Jump to content

hpslugga

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    3266
  • Joined

Everything posted by hpslugga

  1. Fucking this. This idea that "oh sportsmanship has disappeared! My salts my salts! It's gotten out of control!!!" is just historical romanticism, i.e. the "in my day" syndrome. Seriously, go back and watch some of those clips from the The U 30 for 30, and realize that Miami wasn't the only team that was doing it. It used to be that dudes would just outright spike footballs on TD's, take their helmets off after making a big hit (or standing over the dude they just flattened), etc. Like you say, we've just gotten better about capturing it.
  2. Right and that’s what i thought the whole time. It’s just an onion of bullshit...as in just keep peeling all the layers and observe how it somehow always turns out to be bullshit
  3. They said one of the machines appeared to be connected to the WiFi system in the building, but again that has to be taken for what it's worth: 1. Even if that was true, it still doesn't address the reality (I'm seeing a theme already) that the voting machines print out the ballot and that they're checked against a counter. If there were widespread fraud in the form of this kind of hacking, there would have been discrepancies out the ass. Also, there would have been a slew of complaints by Trump voters that "my ballot had me voting for Joe Biden when I specifically selected Trump." Did we see this anywhere? Well we did see one guy try to vote for Trump twice by pretending to be his dead mother...but that's really it. 2. Demonstrating a possibility absolutely does not mean that the alleged phenomena in question happened. I call this the William F. Buckley Fallacy. Buckley was fond of putting certain guests on his Firing Line show against certain hypotheticals. He counted on those guests to concede the possibility of said hypotheticals, then he'd make the huge leap to "well if it's possible, that means it happened!" That's what the Trump supporting lawyers are counting on with these demonstrations: that if you can demonstrate it's even possible to (sort of) hack one machine, then it must have actually happened and on a scale too massive to even comprehend. So this is still more of the same: bells and whistles, colors and lights, smoke and mirrors, whatever phrase you fancy, but it has nothing to do with "evidence" of massive voter fraud.
  4. They would, but blah blah blah BBQBeerFreedom blah blah blah American Exceptionalism blah blah blah George Washington
  5. Yes, I would say that anyone who believed word 1 of that is crazy.
  6. More like Four big mud tires Three shot gun shells Two huntin' dogs And some parts to a Mustang G.T
  7. Right and that’s what I meant with the field goal business. Purely symbolic, had no real impact.
  8. I’ll quote the Forbes article: ”A Pennsylvania state judge ruledThursday in favor of the Trump campaign and ordered the state not to count some mail-in ballots that were missing proof of identification and cured during an extended deadline—but the ruling will not change the vote count as it currently stands” It literally was the Colorado field goal of the 2005 Big 12 championship game.
  9. I would imagine it occurred at the exact same rate that we've seen in the last 20 years, which isn't near enough to turn over a single state that either candidate captured to the other candidate. You'll notice, btw, no one is talking about contesting a single red state. No one is saying "Texas was stolen from Biden! No Democratic candidate ever captured 5 million votes in Texas, and he loses????WTF???" But it's perfectly ok, in the blinded eyes of the red team, to come up with these tortured theories about statistics and probabilities in order to "prove" Trump was robbed in 6 fucking states. This whole thing is just hysterical lunacy, but we are at a very odd crossroads, and of course I'm going to blame the usual suspects in a minute: On one hand, I suppose that the DNC could try to open some line of communication with the people in the administration to establish two things: 1) how many people in there really do accept that Dickhead lost and 2) if the number is sufficient, would they invoke the 25th. On the other hand, social media and FOX/OAN/Newsmax have been so poisonous to the general population that if such an action were to occur, that would just further incite them even more than they have been by all this falderal. "THEY'RE STEALING THE ELECTION AND THEY'RE KIDNAPPING THE PRESIDENT AWAY FROM HIS DUTIES OF PROTECTING US," they'll all shout. The last thing we need is some sort of bastardized uprising to occur, and that just might do it. Again, this is all a symptom of fucking postmodernist doctrine and dogma. This is a symptom of systematic shaming of people who have the fucking nerve to say "you know, sometimes there are facts, not everything is an opinion, and not every opinion deserves over the top diplomatic protection." If people weren't so susceptible to the horseshit that the aforementioned networks spew, and if it weren't such a taboo thing to say "you're wrong to believe what you believe, and here's why:" my guess is that the 25th would have been invoked weeks ago and we'd be sitting here talking about the vaccine and the holidays. But no, Benito Tangerini gets to continue his clown show, and it's not because of him. He is not the problem. The problem is the morons in the federal government and in certain sectors of the media who bend over backwards to protect him.
  10. I'm sorry but that feeds right into what you said about Andrea Yates. Yeah, I'm sure the things they did "served the country as a whole" in "its best interests" as they saw it, but by and large they either really were self-serving or at least responsive to big money donors, which isn't a huge surprise. There are too many examples to go into, but I'm open to discussing them. Yes, Trump is an outlier in his personality. There's no question about that. But policy-wise? He's right there with the rest of that stupid "party." Tell me, what policy difference (and I mean policies of real importance, not fringe crap like prayer in school) does he have with the rest of that lot? That's what I was getting at when I posed that question. Personality-wise, yes, he's a malignant, narcissistic sociopath. On that we agree. Again, I'm sure that they told themselves that, but for everything that every post-WWII president did that you might think was in servility to the greater good of the country, I could name at least 10 that most certainly were not. Yes, in THAT respect.
