LMAO now the autismo is babbling about "WHO", when the original argument was about Trump "getting out of the way" on tax reform...

https://i.imgur.com/5XhU3Kp.jpg

Deflection? Willful ignorance? Retardation? Your guess is as good as mine. Just glad I don't have autism.

WHO was brought up some time ago by someone else, not me. (Back on page 8, we're on page 11 now.) But the issue of getting out of the way is a similar abstraction, which a lot of people - maybe the same people - don't seem able to comprehend either.

@Radio Free Geneva said:

Sneaky Pete said:

@MangeSkeevesOutKlam said:

@Reasonable Kermode said:

@Amy Polaroid said:

@styXXX said:

@Beepositive said:

@Nexus71

You're wasting your time: https://www.autisminspiration.com/public/415.cfm

"Many children with Asperger Syndrome will also argue when told that they are wrong even about seemingly insignificant things. Children with Asperger Syndrome seem to have a drive to be perfect and it is a blow to their self-esteem when they discover that they are not. The easiest way for them to avoid this blow is refuse to believe that they are wrong. Instead, they will argue endlessly to prove that they are right in spite of all evidence to the contrary. For example, my daughter loves to argue with her older brothers over information, even if after I have explained to her that she is incorrect. If her brothers or I attempt to show her the correct information in a book or on-line she will become more agitated and start to scream, all the while still insisting that she is right."

LMAO that describes knixon perfectly. Thank you for confirming my diagnosis.

Spot on!

Poor little guy is still melting down. So much irony in his posts. Too funny.

Quoted for truth.

Yep. Definite autismo. Hilarious thread though.

Agreed. Textbook case.

Totally agree with this.

Not only is this guy arguing to the death about something he was clearly proven wrong about, with the link to that article, with nothing but his illogical opinion as "evidence", and about a dozen other people agreeing with the person he was originally arguing with and not one person agreeing with him (the couple of people who disliked the "personnel" (sic) comments, never said he was correct), but he's exhibiting other symptoms of Aspergers in another thread - https://www.themoviedb.org/tv/253-star-trek/discuss/59c211d292514176d200878c?page=2#59dc1b18c3a36861ec06828e .

The posters in this thread were wise not to waste their time engaging him in his delusions.

He just keeps confirming everything everyone's posting about him. This guy's like the poster child for autism.

Yeah, yeah. Or you're the poster guy for stubbornness, ignorance, and denial. Where's your Ph.D to make a remote diagnosis which someone with an actual Ph.D would never even do? Meanwhile it doesn't take any credentials to recognize your type and the others.

lol

@tpeterson:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uai7M4RpoLU

@gooner73 said:

@PiploWaterMelon said:

You're right, its not PC if its always been diverse. Someone picked a plot point about the holographic communications being 90 years early because it was invented and used once in a DS9 episode?? That's more of a criticism of DS9 really, its not gonna take us 300 years to nail holographic communications, but now I'm just being picky about the picky people....

Thank-you for your reply. In today's terminology. Those characters would be considered pc if made now. Like you said, diverse is the proper term to use. Pc is just a right wing propaganda term used to criticise in this instance. I rember the furore when voyager announced it would have a female captain. Also this is tv. So comparisons with real world jobs is a complete strawman. Tv and films have always played hard and loose with what is capable in in their universes. Especially with sci-fi

can you make a comment without your leftist hate of conservatives show through its really annoying and immature ,there are many conservative fans of star trek of which I'm one who has been a fan for fifty plus years and we don't care what the race of the actors are just as long as the story is good and the writers are not beating us over the head with leftist agendas just give us a trek that holds true to the trek universe and not change everything around just because they can and think they are being cool ,right now they are very close to losing real trek fans, many fans I know are more interested in the Orville than Discovery because they feel its closer to trek and I get more of a trek feeling from The Orville than Discovery too, and The Orville has been given a second season already we will see in a few more eps which way this new trek will go.

@hardseasailor said:

can you make a comment without your leftist hate of conservatives show through its really annoying and immature ,there are many conservative fans of star trek of which I'm one who has been a fan for fifty plus years and we don't care what the race of the actors are just as long as the story is good and the writers are not beating us over the head with leftist agendas just give us a trek that holds true to the trek universe and not change everything around just because they can and think they are being cool ,right now they are very close to losing real trek fans...

