Jump to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Surly Horns

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business & Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Advertise... Tailgate Donations

Captainant

Certifiably Surly
  • Joined

Posts posted by Captainant

  1. 36 minutes ago, Reagan1k said:

    Can you elaborate on this more please…. In layman’s terms? 

    This dude puts out a bunch of layman's explanations of engineering concepts and events. I thought his explainer was very understandable and it's only 16 minutes long

     

    He's a good subscribe if you like this kinda thing, based out of New Braunfels too

  2. 17 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

    Your example of the Catholic bailout inadvertently proves my point, even if the decision was bullshit. The LA Archdiocese spent 20k to lobby on a legislative issue. That’s well within the under five percent “insubstantial” limit and well within lobbying on legislation not for candidates.

    You do know, right, that churches are restricted to an even lower level of lobbying funding than other non-profits (who have a completely different formula) precisely because of the religious freedom exemption? You also know, right, that for profit organizations can spend as much as they want on lobbying, and spent way more lobbying on this issue than any church did? 

    Here's a crazy fucking idea: get rid of bribery - i mean - lobbying. The church should be spending their tithe money on their community and place of worship. Not on influencing public fucking policy and the flow of taxpayer money. 

    And it's heinous that speech is measured in dollars spent, and not in individuals participating in that speech

  3. 1 hour ago, Sawbonz said:

    Reducing an argument to its most extreme is not intellectually honest. It’s akin to just asking questions 

    It's not reducing the argument, it's following their argument to it's conclusion. If CRT is "something that only democrats are interested in", is that not also arguing that it's purely a political tool? It's either that, or that republicans don't think that racism is something that should be addressed. 

  4. 3 hours ago, Sawbonz said:

    I don’t agree with his statement, but this does not at all follow from what he said. This type of fallacious argument is way too common here and everywhere else these days. When we misstate each other’s positions, we can’t ever have legitimate discourse

    Which is why I asked if that's what his position was, because that's what I understood it to mean in the context of the discussion in the thread. Claiming that CRT is a "democrat" political tool is arguing that racism doesn't exist and it's just a club used by the left. 

    I'd think it's a fair thing to ask for clarification when there's a misunderstanding. Otherwise we just end up using the same words to describe completely different things. Which is the objective of Chris Ruso and Donkey and the like, all to protect the existing status quo

  5. 7 hours ago, DonkeyCigars said:

    Interesting and fair/balanced article about CRT and it's origins as a political football and how the term/idea has morphed and is being applied and known.

    https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-inquiry/how-a-conservative-activist-invented-the-conflict-over-critical-race-theory

     

    Lulz, that entire article is about how Christopher Rufo (who was y'all's go-to wHiStLeBlOwEr on the issue) found "political kindling" in CRT and has been stoking white greivance politics. Interesting read, thanks for the share. Some of the more anti-CRT folks would do well to know the source and agenda of their propoganda. 

    Especially interesting too how the article even outlines the strenuous linkage to "red-baiting" as a means to trigger a stronger conservative response. Of course the DT audience swallowed the hook while taking the bait. 

  6. I think this may be the best episode yet. Good character development and action

    Spoiler

    I got a kick out of Wrecker throwing the dudes off the ship, gave me flashbacks of tossing storm troopers in Jedi Knight/Academy. 

    I liked the turn of Crosshair getting seriously injured from his ruthless tactics, and Cad mothafuckin Bane, baby! Definitely the start of the next chapter and end of exposition

     

  7. 10 minutes ago, royiv said:

    Living in Montrose, I can’t believe I’m in the same district with either one of you.

    Lol I moved from a midtown apt to spring branch and stayed in the same district. Thisisfine.jpeg

  8. ·

    Edited by Captainant

    44 minutes ago, landman said:

    Gonna go out on a limb here and say people in favor of CRT might also have some involvement on the Democrat side of things.  And they could still be normal parents.

    So your position is that there's no disparity in treatment by the law based on race or skin color? And that any argument that there is, isn't a statement of fact but just a partisan talking point?

    I'm just trying to parse out how you're framing CRT as a "democrat" issue

    Edit: or is this another attempt to #bothsides the issue to dismiss the abhorrent behavior of the right by arguing without evidence that the left is doing it too?

  9.  Filed under: no fucking shit.

    Fox’s anti-“critical race theory” parents are also GOP activists

    Quote

    Nearly a dozen of the Fox News guests the network has presented as concerned parents or educators who oppose the teaching of so-called “critical race theory” in schools also have day jobs as Republican strategists, conservative think-tankers, or right-wing media personalities, according to a Media Matters review.

