Jump to content

GW Hayduke

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    1712
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by GW Hayduke

  1. Really? You think the semantics of counter attack dog vs attack dog is the real issue here? The other side praises Gym Jordan for not being a push over. The other side praised trump cause he was a fighter - or maybe it was a counter fighter. That side is now sitting on the sidelines. We now have mature people in charge doing mature things. They are having adult-based discussions with the daily white house briefings. His team have been making the rounds using sensible policy/value based rhetoric. We need more and more of that shit. Attack dogs, uhhhh counter-attach dogs, have their role. They may or may not be effective, but they have a role. Gym Jordan and Fox News think they are effective I'm sure. Again, describing AOC's politik isn't disrespectful. She understand how to fight the battle but she isn't an attack dog? Should we use the label of "attack bull?"
  2. It isn't disrespectful to point out her role as the attack dog for the left. It isn't disrespectful to point out that twitter clap backs and attack-based tribal politics turn folks off. Her policies and her method of politik are not the same. It is possible to critique one while supporting left policies. Listen you snot-nose little shit, I was takin' shrapnel in Khe Sanh when you were crappin' in your hands and rubbin' it on your face.
  3. Fuck you, pussy. For some reason you aren't able to contribute except for random worthless dribble. Share a position. Contribute. Or shut the fuck up, pussy. I get that your brain might have melted by a constant stream of tribal dribble, but at least you can shut the fuck up, pussy. No one is saying to work with fascists. The two options are not "work with fascists" or "worship AOC."
  4. This is full tilt tribe-based politics up in here. Any thought or idea about method of politik shall be shouted down. It is all about sides here, seemingly
  5. No. I am the guy saying we shouldn't admire burning buildings and blood. I'm not the guy saying AOC is bad, AOC is the same as Gym, or that Gym is better. I'm the guy saying they are both attack dogs for their side. I'm the guy saying that her serving that role hurts her as a politician when it comes to those on the left that are tired of tribalism. Maybe you aren't tired of tribalism, but instead have embraced it. It is probably good to understand that. She has talent. That was a good moment for her, but everyone has their moments. You should watch more CSPAN. My position isn't that she isn't talented or that she doesn't support good policies. Compare AOC's twitter to Pelosi's. And to Biden. Observe that their accounts are a reflection of their roles. One role is that of an attack dog - or bull - or whatever you want to call it. Giving her an accurate label isn't an attack. Understanding her role shouldn't trigger, just as understanding that some folks are burnt out on tribalism shouldn't trigger.
  6. You guys need to wind down the tribalism. Anyone that accurately describes AOC's politik is labeled the "others." That's rather crazy. Attack dogs have a purpose in politics. They may or may not turn out the vote, but I personally think they suck. They suck when Gym Jordan screams in a committee hearing. They suck when POTUS was an attack dog - Trump tweeting bullshit hourly from the oval office. They suck when AOC clap backs on twitter. It sucks even more when folks equate that to making someone a great politician.
  7. Fuck you, pussy. You guys are a piece of work. I didn't do shit and am not a GOP supporter and never have been. Fuck you again.
  8. Who are "the people?" Are you equating anyone who doesn't feel like twitter clap-backs should be the end-all, be-all of our elected officials as a hypocritical trumpkin or the GOP? I've never voted for a single republican in my entire life dip shit. I recommend you reflect on why you decided to place a label on me. Just because I don't respect twitter clap backs doesn't mean I'm on the team.
  9. The right will always have their boogeymen. That isn't AOC's problem. Her issue is that she has embraced the role of being the attack dog for the left. Her method is division, confrontation, and twitter clap-backs. Folks are tired of twitter clap-backs and tribalism. I'm not saying the left shouldn't have attack dogs. The right has them in the Gym Jordan's and Tucker Carlson's of the world. Attack dogs have their purpose and it is possible they have a positive influence on meaningful things. Folks are just tired of divisive politics. We all lived through Trump. The worshiping of AOC seems to be a promotion of trumpist style politics by the left - the style of attacking the "others" rather than solving problems, passing legislation, and promotion of policies, ideas, values - the things that we should admire in our elected representatives - not twitter clap-backs.
  10. It must be an intimidating force of small game to need a semi-auto with 18 rounds. Hopefully any permit system would accommodate your need
  11. Ideally, it wouldn't matter what the magazine capacity is for semi-auto rifles if they are all removed from the population, except for those permitted to manage wildlife in certain rare circumstances. For recreational hunters and their permitted/registered bolt-action rifles, the mag size would be less relevant due to the low rate of fire. I realize this would all be a big change for a lot of folks and many sportos would left out and thus furious. Sometimes big things have to happen in order to solve our big problems. If we are ever going to provide healthcare for all of our citizens, big changes are going to need to occur. Solving homelessness will also require bold action. The AWB's problem was it was too narrow - it didn't apply to all semi-auto rifles and didn't have a need-based permit system. It catered to folks that wanted to make the requirements overly complicated, less effective, and watered down. Even so, the AWB is believed to have had a positive influence on mass-shootings during the time it was in affect.
