical reasons

5. Infanticide should receive less harsh punishment by the law than murder. 
Topic's author
#24
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
Bro I used to read
  • needless to say, I'm skeptical
Generally I lose interest and drop out and we typically focus on things where I am arguing devil's advocate.
  • AI and child porn?  I can't think of two subjects you were ever more passionate about.
I would be willing to take pro on the following actual researched positions
  • As you know, I only debate 1500+ 
    • besides my time is pretty cranked these day

#25
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@oromagi
  • AI and child porn? I can't think of two subjects you were ever more passionate about.
The child porn comment is unacceptable. I was banned from the site because I requested help to identify a potential pedophile to the police. 

Also the AI debate was against a fellow liberal who was so left wing he considered AU racist. Not me. 

My interest in AI is limited to the following categories

1. How a technological singularity brought on by AI answers the Fermi Paradox

2. How advances in AI will assist in bringing about radical life extension


I also hold out some hope we can replace the government with a perfect AI program, so we can have perfect governance that will create maximum freedom and prosperity which I think go hand in hand as indicated by the economic freedom index. 
#26
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,958
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
will create maximum freedom
What about the freedom to create a corrupt government?

Will AI allow that?
#27
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@Greyparrot
Yes for 3rd world shit holes that we have no business forcing our way of life on
#28
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,958
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
Sounds perfect then.
Topic's author
#29
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@PREZ-HILTON

The child porn comment is unacceptable. I was banned from the site because I requested help to identify a potential pedophile to the police. 
 I was thinking of multiple bans like this one:
Joint Decision
After reviewing their history, the moderation team has decided that Singularity, AKA Wylted, [AKA Incel-Chud, AKA Victoria, AKA wyited] will be indefinitely banned from the site.  This is an unusual course of action for the moderation team to take. A few key points that went in to our decision includes: 

  1. Repeatedly glorifying rape and sexual assault;
  2. Repeatedly glorifying hate groups
  3. Repeatedly glorifying sexual abuse towards minors, and most disturbingly, 
  4. Portraying himself as a 13-year-old-girl towards a 14-year-old boy; and 
  5. Multi-accounting to circumvent his ban. 
Let me make this clear: The moderation team will not tolerate any glorification of Nazis, rape, pedophilia, and sexual assault. 


#30
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@oromagi
If you look at what lunatic posted from that thread then you'll see it was me accusing another user of being a pedophile and then making a Chris Hanson joke. David did delete the thread once it got shown as the reason he banned me as a way to cover up his stupid manufactured reasoning. This isn't like the BSH1 thing where I flirted with a minor (not that his actions were intentionally malevolent, it was an innocent slip up). 

The debate and I think I elaborated on the position more when I did the debate on debate.org where I was a top 5 debater against stiffer competition.

The opening of the fBI child porn database would reduce the ability of people to exploit children because it would reduce the economic incentives for exploiting children. 

It would also bring more unknown perpetrators to justice who are seen in those films by perverts jerking off to the films, recognizing a participant and then using the FBI tip box under the film to report the person so they would be brought to justice.

So the argument was about a strategy to reduce child exploitation, and about bringing more offending pedophiles to justice. 

There is also data that supports countries that outlaw porn see an Increase in rape and other sexual offenses, so there is an argument to be made that the FBI releasing it's database would prevent more harm to children.

It's a really good arguments for releasing the FBI's child porn database. It isn't an argument for supporting the child porn industry, it actually would eradicate it.

Obviously, even though the argument is ethical to make because it is one about reducing the incentive to exploit children, lowering the amount of pedophile offenders and bringing more offenders to justice it's more of a thought experiment and devil's advocate position.

I believe that you could potentially poke holes in the porn bans resulting in more rape arguments, but the other 2 arguments that it reduces the commercial viability of producing porn and it brings more offenders to justice is true. 

If you actually take the time to understand the position it is about protecting children not harming them so you painting me in that light is wrong.

It's a sensitive subject, but the thought experiment I laid out was worth exploring and taken far enough might provide some real world solutions to combating the exploitation and abuse of children. 

It's a nuanced position, a thought experiment just like my debate against Danielle about judicial corporal punishment  and it's worthy of exploring, because it often helps look at problems with a unique point of view that could perhaps recognize some unintuitive solutions to problems we all see in society.

For example during the judicial corporal punishment research I realized the following things, while advocate that an alternative to prison should be caning inmates. 

1. Prison sentences are often counter productive to what we want to do as a society. For the following reasons

A. Cause people to connect with other criminals and foster a type of felon university

B. Take father's out of the home who need to provide for their family.


C. Give people a blemish on their record and make them harder to integrate back into society to be productive members of it upon releasing.

2. That the war on drugs harms the black community by taking a lot of black males out of society. We can see countries where large male segments migrate out for various reasons and the effect we see on those communities is similar to what we are seeing in black communities in America. This is complicated and nuanced to spell out but having significantly fewer males than females in a particular society is detrimental because it gives men too much power to mate select, which promotes promiscuity, single mother hood and reduces the civilizing effect women have on men, with less power of mate selection.


3. We also see more harms on lower income populations due to the fact that it is often better to just plead guilty to a crime you didn't commit, than it is to plead innocent and have to spend time defending your case. This results in the negative impact of a record that would not happen if a person could make bail and quickly be back in society while defending their innocence. 

So what real world solutions does participating in a judicial corporal punishment thought experiment reveal?

1. Some sort of bail reform. Not what liberals are proposing now which there are many cases of violent offenders immediately getting out to finish what they started with victims, but bail reform for non violent offenders who want to plead innocent and fight to keep their name in good standing, but also need to quickly get back to work to support their family.

2. We need more of a focus in prisons on preparing prisoners to return to society. This doesn't even necessarily mean giving them less time, but making sure they don't reoffend by providing them resources to reintegrate will help them as well as society as a whole.

3. The war on drugs needs to focus on giving people help. I don't think we need to go as far as giving people free heroin or anything that absurd but if we are willing to spend a shitload keeping them in prison, we might be saving ourselves a bit of money if we can get them the help they need before they end up in prison.


4. Ban the felon check box on applications. Seriously why is Applebee's asking dishwashers if they are felons? Who gives a fuck. Let these people reintegrate into society and punish businesses for being retarded.


Had I finished the other debate about the FBI porn database, we both may have learned something. I apologize for that. These thought experiments are worth doing though. Here is something I learned from the first debate.


1. We should make it easier for pedophiles to receive help before they offend or before they offend again. 

These people have to keep a nasty secret about themselves, and if they fear coming forward to tell somebody because it will immediately put them in prison than they are afraid to get help. 

These people are a danger to society and we need to support measures for them to come forward and get the help they need not to offend. 


People should not have their character attacked on this site for making devil's advocate debates or conducting thought experiments . This place is not for advocating your actual positions. It is for having intellectual exchanges that help you grow. 

You can go proselytize elsewhere. This isn't the spot for it. This is supposed to be the spot you go to hash things out before you proselytize not the place you proselytize.