Jump to content

Captainant

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    13,810
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    5

Posts posted by Captainant

  1. Just now, AtticusFinch said:

    Who said I wouldn't engage in a good faith conversation.   I was immediately called names and told to go die

    Because you didn't engage in a good faith conversation while also declaring you were discussing in good faith. We don't like liars, we don't like trolls. Go to the shag if you want uninformed, factually incorrect discussion. Fuck off, aggy. 

    • Like 1
  2. 1 minute ago, AtticusFinch said:

    No, you would slow it down.  The accusation is the video was slowed down to make the act by Acosta seem worse than it was.

    That is not the accusation and you are deliberately misstating the opposing position for the sake of a straw man argument that doesn't even make sense. 

    Eat a bag of dicks and die in a fire. Go troll somewhere else. 

    Trolling like this is why CR turns so toxic. It's just a complete rejection of fact in favor of the trump flavored propoganda. 

    • Like 1
  3. 3 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

    I am not sure which way politico (the journalism/news organization) skews, but they have a very fascinating read today about Andrew Johnson which they do a great job of tethering to today with Trump. For guys like me who aren't strong on presidential history/historical knowledge, it's a very fascinating read about how basically everyone tried to work around Andrew Johnson's racism and incompetence.

    And the article does a great job of subtlety and nuance in showing the similarities of Andrew Johnson's attempts at populism (which weren't very effective ultimately and Trump's populism (which are proving more so). Things like crowd-hyping of the southern states (he was a proud Tennessee man, after all), ignoring advice, pandering to racists, etc. etc. etc. 

    Lastly, as someone who is barely educated compared to a lot of you upper crust Ivy league types, I had always heard Andrew Johnson was the worst president of the US and always saw him ranked at the bottom. This gives a glimpse as to why he's historically viewed that way, but also brings the lulz when the conclusion is basically Trump is a poor man's, 21st century version of Andrew Johnson who America thought they would never see someone like again in the office of President. There is nothing new under the sun, as is said...

    Very great read I recommend: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/11/13/andrew-johnson-undermined-congress-cabinet-david-priess-book-222413

    Not sure if serious... Andrew JACKSON was the populist known as "King Mob" lol

  4. 3 minutes ago, Lurch said:

     


    It’s been widely reported. They’re boycotting twitter for not taking down the posts that had Tucker’s home address fast enough.

     

    And nothing of value was lost. 

    • Like 1
  5. Not just a ceremony, but a remembrance of Armistice Day and of the sacrifice made by millions of men. Those who support trump on the basis of trump's support for the troops or how tough he is or how much respect he has for our nation are just useful idiots repeating propaganda. They won't own up to their mistakes. They won't address their cognitive dissonance. They'll just say "what about ...." and "but her emails" and whatever else completely uncorroborated conspiracy theories come to their minds.

    They're a lost cause. Trump's base and supporters are nothing but irredeemable at this point if they continue to support him blindly. All thirty to thirty five percent of the country.

    • Like 1
  6. 2 hours ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

    I thought the definition of a wave was that every jump-ball broke one way (as opposed to the other). This seems more like a decent Democratic showing, not a failure and yet not the success everyone was hoping for. Same as last week on Tuesday.

    In terms of votes, it WAS a wave election. However, due to gerrymandering, the actual electoral effect is significantly muted.

  7. 1 minute ago, Fozzz said:

    It's not in the police report.  I hate to say this, but they might be lying.

    DrgfDe5X4AIxvJW.jpg:large

     

    Nice find with the police report. If they had indeed broken the door, it would be negligent to omit it from the police report. And it would also be classified as a burglary/forced entry. Calling bullshit until there is more evidence to show Carlson's door was broken.

    • Like 1
  8. 2 minutes ago, Zavala said:

    They broke the door? 

    Also, if right wingers were outside of Don Lemons house chanting "we know where you sleep" how do you suspect that would be portrayed in the media?

    Where are you seeing they broke in the door? I'm having trouble finding any sort of news on this besides that it happened

  9. 2 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

    ^^^  quid pro quo - lifting Russia sanctions/Rosneft stock sale. 

    Potential third unreported meeting between Sessions and Kisylak: Sessions attended the VIP party at the Mayflower Hotel Trump foreign policy speech where all the main players in the Rosneft stock sale/money shuffle were present in person.  nothing shocking.

    Not to mention the trump mansion sale to the recently detained russian oligarch who bought a mansion for a significantly above market value that totally wasn't a money laundering scheme. 

    • Like 1
  10. 7 minutes ago, Patrick Bateman said:

    LOL.... that's not remotely true and a horrible contortion of the truth.  You have no idea WTF you're talking about.

