Jump to content

hpslugga

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    3503
  • Joined

Posts posted by hpslugga

  1. 10 hours ago, kibbles said:

    trump is a great exec and a horrible person.  name one exec who is not?   minnie ingersoll from 101 0 ventures?    or whom?

    You’re a fool if you believe he’s a great executive.

    • Hook 'Em 2
  2. 8 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    Well, yeah.  He's a Republican.  It's literally their foundational value.

    He takes it to extreme levels, i.e. when he was interviewed by Tapper and kept insisting Obama’s DOJ was the one that cut the Epstein deal. When told it was 2008 and that Bush was still president, he was like “nuh uh it was 2009!”

    • Hook 'Em 2
  3. 6 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

    Oh. Well then by all means you should lean into such stupidity. 

    You say this as if you’ve made a compelling case up until this point, or that you even understood what I was saying previously.

  4. 4 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

    Y’all realize Mamdani isn’t running for Mayor of America, right? Local issues are local. 
    Jesus. 

    The criticisms are no different and it’s not like they would be if he was running for a national office. Don’t kid yourself. This lot that I referred to in that post you quoted isn’t nearly that nuanced

  5. 3 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

    Because democratic leadership loves status quo due to being able to profit off of it

    That’s correct. They don’t dislike Trump because of his embrace of right wing politics. They hate Trump because his policies are so insane that they even hurt their bottom line. But they’d still would rather take a chance on trying to educate Trump and his idiot minions out of their more insane policy ideas than they would voting for a Bernie or a Mamdani against them. 

    And they’re very committed to that idea, too. You could show them all the pie charts in the world that show Mandani/AOC/Bernie policies are not only better for the average American than Trump, but also the establishment Democrats. Wanna know what their response will be? If they don’t find a way to mute their opposition, what they’ll say basically amounts to “well you see, the facts may very well seem to indicate Y, but I prefer to believe X.”

    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Like 1
  6. 5 hours ago, Chuckie Finster said:

    What the Democratic Party needs to do is emphasize how absurd a billion dollars is.  I think most people just group all "rich" together and have no reference point to the disparity in levels of wealth between their boss's boss at work and a true, legit billionaire.

    For example: If a baby was born the morning of the Seinfeld series finale and was given $100,000 (more money than the majority of Americans will ever see in a year and almost double the average annual salary in America) EVERY.SINGLE.DAY of his life and never spent a penny, he still would not be a billionaire.  These are the people that the Republicans are protecting and giving tax cuts to.

    Once you put it in normal people terms, then you might start converting folks.

    Most Republican voters don’t know shit about economics. They readily vote against their own interests and it’s not because “I’ll pay more if it means owning the libs.” No, it’s because they all too readily believe improbable claims from questionable sources based on insufficient information.

    Everything they say they believe” about economics? They don’t actually believe it, but they’ve definitely been told to believe it by people who have a skin in the game. Trickle down economics is bullshit, tariffing the shit out of everything is bullshit, the stories they tell about “military spending is what got us out of the Great Depression” is bullshit, the idea that we need to pull crumbs away from the poors in order to save the economy is bullshit, and “taxation is theft” is utter, complete and unforgivable bullshit.

    Bottom line, if you voted for Trump because he’s a “successful businessman,” even his record clearly shows he’s not, and that “he’s better for the economy” when he was steering it towards a major recession (if not depression) in his first term before the pandemic gave him cover, you are by definition a low information voter.

    Explaining to them the magnitude of a billion dollars is not going to change that because most of them wouldn’t even get it and the rest are too emotionally invested in this idea that politics is a team sport and “but muh red team.”

    • Hook 'Em 3
    • Like 3
  7. 3 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

    They got rid of all the personalities, and all the wrestlers are the same.

    That’s usually what happens when you stop letting them be their own gimmicks and instead leave everything to the comedy writers 

    • Hook 'Em 1
  8. Just now, WhatTheBuck said:

    What Hamas did on Oct. 7 was heinous but what Israel has done to the Palestinians in response has been much, much worse. 

    And to that, we can also add “what Israel was doing to Gaza before 10/7 especially from 2006-now has been much much worse.” Worse before, even worse after. 