    Critical race theory is an academic legal framework which examines the systemic impact of racism in the United States. But “critical race theory,” like “cancel culture” and “political correctness” before it, also functions as an umbrella term the right-wing movement uses to turn its mostly white adherents’ racial anxiety into political energy

    In this case, a sophisticated, nationwide network of conservative think tanks, advocacy groups, media outlets, and GOP officials have seized on the term and, in the words of Christopher Rufo -- a senior fellow at the conservative Manhattan Institute and a key player in the effort -- sought to render it “toxic” and apply to it “the entire range of cultural constructions that are unpopular with Americans.” Republicans have proposed or passed a slew of legislation restricting “critical race theory” and hope to use it as a core part of their political strategy in upcoming local, state, and federal elections.

    Fox, the leading propaganda outlet for the GOP, plays a key role in this strategy. The network has mentioned “critical race theory” nearly 1,300 times over the past three and a half months. The purportedly sinister spread of “critical race theory” provides a perfect framework for Fox’s technique of highlighting local concerns to fuel the culture war. The network supercharges the individual, at times dubious, stories that filter up with the help of nationally backed local activists, other right-wing outlets, and social media. Fox has targeted the purported influence of “critical race theory” in corporate America, the military, and particularly schools, hosting parents, teachers, and other educators to talk about how they don’t want it taught in their communities.

    In several of those cases, the locals Fox has highlighted are also Republican strategists, conservative think-tankers, or right-wing media figures -- ties the network has downplayed or ignored altogether. This trend is particularly notable when Fox covers “critical race theory” controversies in Northern Virginia, a bedroom community for Washington, D.C., in a state where GOP gubernatorial nominee Glenn Youngkin has sought to make his opposition a central issue in the fall.

    “The first test will be here in Virginia,” Fox chief Washington correspondent Mike Emanuel reported last month. “If this issue works in the governor's race in November, it will likely be part of the GOP campaign playbook in the midterm elections next year.”

    Republican strategists have every right to advocate for their children and their communities, if not to manipulate nationwide education priorities. But since Fox has identified opposition to “critical race theory” as central to the party’s political strategy, the network has a responsibility to inform its viewers about exactly who it’s talking to.

    TL:DR - fox has been presenting their own political operatives as "just normal parents" in all of their segments on CRT, in order to astroturf conservative grievances 

  10. Filed under: no fucking shit.

    Fox’s anti-“critical race theory” parents are also GOP activists

    Quote

    Nearly a dozen of the Fox News guests the network has presented as concerned parents or educators who oppose the teaching of so-called “critical race theory” in schools also have day jobs as Republican strategists, conservative think-tankers, or right-wing media personalities, according to a Media Matters review.

    Critical race theory is an academic legal framework which examines the systemic impact of racism in the United States. But “critical race theory,” like “cancel culture” and “political correctness” before it, also functions as an umbrella term the right-wing movement uses to turn its mostly white adherents’ racial anxiety into political energy

    In this case, a sophisticated, nationwide network of conservative think tanks, advocacy groups, media outlets, and GOP officials have seized on the term and, in the words of Christopher Rufo -- a senior fellow at the conservative Manhattan Institute and a key player in the effort -- sought to render it “toxic” and apply to it “the entire range of cultural constructions that are unpopular with Americans.” Republicans have proposed or passed a slew of legislation restricting “critical race theory” and hope to use it as a core part of their political strategy in upcoming local, state, and federal elections.

    Fox, the leading propaganda outlet for the GOP, plays a key role in this strategy. The network has mentioned “critical race theory” nearly 1,300 times over the past three and a half months. The purportedly sinister spread of “critical race theory” provides a perfect framework for Fox’s technique of highlighting local concerns to fuel the culture war. The network supercharges the individual, at times dubious, stories that filter up with the help of nationally backed local activists, other right-wing outlets, and social media. Fox has targeted the purported influence of “critical race theory” in corporate America, the military, and particularly schools, hosting parents, teachers, and other educators to talk about how they don’t want it taught in their communities.

    In several of those cases, the locals Fox has highlighted are also Republican strategists, conservative think-tankers, or right-wing media figures -- ties the network has downplayed or ignored altogether. This trend is particularly notable when Fox covers “critical race theory” controversies in Northern Virginia, a bedroom community for Washington, D.C., in a state where GOP gubernatorial nominee Glenn Youngkin has sought to make his opposition a central issue in the fall.

