Jump to content

HillaryFan420

crowd sourced
  • Posts

    304
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by HillaryFan420

  1. 42 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:


    The goal was to delay the certification and to force the electoral vote into the House, one state one vote, Trump prevailing. Also, Trump was not above declaring martial law if the shot arose. A captured Congressional leadership would suffice- no? A SCOTUS save is not a given. Saying that the crisis would not have ultimately led to a successful coup does not foreclose the possibility that there could be a coup attempt clothed in the Electoral College to the House vote scenario.

    Focusing on the ultimate conclusion to that horrific possibility is seriously myopic. As are your claims of ‘no prior planning’ and the exclusive fault resting with the capital police. In any event, whether Trump ultimately prevailed is not the point.

    The rioters did delay certification but there was never any possibility of an electoral vote going to the House.  The plan to raise objections to the electoral slate also had no possibility of success and was PR to show they were trying to do something to support Trump.  McConnell quickly got tired of it and put his foot down that day regarding certification. 
     

    This is all just fan fiction. The MAGA chuds on the right believe they are part of some valiant fight to stop the steal while the libtards on the “left” believe a fascist coup was nearly perpetrated.  None of its real and none of it matters. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
    • Fuck You 1
  2. 1 hour ago, Gatorubet said:


    Yes, allowing the sitting VP and the VP elect and the Speaker and Senate Majority Leader to be killed or taken hostage is a nothing burger.

    By God, NOW I see the error of my thinking and why you are not a shitty poster deserving of your negs.

    giphy.gif

    I said in the thread that the actions of the Capitol police were to blame for what happened. However, to pretend that some mob of dipshits without any prior planning were going to topple a global hegemon is so absurd that it’s difficult to even muster a response. You are the liberal equivalent of Q followers. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
    • Fuck You 2
  3. 11 hours ago, immamac said:

    That's not true and you know it. 

    These posts were made in response to my post below in the bottom link:

    https://www.surlyhorns.com/board/index.php?/topic/18467-the-us-capitol-has-been-breached-action-and-developing-stories/&do=findComment&comment=2951959

    https://www.surlyhorns.com/board/index.php?/topic/18467-the-us-capitol-has-been-breached-action-and-developing-stories/&do=findComment&comment=2951993

    https://www.surlyhorns.com/board/index.php?/topic/18467-the-us-capitol-has-been-breached-action-and-developing-stories/&do=findComment&comment=2951920

    Within the CR, if you believe it's vile to make the morbid comments Chu made then you are a "Nazi supporter" who should be censored from the board.  It's one thing to throw that term around glibly on the internet as has always been done, but I don't see why posters should be banned for innocuous posts (certainly far less histrionic than calling random people on the internet Nazi supporters) because they are deemed to be in support of the wrong tribe even when that's not even what's going on.

  4. On 1/13/2021 at 4:10 PM, immamac said:

    He at least substantiates his position rationally and methodically. People disagree with him on many issues, but he is actually one of the posters that I think has had a lot of influence in the CR about giving alternative viable vantage points on some key issues. 

    The reason that BC has not been crowd sourced is because, although he differs from many of the posters in the CR, he is at heart a democrat.  For that reason he does not question or mock many of the CR shibboleths no matter how absurd they may be, such as the fatuous idea that Trump conspired with Putin during the 2016 election or that Trump is akin to Hitler or Mussolini in his authoritarianism.  If you question those things are you deemed to be a Trumper and thus must be crowd sourced no matter what your actual politics are.  Indeed, I was called a Nazi for arguing that we shouldn't celebrate the deaths of the idiot protestors who stormed the Capitol. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Fuck You 1
  5. On 1/10/2021 at 6:13 PM, cactusflinthead said:

    laughter laughing GIF

    I know that you're proud of how you and the others acted in that thread.  That doesn't surprise me at all.  There is an authoritarian streak in liberals as much as there is in conservatives, the difference being the identity of the out group.  

  6. On 1/12/2021 at 9:42 AM, capnamerca said:

    Do some more both-sidesing so you can equate an armed insurrection with protests in the street. Go ahead, we'll wait.

    Please show me where I did that.  I mainly argued that at no point was there ever a risk of our government being toppled or a civil war breaking out, even if a hostage situation were to arise.  This episode was about as threatening to our "democracy" as the shooting of Steve Scalise, which is to say it wasn't.  

    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Like 1
  7. 9 hours ago, Helobious said:

    If you don’t like what it’s become, why visit or post there? 

    I refrained from visiting it for the most part but I'm interested in politics so it can be hard to stay away completely.  Even then, a handful of posts in a single thread that they interpret as not being supportive of their team can result in hundreds of negs.  Some of the more insane posters will even pull up your entire posting history so they can neg posts that have nothing to do with the topic that triggered them in the first place. 

     

    As an example, arguing that we shouldn't celebrate the deaths of the handful of wingnuts who died at the Capitol the other day will get you neg bombed.  These people have some of the blandest politics imaginable but at the same time are viscously tribal and  monomaniacal in rooting out and exterminating the perceived enemy.  

    • Hook 'Em 4
    • Like 2
  8. 4 minutes ago, ztejas said:

    Lol since when is the CR economically conservative?

    They are for the most part centrists so they would be to the left of Von Mises but to the right of the New Dealers and maybe even Nixon.  It's on "social issues" where their liberal streak shines.  

  9. People have always complained about the CR, but I believe until recently there has always been some small amount of productive discussion along with some variety in the viewpoints shared.  However, now i'm afraid it truly has become the unrelenting, hysterical circle-jerk of which it so often has been accused.  It is nigh impossible to post in the forum without sharing the pedestrian "socially liberal but economically conservative" viewpoint shared by the CR postariat.  To do so, irrespective of your own beliefs or positions, is to brand yourself a "fascist" or even a "Nazi supporter" resulting in your eventual crowd-source banning.  There is as much use reasoning with these people as there is reasoning with a stampede of feral hogs.