    • Like 1
  9. 28 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

    have you ever heard the cognitive psychology behind the word "but"? If not formerly, I think you might have internalized it somewhere along the way in life because when you re-quoted yourself you conveniently left it out, as it was used after the word "deplorable".

    when you say "yes the actions were deplorable, but..." it's inviting defense. Just like in therapy you are taught that a real apology is not a "I'm sorry, but" (that's actually known as a non-apology apology), your sentence here you are citing actually does make it seem defensive.

    This is just inexcusably lazy. You’re essentially trying desperately to straw man the living shit out of what I said based on a single conjunction.

    The “but” that followed was “they were no different than the atrocities committed during the Nat Turner rebellion and they were done for the same reason as the Nat Turner rebellion.” 

    So if you want to waste time tediously nitpicking about semantics, you should at least have the courtesy to notice the “deplorable” before the “but,” as well as “atrocities” after. Those are both very judgmental words. You’re going to have to move on to the next topic because this “but” stuff isn’t the slightest bit convincing.

    Now that we’re past the trivial semantics, it’s important to understand the comparison to Turner’s rebellion. In Turner’s own words, the whole purpose was "kill all the white people.” Even at the time, William Lloyd Garrison was known to have said that he condemned the actions but refused to condemn Nat Turner personally, who himself did kill one white woman by bludgeoning her with a fence post. 

    Americans today are generally reluctant to condemn Turner, or John Brown, even if they did condemn the actions. And it’s rather important because that was 1831 and as Frederick Douglass himself stated, there was a straight line from John Brown to the beginning of the American Civil War. Well, John Brown freely confessed that Turner was who inspired him the most.

    Do you condemn either of them personally? 

    And that is an important distinction that’s been understood outside of jingoistic circles for centuries. 

    Here’s the comparison: the slaves who perpetrated the Turner rebellion were born as slaves, lived their entire lives as slaves, and were resigned to the grisly reality that they would die as slaves. 

    The Gazans who perpetrated 10/7 were born prisoners, lived their entire lives as prisoners, and were resigned to the grisly reality that they would die as prisoners.

    Now, that’s my judgment of them as people.

    As to their actions?

    Those who defend the actions taken by Hamas on 10/7 (and there are very few) don’t have a leg to stand on. Those who defend Israel’s response to it don’t have a leg to stand on either, and they have a much weaker position. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 4
  10. 41 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

    I need to re-read this two or three more times because I've tried to get through it at least twice now and what I keep hearing is a pretty overt apologia for 10/7 on behalf of Hamas and Palestine.

    edit: maybe I'll just ask directly, is that intentional? are you intending to defend 10/7 (to any degree)?

    Amazing that you can read a sentence that says “Yes the actions were deplorable,” and even for a moment contemplate that it was in any remote fashion “overt apologia.”

  11. 5 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

    @hpslugga Terrific post.

    What's killing getting your points and those of other's here across is the binary thinking built into our mythology and outlook.

    It's good guy versus bad guy. The bad guy always ends up killed by the good guy. Once the bad guy (any terrorist no matter the cause) is established, we're not able to reassess without great turmoil thus the good guy gets to kill, maim, terrorize the bad guys with what amount to a mandate from heaven.

    Any detail I read about the Hamas attack of October completely mortifies me. Rape, mutilation, torture, gleefully applied torment at every opportunity. Bad men. And that's it. Any retaliation is justified against the bad men. Netanyahu has used the event cynically, and we do little to even slow him down because it's hard to get the American people to see Palestinians as anything other than targets for righteous vengeance. Our leaders cynically apply accusation of anti-semitism or terrorism to anyone voice an opinion that runs against the good guy grain.

    Israel is the fucking bad guy. So. Are. We.

    I know you know this.

    Sorry but this portion is bullshit as it concedes talking points that originate in the Israeli MFA and the US Dept that just became doctrine and dogma overnight.

    As Finkelstein would say, when you consider how old most of those boys were, you condemn the actions and not the actors.

    Yes the actions were deplorable, but they were no different than the atrocities committed during the Nat Turner rebellion and they were done for the same reason as the Nat Turner rebellion. Most of the boys who committed those atrocities were born at or around 2005 which was when the so-called “disengagement” began and Israel began to occupy Gaza from the outside instead of the inside.