    “The first test will be here in Virginia,” Fox chief Washington correspondent Mike Emanuel reported last month. “If this issue works in the governor's race in November, it will likely be part of the GOP campaign playbook in the midterm elections next year.”

    Republican strategists have every right to advocate for their children and their communities, if not to manipulate nationwide education priorities. But since Fox has identified opposition to “critical race theory” as central to the party’s political strategy, the network has a responsibility to inform its viewers about exactly who it’s talking to.

    TL:DR - fox has been presenting their own political operatives as "just normal parents" in all of their segments on CRT, in order to astroturf conservative grievances 

  11. 4 minutes ago, elfenix said:

    ^^while the courts still look at it, i don't know that compactness is necessarily a strength when districts have ~750,000 people in them.  i guess perimeter vs. area might cut down on some of the block-by-block sawtoothing that goes on in houston.  but a district, that, say, encompasses the more built up areas of the golden triangle also cutting some narrow line down I-10 to get over to baytown and pick up a similar population while letting the rural areas in between be able to represent themselves doesn't really offend my sensibilities. 

    And there's also some statutory requirements from the VRA to ensure that minority communities are kept together, even if geographically disbursed. There's definitely shades of just how bad the gerrymandering can be though, and 538's Gerrymandering Project is a really nice study series on how and why our districts look they way they do.

    I think an interesting metric is % of wasted votes in a district, along the lines of comparing total (for a state) percentage of votes cast for one party or another compared to the total percentage of seats/representation won. It doesn't do much to inform what an "optimal" shape is, but it's another strong indicator of gerrymandering in action.

    It's a really interesting and unfortunate problem in that we struggle to even describe what the most fair shape of district is, considering how subjectively and objectively it's clear that our districting is not fair or representative of the actual aggregate vote of the people.

  12. 15 minutes ago, elfenix said:

    obviously written by someone who doesn't understand computer models are what has allowed the extreme gerrymandering the republicans have been doing since 2010. 

    I actually had a project back in undergrad CS to develop some quantifiable measure of how gerrymandered a district was, and the idea I came up with was a proportion between surface area (perimeter length) of the district and its encompassed area. It's by no means perfect but it did a good job of identifying the worst offending gerrymandered districts in Texas, and I wish some mechanism like that was used to gut-check district shapes

  13. 13 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

    No it's not. Kingwood is awesome.

    Man, fuck Kingwood. I hate being in the same district as yall living over in Spring Branch. The gerrymandering in Houston is fucking obscene.

  14. ·

    Edited by Captainant

    18 minutes ago, SquishMitten said:

    Thanks!

    If the good captain is correct, then Home Depot, Lowes, and Walmart all have sufficiently powerful generators in stock (or delivery within a few days if not in a local store).

    Before you start spending money, you should spend an afternoon tracing some circuits in your home that you're thinking of powering and trying to tabulate how much power you'll draw for the entire circuit. From there you'll have a decent idea of what sort of base load you should plan for. If you get a transfer switch installed you basically are powering entire circuits through your breaker box off the generator

    During the Feb Freeze this year, we were able to run a fridge, TV, charge a shitload of batteries, and even get some electric blankets going on a 3500W gas unit and a few heavy duty extension cords. I'd imagine that 10KW will let you run most of the critical circuits in your home (and prolly a window unit to boot) but I'm just a jackass on a message board so grain of salt etc

    edit: also remembered that if you're running on propane/natural gas, you'll take at 10% hit to power output - so worth considering when purchasing too

  15. 57 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

    trump_sworn_in_t800.jpg?90232451fbcadccc

    If we get the government deciding what Fox News says, what happens when a Trump gets in and his administration starts deciding what PBS, CNN, etc. report on?

    Well it does help that Germany has actual laws against nazis on the books to keep that shit out of the mainstream. I'm not in favor of a government agency determining what can be reported on, but we NEED something like the fairness doctrine again, as well more stringent categorization for news channels vs opinion channels with respect to "just the facts" vs "people are saying"

  16. Just now, Anastasis said:

    You failed to respond to my request. 

    you're asking me to compare against something that didn't actually happen - you want me to argue against a straw man rather than actually discuss the relevant issue and facts at hand.

    Just now, Anastasis said:

    You realize that you are wading in with the server dns log lunatics right?

    For fucking FUCKS sake. Stop fucking lying and misattributing what I said in that thread THREE FUCKING YEARS AGO. Nevermind that there has been ample evidence and positive proof that the trump campaign was covertly sharing sensitive data with Russia.