  11. It has to start with self-awareness. It absolutely has to. If you can’t recognize that you’re going down the pathways of Dunning-Kruger/sociopathy/narcissism/et al in their most infant stages, you’re going to have a damned difficult time shedding it. Those things are cancers, and like actual cancer, the more you coddle it and the more you put off treating it, the less success you’ll have in treating it when you finally come to grips with it. I mean just look at narcissism. It’s a damn difficult thing for a person to accept that about himself/herself when the core foundation of the issue is that s/he doesn’t think there’s anything that is wrong with them. The most difficult sentence in the world to say seriously is “I’m a narcissist and I need help.” Now, the next question you’re probably going to ask is “well how does a person improve self awareness?” Well the answer to that is education, and that’s where we are fucked at the moment.
  12. We can’t depend on people on power to do anything that’s outside of what benefits them. This is something that we have to fix ourselves.
  13. That's narcissism mixed with tribalism. You can't correct a narcissist on a previously held belief, because that would mean the person was wrong, and they're "never wrong." And in this particular case, the narcissism is rooted in tribalism. Most Americans don't view politics in the classical sense, which is when one acts on their best understanding of what's right vs. what's wrong. Americans, by and large, view politics as a team sport and that it's all about winning and losing. And it's hard to break that cycle because the greatest beneficiaries of that are the two big political parties. They've been able to accumulate large swaths of voters who they absolutely can count on to vote for their candidates no matter what. I mean for fuck's sake, Trump actually had a better turnout than he did in 2016, even though he proved himself to be the absolute worst president in US history. Well that's Dunning-Kruger. There, a person with no professional background on the topic is asserting he knows more than a much more qualified professional. I would also suggest such a person is a fool. A fool is defined as a person who too readily accepts dubious claims from questionable sources based on insufficient information. Again, back to narcissism. Complete inability to recognize when someone is wrong, which inevitably yields a person unable to learn anything. But that is an important example you illustrate because what it also shows is a person using apologetics, which is when someone perpetually lies in defense of something that's indefensible. Some will also tell you that this is confirmation bias, but that's really just a means to an end. The big question in those instances isn't THAT it's confirmation bias, it's why the person is using it. Yes it is, and that Antrim County audit nonsense is a perfect example of it. Seriously read what actually did happen with that whole thing, then observe the pro-Sidney Powell commentary on it and you will notice that it's no exaggeration to say that she and her idiot followers are absolutely wrong about absolutely everything that they said. But the point is that they just run with it...then someone like you might try to explain it to them...then they still believe, maybe even more fervently than they did before you spoke, in the lie.
  14. This is just another textbook example of what right wingers have been guilty for many generations: they read into the text of certain documents things that they do not say, and they ignore what they do say. So they read in between the lines, but they don’t read the lines. That’s quite a talent, especially considering the semi-literacy of that demographic. Here? That stupid “audit” that they think is the ultimate “gotcha” when it’s nothing even remotely close to anything of the sort. Such is life in the fairy world of make believe and pretend. Of course Trump doesn’t actually believe in it, and that’s part of the grift.
  15. He's just gonna call special "dinner at the White House" meetings with R Reps and Sens to seek to invalidate the EC vote on January 6th. He's never going to literally acknowledge that this happened. It is the ultimate parallel to the Black Knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail
  16. If California sued every red state, stating that their injury is that their proximity to them prevents their economy from thriving more than it has, for $5 trillion, that would have more merit attached to it than this latest round of horseshit from Ken Paxton.
  17. It’s dilatory. They’ve not once presented a credible case that would persuade any judge to order a fucking overturn of an election. I get that you do not understand simple things, but do you ever wonder why his lawyers always stop short of alleging fraud in court? It’s because they’ll be severely disciplined if they do so with no evidence, which is exactly the case: they have no evidence to support their baseless claims. So when you tell us that Trump is within his right to do that, that’s about as useful as me telling you that I’m within my right to call your great grandmother a whore. It’s a fucking useless standard and it completely avoids the issue. Is he within his right to take these matters to court? Sure. Does that mean that doing so in and of itself proves the existence of widespread fraud? Fuck off with that rabbit-assed nonsense.
  18. And it’s not just the treatment of the asylum seekers, it’s the involvement that invariably led to the creation of same.
  19. Ok is it just me, or did anyone else read this in the voice of the bastard child of Yosemite Sam and Carrie Fisher?
  20. That’s an interesting combination: the 21st century’s Oliver North and the female Jim Adler.
  21. That’s an interesting combination: the 21st century’s Oliver North and the female Jim Adler.
  22. hpslugga

    Yemen

    Dude just let it go. He knows how full of shit his posts are. If there was a more obvious troll job being committed on a UT-based message board, I’ve yet to see it...and actually would like to just for the theatre.
  23. hpslugga

    Yemen

    Well it’s like you said, they’re fucking bozos. They do believe those things. Why? Because they were told to by entities with skins in the game. It’s very perplexing because when it comes to these right wingers, they’re always This is like that spot in Caddyshack where Judge Smails (the government) tells Danny (the population) to ignore his repeated very illegal improvements to his ball lie...except in this analogy, Danny literally believes the justification that Smails was interfered with.
×
×
  • Create New...