     

    That very may well be true, a lot has happened since then and I may be mis-remembering. Didn't mean to derail the thread, but id be happy to continue discussion in the gun control thread

  11. Lol I found the article for ya boi 

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/08/media/tucker-carlson-protestors/index.html

    Quote

    Figures on the left and right quickly denounced the Antifa group's action. Former Fox host Megyn Kelly tweeted: "This has to stop... He does not deserve this. His family does not deserve this. It's stomach-turning."
    "This is not okay," CNN host SE Cupp wrote. "By the political left, the political right or the deranged. Don't do this."
    "Late Show" host Stephen Colbert weighed in as well, saying "Fighting Tucker Carlson's ideas is an American right. Targeting his home and terrorizing his family is an act of monstrous cowardice. Obviously don't do this, but also, take no pleasure in it happening. Feeding monsters just makes more monsters."
    One of the leaders of Media Matters, a liberal media monitoring group that opposes Fox, also condemned the incident.
    "This behavior is way over the line," senior fellow Matthew Gertz tweeted. "Going to someone's home, breaking their door, and terrorizing their family is unacceptable. It's also extremely counterproductive if your interest is actually in reducing his influence."
    Max Boot, a conservative columnist and CNN commentator, said he agreed with Gertz.
    "I think Tucker is a terrible influence on modern America but that doesn't justify harassing him at home," Boot tweeted. "Go high, not low."

    Go figure they're talking about the the day's mass shooting and trump banning one of their reporters and trying to gin up false accusations against their reporter instead of poor ol tucky carly, right?

    • Like 1
  12. 3 minutes ago, Mo Horn said:

    Didn't want to CR the Daily Texan thread and didn't want to start a new thread here. 

     

    This is a bad take. Trump rescinded an Obama-era EO that in addition to requiring gun checks for the mentally ill, also arbitrarily decided folks on social security who use a financial planner are mentally ill, setting a precedent for non-medical adjudications of mental illness. There's PLENTY to criticize trump over, but rescinding that EO is not one of them.

    1 minute ago, EMAWesome said:

    They should, but they don't.  Also Trump hasn't called members of the press enemies of the state.  He has called them enemies of the American people, not the American government (even though in their current form they are).

    Are you familiar with the expression "government of the people, by the people"? So logically, if something is an enemy of the people it is intrinsically an enemy of the state?

    • Like 1
  13. 11 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

    Bait whom exactly? I was responding to a post mentioning this particular group coming to my home and putting my family at risk. I certainly value life, I just value my family’s lives more. 

    Well, just you saying "I hope they're keenly aware of the castle doctrine" indicates (to me, at least) that you intend to fire on them for any perceived infraction, which is legally jeopardizing to say. Especially since people have been found guilty of murder while exercising the castle doctrine based on previously stating an intention to cause harm. And the jury found him guilty of intentional homicide.

    Just trying to help out a stranger on the internet if they went to court and discovered that their shitposting is admissible in court. Just ask BlackLab how that can go.

    • Like 1
  14. 1 minute ago, immortal13 said:

    No dude I just believe any hearsay people spew in the interwebs....not naive at all

    How about this?

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-militia-groups-head-to-border-stirred-by-trumps-call-to-arms/2018/11/03/ff96826c-decf-11e8-b3f0-62607289efee_story.html

    Does that corroboration help you believe the anecdotal story? Or are you incapable of rational thought that is also critical of your identity politics group?

  15. Just now, Chrispy said:

    Well, I hope they’re keenly aware of the Castle Doctrine. 

    Just so you know, don't try and bait anyone into attacking you. Folks have been found guilty of manslaughter for similar behavior. I only say this because I genuinely don't think you know any better and I'm pretty sure you don't intrinsically value human life.

    • Like 3
  16. 1 minute ago, Foosters said:

    I'm not really sure I see what this has to do with anything? That's a shitty thing to do. Should be condemned.  What does this have to do with the behavior of the POTUS and the White House?  Do we not have different standards?  It's like, "yeah, the CEO of our company just went on a meth binge and took a shit in the middle of the conference room, but so did that homeless guy outside, so what's your problem?"

    It doesn't have anything to do with anything, just commenting on the whataboutism of the day. It's not right to terrorize a man's family because you disagree with his opinions. Full stop. My comment about comeuppance is that in a petty way, I see it as him reaping what he's been sowing. Carlson has been a big part of the decline of our discourse so it's the chickens coming home to roost.

    To reiterate: I don't think that sort of behavior is ever ok. 

    • Like 1
    • Fuck You 1
  17. 5 minutes ago, gmr548 said:


    What fits your criteria? I don't think anyone would argue against the idea that Salon has a liberal editorial slant but they also don't outright report lies ala Breitbart.
     

    It's pretty common among right-wingers (and I'll readily admit I was guilty of this in the Bernie-craze too) to think that because their dogshit editorials only put out horse shit, then all dogshit editorials only put out horseshit. Buzzfeed puts out 99% garbage, BUT, they do occasionally publish well-researched journalism and that ISN'T bullshit. They don't see the distinction between journalistic reporting and editorializing, and are either unwilling or incapable of seeing the difference.

×
×
  • Create New...