  17. Just now, Anastasis said:

    Pretty funny watching the overlap between the adherents of total nonsense and the back benders when it come to this admins stance. 

    will you fucking address my actual response to your bullshit? Or if you're just trolling and shitposting then cool, we can do that too

  18. 1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

    Now give your take if trump did the exact same thing. 

    How about: when the sanctions were first imposed, they were hamfisted and pissed off our EU allies just as much as our RU adversaries and viewed it as an infringement on their sovereignty (source, BBC), in addition to being ineffective at achieving their desired outcome of stopping RU gas flowing into EU. Biden's recent moves, while marginally benefitting our adversaries - far greater benefitted our allies and is a step towards repairing that partnership.

    Shit, the AP article I edited in after you quoted me even clarifies that in the fucking headline so even the DT folks could get the gist. The sanctions were reduced in scope to only target russian-owned entities and not those owned by other sovereign nations that we happen to be allied with.

    But yeah, I know what you mean about people trying hard to miss the point.

  19. ·

    Edited by Captainant

    22 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

    Brain.worms.

     

    In May 2021, the Biden administration waived Trump's CAATSA sanctions on the company behind the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline and its chief executive.[186][187] Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov welcomed the move as "a chance for a gradual transition toward the normalisation of our bilateral ties".[188] Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said he was "surprised" and "disappointed" by Biden's decision.[189]

    Also - just to actually cite the relevant information and not just """PeOPlE aRe SaYiNg" with unattributed text (note to WWS: this is an example of sharing factual information for the discussion)

    U.S. waives sanctions on Nord Stream 2 as Biden seeks to mend Europe ties

    In the Reuters reporting, it states that the Biden admin made this move as a concession towards Germany, but it DOES have the ill effects of further isolating Ukraine and indeed weakening the US posture towards russia. If you'll recall, our relationship with Germany was pretty far on the outs thanks to yaboi trump and his unnecessary antagonism that distanced ourselves from our allies.

    Do I think that it's good that we lessened some sanctions against russia and its oligarchs? Fuck no! But I'm also a big boy and able to hold more than one thought at the same time in my head, and I can recognize that there are other factors at play here in terms of destabilizing our international relationships that were so badly mangled by trump.+

    Also bears noting - this is the only thing that annie and his merry band of concern trolls can point to as far as biden being soft on russia. And it happened at the hundred day (ish) mark of his presidency, and it wasn't just for the sake of making daddy putin happy.

     

    EDIT: this AP article is good too if you want more than just whatever fox and facebook are telling you what to think:

    Quote

    REYKJAVIK, Iceland (AP) — The Biden administration imposed sanctions Wednesday on Russian companies and ships for their work on a European natural gas pipeline adamantly opposed by the U.S., but President Joe Biden angered many Democratic and Republican lawmakers by opting not to punish the German company overseeing the project.

    Waiving penalties regarding ally German in the Nord Stream 2 project was “in line with our commitment to strengthen our Transatlantic relationships as a matter of national security,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken said in a statement.

    The U.S. has battled for years to block the pipeline, now 95% complete, though construction has not yet started on its German leg. The pipeline will carry natural gas from Russia to Germany, increasing Russia’s leverage as a vital energy supplier in Europe. The U.S. argues that the pipeline threatens European energy security, heightens Russia’s influence and poses risks to Ukraine and Poland in bypassing both countries.

    Critics of the pipeline had hoped to stop it by targeting the German company and its top executive.

    Sen. Bob Menendez, a New Jersey Democrat and chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said he opposed Biden’s waiver for Germany. Senior committee member Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, a New Hampshire Democrat, said the pipeline “allows Russia to further spread its malign influence.”

    “Oh, my God, enable Russia!” Sen. Joni Ernst, an Iowa Republican, exclaimed at the decision. “Joe Biden, thank you so much for allowing Russia to export their goods,” she said, sarcastically.

    Blinken said the Biden administration would continue to fight the pipeline. “Our opposition to the Nord Stream 2 pipeline is unwavering,” he said.

    Biden’s administration has emphasized strengthening alliances internationally to deal with foreign policy challenges. U.S. relations with Germany were unsettled by President Donald Trump’s frequent affronts to Germany and other European allies and Trump’s enthusiasm for Russian President Vladimir Putin.

    German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas, who spoke with Blinken by phone Tuesday, praised the decision regarding the German interests involved.

    “We perceive this to be a constructive step that we will gladly continue to discuss with our partners in Washington,” Maas told reporters in Berlin on Wednesday.

     

Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business & Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Advertise... Tailgate Donations

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.