  12. Semi-auto rifles provide no benefit to society except in certain limited wildlife management settings. The obvious route is to implement a buy-back program and needs-based permitting system (i.e., a trained professional wildlife technician permitted to manage populations). Other long guns and hand guns could have their own tiered needs-based permits. Australia did it and it worked. It would also all require a licensing, training, background check, and registration system. It isn't rocket science. The only difficulty is that people have tied their identity to firearms, a political party uses those people, and those people have been programmed to fear (both scary government takeover of freedom eagles and rabid horde caravan of illegal migrant crack-induced pedophile rapists).
  13. I don't give a fuck about the slippery slope argument. Society heavily regulates all kinds of things - explosives, vehicles, chemicals, etc. - to minimize harm. The people who need those potentially dangerous things still have access to them. It shouldn't be a big deal to heavily regulate semi-auto firearms, except many have entangled their identity to them and a political party shamefully decided to take advantage. The US is in an overall very sad and irresponsible place. I don't have a lot a sympathy for the stance that firearms confer benefit to a household considering they have been shown to increase suicide rates and homicide rates related to domestic violence. However, introducing licensing, registration, training and safety requirements may change that. Plus there isn't a need for semi-auto rifles for home defense (unless an identity formed watching Rambo or irresponsible media consumption allows someone to live in fear). The only need for those type of firearms are in certain limited wildlife management settings (i.e., needs-based permit system).
  14. How is it a problem with a two-party system when only one of those parties is broken? How exactly would a third party change that? Maybe Ralph Nader can save us? Or maybe if Bernie was the head of a third party, Trump would somehow not have won Florida? The problem is the propoganda arms of the right with their weaponized misinformation and large swath's of the US unable to protect themselves against that propoganda. The problem is the senate and EC's excessive weight to low-population, far-right states. Those problems can minimized (PR/DC statehood and regulate facebook, etc.) but it would take Dem control in the Senate.
  15. Meh. We have rules that address divesting and financial entanglements for certain government employees. Those rules don't normally extend to children since there is an expectation that children should be able to lead their own life. There are rules that act as guardrails against nepotism, against self-dealing between family members, and ensure disclosures when potential conflicts exists. There is zero evidence any of these guardrails or rules were crossed. That should be the end of discussion - but because of right-wing propaganda - folks but into the "controversy." If folks want to expand our current system and increase prohibited activities when it comes to children, that is fair and there is a rule making process to make those kinds of things possible. However, pushing manufactured right-wing propaganda isn't the way.
  16. Hey man. Have you ever considered whether you might be in a information bubble? Everyone is in one. The trick is to understand that and make a deliberate attempt to diversify the sources. Plus, brush up on the basics of journalism. Journalists shouldn't run with stories that aren't vetted. Plus note the difference between editorial and news and how many sources (most notable Fox) blends the two together. PBS newshour is an easy way to add is expand your bubble. https://www.youtube.com/user/PBSNewsHour
  17. Like everyone else, Rudy has to lay down on a bed when he "tucks in his shirt" while in the presence of a young woman
  18. I get that it is easier to maintain peace and moderate, keep threads on topic, and accommodate a broader user base, but how does maintaining a safe space eliminate gaslighting and allow folks to be honest? Doesn’t the opposite actually happen? If someone is logically or ethically weak in their political and cultural ideas, wouldn’t it be better promote honesty for them to see those ideas broken down and challenged?
  19. Just an observation but if these are your actual concerns with the Democratic Party, it is rather apparent you have been captured by right-wing culture war propaganda. My recommendation is to reflect on your information bubble and takes steps to diversify the sources of information you expose yourself to while increasing your general understanding of media. In this day and age with social media, it is important to take a deliberate and focused look at this in order to be an informed voter. Being an informed voter is your duty as a citizen. If you conclude you aren’t an informed voter, you should abstain from this election. Some easy steps: Delete your Facebook and twitter accounts. I also recommend you brush up on the basics of journalism, like the difference between news and editorials and how many sources blur those two together. Make an effort to understand how algorithms push consumers down rabbit holes on certain sites (e.g., YouTube.). Finally, fold in some easy nonbiased sources, like PBS’ Newshour, which is 50 minutes a day and available for free to stream.
  20. Are folks afraid that a Biden admin will go to war because of the Lincoln Project? Are they on the short list for Secretary of State? Are people contemplating whether to have them babysit their new infant?
  21. Folks aren’t too concerned about undecideds. There aren’t many. The game is about motivating turnout for your side and suppressing turnout for the other. If you are on team Biden this election, then consider not sharing the opinion that he sucks or is a bad candidate - when the opposite is true
  22. The dude is up by 10 points nationally. Define “good.” Like what? I’m afraid you may have missed out on the last two decades of US politics. Are you aware of Mitch McConnell, and do you understand the role he plays in US politics? I feel like someone should make an easy to digest video about how a bill becomes law. He is clearly the best for the US right now. Name a single person better.
  23. I see you are sad that both sides aren't being treated the same. Are you under the impression that one side is a victim? Do things just not seem fair?
×
×
  • Create New...