    After the Hamas victory in the parliamentary elections, which Hillary Clinton herself lamented that we should have rigged in Fatah’s favor, the US and Israel moved almost immediately to overthrow the government via a putsch. Hamas preempted the putsch and their efforts were for naught. So Israel then proceeded to enact the blockade, which is all an 18 year old Gazan in 2023 would fucking know as “life.” As even David Cameron conceded, Gaza was and still very much is the world’s largest open air prison. So the prisoners fucking snapped.

    When you’re in a position like Israel and you have that happen, you don’t tighten the screws. That’s all phony tough guy bullshit. All that accomplishes is to exacerbate the underlying causes that led to 10/7 in the first place. Seriously, have we not learned anything from 9/11 at all? Have we all gone crazy or just stupid?

    The way you deal with a nation whose grievances against you are so vast that they violently lash out at you is not to intensify the very thing that was pissing them off in the first place. What you do is admit to the grievances and then address them a la the U.K. and Ireland in the Good Friday agreement of 1998. That agreement is precisely why you don’t hear very many stories about IRA bombings any more.

    The Palestinians have very obvious and real grievances with the Israelis. They’ve had them for nearly 77 years, and certainly for the last 58 years. The Israelis have done next to jack shit to address those grievances and when push comes to shove, they intensify the underlying issues.

    And of course the same useless idiots in the US use their tired, old, dishonest apologetics to make chickenshit little excuses that are specifically designed to gaslight people into thinking “yes it makes sense that the Israelis are torturing the Palestinians, demolishing their homes, stealing their lands, and killing those who dare to defend them because well, we just can’t have the Palestinians acting like less-than-perfect prisoners.”

    Seriously, I’m sure if Dennis Ross was to write a book about the underlying causes of 10/7, he’d go through a carefully sanitized history from 1987-2006, and what a convenient stopping point that would be for him then to begin to chastise and admonish Hamas.

    Anyways you’re quite right to say that we and the Israelis are the bad guys. But the one issue I take with what’s implied there is that this didn’t start on 10/7. It’s been true since well before that. It’s been true since Israel’s response to UNSC 242 was essentially “we have no solution, you shall continue to live like dogs, and whoever wishes may leave.”

    • Hook 'Em 4
    • Like 3
  12. On 7/22/2025 at 4:07 AM, WhatTheBuck said:

    Israel: All Palestinians are “Hamas.”

    Which is actually quite funny because let’s just suppose it was true…

    How is it any less accurate and/or worse than:

    All Israelis are Knesset
    All Israelis are Mossad
    All Israelis are IDF
    All Israelis are Likud
    All Israelis are Netanyahu

    Those individuals/groups have committed far worse acts of terrorism than anything that Hamas has ever dreamed of, and Hamas hasn’t responded with anywhere near the depravity that Israel did just to October 7 alone. And yet, the Israelis as a society are far more supportive of the IDF than the Palestinians are of Hamas.

    Gaza’s support of Hamas has, for quite some time, hovered in the mid 30’s. Meanwhile, virtually half of the Israeli population supports actual genocide in Gaza https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/majority-israelis-support-expulsion-palestinians-gaza-poll

    So to the extent that there are posters that do believe in this feeble nonsense that “all Palestinians are Hamas,” and there very clearly are: that’s not the slam dunk argument-winner those mindless little cheerleaders think it is. 

    And just to stop the retort that’s brewing in their garbled minds; no that is not an endorsement of Hamas as a political party, nor is it antisemitic. It’s an endorsement of the very obvious reality that the Israeli state managed to find a way to out-suck Hamas in the sucks department. You really have to suck to out-suck Hamas in the sucks department.

    And I can tell by the neg on one of my earlier posts that one of the damned wiener kids is reading.

    • Hook 'Em 3
    • Like 3
  13. 2 hours ago, StassneyHorn said:

    Make men straight again and tell women feminism made them unhappy with student loans, no homeownership, barely any money to afford a dog, and still not in management. Bring back boobs. Make Gen Z women wear clothes that make them attractive to men.

     

    • Haha 3
  14. 13 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

    Oh, I think he's deluded enough to actually believe it, in the context of "muh taxes."