    What is to be done with this place?  Why even allow negging in the CR when it's used wantonly to ban anyone with a different viewpoint, no matter what that viewpoint is?  

    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Fuck You 2
  10.  

    1 minute ago, Thatguy said:

      No one has ever trained them to shoot people that look like them, or believe in what they believe in. Something that should be addressed in training going forward.

    There are plenty of shithead cops, but i dont think their personal failings are to blame for the harms they cause and essentializing them, like essentializing any group, is counterproductive even if they are a self-selected group.  

  11. 10 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

    Yeah, gonna have to disagree with you here. I'm not sure what you categorize as fucking poor, but I guarantee you that plenty of these stupid rubes have shit jobs for wages maybe 20-25k above the poverty line. I think you underestimate the ability of stupid to say, live paycheck to paycheck buying guns and truck lifts, or opening up a new credit card to say, buy a super cheap (thanks covid) plane ticket to go to Washington D.C. to make libruls cry and save 'murica. You're also failing to recognize the level of mentally illness involved and that many of those fucktards literally think they're patriots saving America.  Im sure plenty of those people drove, and plenty probably live in their cars. 

    I'm guessing a good chunk of the ones that showed up WITH money probably didn't attack the Capitol and walked away. Fuck, who knows. 

    lol this must be the shitlib version of the conservative's shibboleth of welfare queens and "strapping young bucks" living off of a diet of T-Bone steaks.  

    • Fuck You 23
  12. Just now, DigDug said:

    That is exactly how wars can get started.  Men with guns and zip ties were there to take hostage and/or kill members of our congress and overthrow our government.  You honestly need to wake up to that fact.

    Why would a war start over some wingnut grabbing a hold of a congressman because the police didn't bother doing their jobs?  I'm missing something.

    • Fuck You 14
  13. 3 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

    Right, nobody has brought up Charlottesville in years! This will be Trump’s lasting legacy.

    GWB started a war on false pretenses that killed nearly a million people. Reagan supported death squads which murdered nuns and did all manner of unspeakable things.  None of these things defined their legacies and the media love both of them.  Maybe Trump will be different given his boorishness but I wouldn't be so sure that he will be reviled by the general public 10 or 20 years from now.

    • Fuck You 10
  14. 6 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

    No, it was treason.  It was "making war on the United States."  That's the definition of treason.

    This is absolutely no different from the traitors in 1861.  They made war on the United States.  The only difference is that the Army of the Potomac did a much better job at protecting the Capitol.  But the goal of the Antietam Campaign and the Gettysburg Campaign were the same as the goal of the traitors yesterday--to capture the elected members of Congress and force them to acquiesce to their treason.

    And yeah--you do get a no-due-process death penalty when you are in the engaged in the act of violent treason.  We didn't arrest the traitors at Gettysburg or Vicksburg; we shot them.  And we didn't shoot them because they pointed guns at Union troops; we shot them because they were engaged in the act of treason.

    The government has a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence.  That's what makes it the government.  When the government is not the only entity that can legitimately use violence, then you're a failed state (e.g., South Sudan, Libya).

    Police get to use deadly violence when they believe themselves to be endangered not because there is innate value to their lives.  They get to use deadly force in that instance because they are agents of the government.  Which is to say that in that moment, they are the government.  You don't get to use deadly force against the government (or its agents), and if you do, you get shot.

    Here, she was using deadly force against the government itself by trying to overrun Congress and prevent it from performing its constitutional duties.  The government's life was threatened.  And it gets to use deadly force to protect its life.

    To compare this with the Civil War is so incredibly insane.  There was no possibility whatsoever that the conspiracy theorists and other idiots who "stormed the Capitol" were going to seriously impair the functioning of the federal government much less overthrow it.  These people are simply idiots and the most surprising thing about the episode was how ill equipped the DC police were to control the crowds.  Had they done their jobs nothing would have happened.

    • Fuck You 27
  15. Just now, Captainant said:

    Can we crowdsource this fucking troll already? We can drop the civility act after a violent insurrection by him and his ilk

    I've never voted for a Republican in my life.  I just think the whole thing is silly and the only meaningful consequence of this entire event could be enhanced domestic surveillance via a beefed up Patriot Act.  That outcome will be driven by the media hysteria surrounding what happened yesterday.

    • Fuck You 15
  16. 6 minutes ago, satyanash said:

    We only know Tom isn't an offensive guru because of his time here. At Ohio State he was absolutely thought of as the offensive mastermind, just like you think Sark is now.

    I’m sure there were some people who considered Tom an offensive mastermind when he was hired but his performance under Meyer didn’t mean much of anything. Herman’s resume was thinner than Strong’s when he was hired and he was more a product of media driven hype than real success. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
  17. I hated the idea at first but now I think I’m coming around to liking the hiring of Sark.  Unlike Tom, Sark is a genuine offensive guru and he can recruit as well. He also doesn’t have a staff of buddies he will be bringing along and thus hopefully he can put together the best staff UT’s money can buy. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
  18. I think I’ve about given up on the idea of Urban coming. I would think that if it was a done deal they would have fired Herman weeks ago to give him a better chance of finding a HC gig to offset the buyout. Maybe they’ll ask again but I’m doubtful this is going down.  
     

    The fact that Herman has hung around this long is even making me question whether he’ll even be fired at all for the same reasons. 

    someone talk me off this ledge. I’m close to jumping. 

×
×
  • Create New...