What exactly are leftists agendas anyway? If you've been a fan for 50 years you'd know Trek was built on what conservatives are now calling "PC/SJW" ideas. Intentionally putting a black woman, a Japanese guy, and a Russian guy on the bridge. Featuring the first interracial kiss. Creating a race of aliens who are white on the left side and black on the right side warring with aliens who are white on the right side and black on the left side. Creating a race of genderless aliens, some of which realize they are gendered, and then are sent to "conversion" camps. Creating a socialist utopia where everything is free and money doesn't exist and humans aren't religious.

I think it's great that there are conservative fans of Trek, but let's not pretend the world of Trek hasn't been drenched in socialism, progressiveness, and "social justice" since it debuted in the 60s. Every time I see someone use "SJW" in a derogatory way, all I can wonder is, do you realize what social justice is supposed to me? It's about making things equal. It's about showing that everyone is equally capable of doing anything.

Star Trek showed us that you could make piece with your enemies, that having sex with aliens (ie other races) was cool, that a robot can have the same rights as a human, and that humanity's greatest strength was science and rational thinking.

Now don't get me wrong, I hate the way the STD showrunners are pretending to be liberal by parading around their gay character and black female character and virtue signaling, and I'd wager that if they let us discover those characters on our own like Orville did people wouldn't be so combative over the show (also if it weren't so terribly written), but it still fits in with Trek's history of trying to trailblaze with social issues.

You get things backwards like so many "progressives" do. The name is kind of a joke anyway, since "progressives" haven't had a new idea since the 1920s or so. And back in the 1960s, "classical liberalism" is actually conservative, and especially so compared to what passes for "liberal" or more accurately leftist, today. JFK - the real one, not the cheap knockoff - couldn't even be nominated as a Democrat these days, let alone win. He was patriotic, anti-tax, anti-communist, anti-abortion... (And by the way, he was not assassinated by a conservative.)

Uhura wasn't on the bridge because she was black. She was at least arguably the best at that job of anyone in Starfleet, hence her position on the bridge of the flagship. Same with Sulu. SJW etc is what would put an Uhura on the bridge who maybe barely graduated from high school, if that, just because her people were oppressed in the past and have to be given reparations. There's a lot of no-delayed-gratification involved too, which is mostly what the "reboot" movies have, in which Kirk somehow becomes captain of the Enterprise even before serving with Captain Garrovick etc and the other experiences that made him worthy.

@cswood said:

@hardseasailor said:

can you make a comment without your leftist hate of conservatives show through its really annoying and immature ,there are many conservative fans of star trek of which I'm one who has been a fan for fifty plus years and we don't care what the race of the actors are just as long as the story is good and the writers are not beating us over the head with leftist agendas just give us a trek that holds true to the trek universe and not change everything around just because they can and think they are being cool ,right now they are very close to losing real trek fans...

What exactly are leftists agendas anyway? If you've been a fan for 50 years you'd know Trek was built on what conservatives are now calling "PC/SJW" ideas. Intentionally putting a black woman, a Japanese guy, and a Russian guy on the bridge. Featuring the first interracial kiss. Creating a race of aliens who are white on the left side and black on the right side warring with aliens who are white on the right side and black on the left side. Creating a race of genderless aliens, some of which realize they are gendered, and then are sent to "conversion" camps. Creating a socialist utopia where everything is free and money doesn't exist and humans aren't religious.

I think it's great that there are conservative fans of Trek, but let's not pretend the world of Trek hasn't been drenched in socialism, progressiveness, and "social justice" since it debuted in the 60s. Every time I see someone use "SJW" in a derogatory way, all I can wonder is, do you realize what social justice is supposed to me? It's about making things equal. It's about showing that everyone is equally capable of doing anything.

Star Trek showed us that you could make piece with your enemies, that having sex with aliens (ie other races) was cool, that a robot can have the same rights as a human, and that humanity's greatest strength was science and rational thinking.

Now don't get me wrong, I hate the way the STD showrunners are pretending to be liberal by parading around their gay character and black female character and virtue signaling, and I'd wager that if they let us discover those characters on our own like Orville did people wouldn't be so combative over the show (also if it weren't so terribly written), but it still fits in with Trek's history of trying to trailblaze with social issues.

Well said.

@user 01 said:

Well said.