    I have no doubt that he believes it. What I object to is this bullshit presentation that he “knows” about the economy and we are just a bunch of group thinking morons.

    The  magatards over at the daily Texan very often accuse people in the cloak room of being guilty of group think. No, it’s not group think. it’s just that the things that we say are so obvious and they so desperately do not want to accept them that they waste everyone’s time with these pitiful mental gymnastics performances trying to justify the continuous nonsense that’s perpetrated by this administration. So while the aforementioned beliefs may be sincere, the confidence and the make believe surrounding the idea that they “know” these things, when really what they’re doing is struggling and tripping over themselves, is not.

     

    • Hook 'Em 6
    • Like 1
  15. 8 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

    Oh, he's one of those that claims to hate all politicians equally.  And he's *very concerned* about the economy.  So *concerned* that he loves the Big Beautiful Buttfucking because it might lower his taxes.  While exploding the deficit and making life very, very hard on the least of us.

    Which is why I told him to drop the act.

    People who claim to be 1). focused on/familiar with the economy and 2). supportive of Republican economic policies, in reality, do not know shit about the economy. When they say “the economy,” what they’re talking about is what their favorite shock jock commentators order them to believe what’s in their own personal interests. The thing is, they’re just part of a much bigger group of Republican voters who vote against their own interests. 

    So when this fucking guy, as others before, comes along and talks about “the economy,” you’re witnessing a performance piece, and a horribly executed one at that. 

    • Hook 'Em 3
    • Like 1
  16. 4 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

    I sweatergawd, every time a DT poster comes in here, it posts some shit that is a dead giveaway that they have sucked up propaganda.

    AOC.  Twenty million dollars.  Christ. On. A. Crutch.

    Do you fuckers realize what we do with even "lefties" that come in here with such misinformation?

    These are the people that turned “faith” into a verb. Unmotivated, ambition-less, lazy fucks that have been given every opportunity to improve themselves intellectually, and [Tywin] they chose to spend their days, as they always have, listening to charlatans and trusting in frauds [/Lannister]

    To those of you who are reading and posting from a desktop, you will find more wisdom in the dust under your computer desk that accumulated over the last 24 hours than you ever would reading that silly assed DT shit since the founding of Surly and all its predecessors.

    • Hook 'Em 3
  17. 17 minutes ago, mdmost said:

    Maybe stop giving it more oxygen. Why anyone would watch this shit is beyond me other than you must really hate yourself. 

    This. That shit does nothing but give a platform to fascists. It presents fascism as if it was a plausibly valid worldview, or at the very least that it needs to be debated.


    And this is where we get this toxic cultural environment where people think it’s valid to argue “how dare you attack my opinion” or “I have a right to believe X.” 

    And we just accept this. Hardly anyone has the balls to say “newsflash, you soft piece of shit: not every opinion is worthy of consideration, which by definition makes them assailable. And if you’re going that far into the bag to pull out the “I have a right to believe X” excuse, I take that as an admission of defeat.”

    • Hook 'Em 1
  18. On 6/30/2025 at 6:09 PM, SL Xpress said:

    Bill Yeoman should get more credit for the triple option with his veer than he does. 

    He gets enough credit already. The triple option had already been around over a generation and multiple coaches at the very least dabbled in it, if not made it an outright staple of their offensive systems, going as far back as Don Faurot at Missouri. 

    Just as an aside, I always get tickled when people talk about Ken Hatfield "inventing" the flexbone when all he really did was dust off some old copy of Tiger Ellison's book and just stripped out the passing game stuff.

  19. 17 hours ago, Brian Fantana said:

    Lol ok, you're going to impose sanctions on a person. Got it. Good one, little Marco.

    At this rate, these actions are going to be coupled with the phrase “times infinity” in their announcements.

    ”We impose sanctions on Hamas’ #3 times infinity because he’s a big poopoo head”

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
  20. Who are yall kidding? The democrats are too busy sticking their heads up their asses with this “they go low, we go high” shit. No way would they wipe off mar a lago or any other republican power center even if given the ability to control weather. At best they’d ask it politely to leave and when not given an answer, they’d brag about how they spoke to Mar a Lago for 8 hours about how mean of a place it is, and their followers would gush over it.

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Rage+1 1
×
×
  • Create New...