Except I pointed out why it's wrong. 1960s "liberalism" is not the same as what is given that name - or "progressivism" - today, and somehow arguing that Roddenberry et al used the same thought processes 50-60 years ago that "liberals" use now, is silly. cswood actually gave away the game, but I suppose without realizing it, with:

Now don't get me wrong, I hate the way the STD showrunners are pretending to be liberal by parading around their gay character and black female character and virtue signaling,

THAT is PC/SJW/etc "liberalism" today. Classical liberalism, which is actually conservative especially compared to what passes for "liberal" today, has always included people from minority groups who recognize its value.

@user 01 said:

@cswood said:

@hardseasailor said:

can you make a comment without your leftist hate of conservatives show through its really annoying and immature ,there are many conservative fans of star trek of which I'm one who has been a fan for fifty plus years and we don't care what the race of the actors are just as long as the story is good and the writers are not beating us over the head with leftist agendas just give us a trek that holds true to the trek universe and not change everything around just because they can and think they are being cool ,right now they are very close to losing real trek fans...

What exactly are leftists agendas anyway? If you've been a fan for 50 years you'd know Trek was built on what conservatives are now calling "PC/SJW" ideas. Intentionally putting a black woman, a Japanese guy, and a Russian guy on the bridge. Featuring the first interracial kiss. Creating a race of aliens who are white on the left side and black on the right side warring with aliens who are white on the right side and black on the left side. Creating a race of genderless aliens, some of which realize they are gendered, and then are sent to "conversion" camps. Creating a socialist utopia where everything is free and money doesn't exist and humans aren't religious.

I think it's great that there are conservative fans of Trek, but let's not pretend the world of Trek hasn't been drenched in socialism, progressiveness, and "social justice" since it debuted in the 60s. Every time I see someone use "SJW" in a derogatory way, all I can wonder is, do you realize what social justice is supposed to me? It's about making things equal. It's about showing that everyone is equally capable of doing anything.

Star Trek showed us that you could make piece with your enemies, that having sex with aliens (ie other races) was cool, that a robot can have the same rights as a human, and that humanity's greatest strength was science and rational thinking.

Now don't get me wrong, I hate the way the STD showrunners are pretending to be liberal by parading around their gay character and black female character and virtue signaling, and I'd wager that if they let us discover those characters on our own like Orville did people wouldn't be so combative over the show (also if it weren't so terribly written), but it still fits in with Trek's history of trying to trailblaze with social issues.

Well said.

Agreed.

If that's really him, I wouldn't allow him on my site.

@tpeterson said:

@Radio Free Geneva said:

Sneaky Pete said:

@MangeSkeevesOutKlam said:

@Reasonable Kermode said:

@Amy Polaroid said:

@styXXX said:

@Beepositive said:

@Nexus71

You're wasting your time: https://www.autisminspiration.com/public/415.cfm

"Many children with Asperger Syndrome will also argue when told that they are wrong even about seemingly insignificant things. Children with Asperger Syndrome seem to have a drive to be perfect and it is a blow to their self-esteem when they discover that they are not. The easiest way for them to avoid this blow is refuse to believe that they are wrong. Instead, they will argue endlessly to prove that they are right in spite of all evidence to the contrary. For example, my daughter loves to argue with her older brothers over information, even if after I have explained to her that she is incorrect. If her brothers or I attempt to show her the correct information in a book or on-line she will become more agitated and start to scream, all the while still insisting that she is right."

LMAO that describes knixon perfectly. Thank you for confirming my diagnosis.

Spot on!

Poor little guy is still melting down. So much irony in his posts. Too funny.

Quoted for truth.

Yep. Definite autismo. Hilarious thread though.

Agreed. Textbook case.

Totally agree with this.

Not only is this guy arguing to the death about something he was clearly proven wrong about, with the link to that article, with nothing but his illogical opinion as "evidence", and about a dozen other people agreeing with the person he was originally arguing with and not one person agreeing with him (the couple of people who disliked the "personnel" (sic) comments, never said he was correct), but he's exhibiting other symptoms of Aspergers in another thread - https://www.themoviedb.org/tv/253-star-trek/discuss/59c211d292514176d200878c?page=2#59dc1b18c3a36861ec06828e .

The posters in this thread were wise not to waste their time engaging him in his delusions.

He just keeps confirming everything everyone's posting about him. This guy's like the poster child for autism.

Wow, you weren't kidding.

Meanwhile, back at the OP.......