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

Brisketexan

Legacy Members
  • Joined

Posts posted by Brisketexan

  1. On 5/7/2025 at 9:23 AM, Chad Fuck said:

    818qOXhr+nL._SL1500_.jpg

    You'd love this book.  So many examples of death by misadventure.  I love that coroners call it that because "death by your own stupidity" is just too undignified. 

    There's also this one, from the Grand Canyon:

    300.jpg

    We went a couple of years ago, during the heart of the pandemic.  Winter, snow, icy conditions.  It was beautiful, but we also talked a lot about how hazardous many of the places were.  Daughter found the book in the gift shop, bought it, and then proceeded to read all the stories aloud to us in the car.

    Does it say terrible things about our family that we laughed at several of them?

  2. 7 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

    Which again just proves what's been undoubtedly true since no later than 1973:

    When the US government is talking about "antisemitism," that's just code for "opposition to Israeli foreign policy, especially in the Occupied Territories." That's all it's ever been.

    100%.

    "Jews are evil, untrustworthy, and should not be allowed to hold any government position in America." = totally fine.

    "Maybe the state of Israel shouldn't engage in complete ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from the Levant." = ANTISEMITISM!

  3. 5 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

    The foregoing illustrates something.  People seem to go along with the Rule of Law because they agree or personally believe that it is in their best interest, whether that be self-interest, or the common good, probably most often the latter.  The latter because at some level, the Rule of Law curtails personal freedom (in many cases things that we aren't inclined to do, but in others, like speeding, seatbelts, public intoxication, sodomy, etc. things we are inclined to do).

    People ditch the Rule of Law because they no longer believe it is in their best interest, presumably; again, either self-interest or the common good.

    Trump and his ilk are doing it out of self-interest.  But they have the common man believing it's because the Rule of Law no longer serves the common good.  Or at least the Rule of Law as currently conceived.  All men are created equal, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and all that.

    Dictators need a rule of law, too, it's just not a rule of law that works for anyone else.  In groups, out groups, for thee not for me, etc.  Like the law of Boot and Gun, it's pretty much all enforcement and no voluntary compliance because it serves no one's interest except the dictator's.

     

    And to tie this back to "shipping people to a foreign gulag with no due process".....why is it bad?

    1)  It's bad because it violates our current laws.  Thus, deploy enforcement mechanisms, and stop it and punish the wrongdoers.

    2) It's bad because it hurts people, some of whom turn out to be innocent, and any decent human should care about innocent people being hurt.

    3) It's bad because it erodes due process and the rule of law for all, leading to chaos, and "Rule of whatever the dictatory wants or says."

    4) It's bad because if the regime can grab and deport one person to a foreign gulag with no due process or formal judicial process, then it can grab ANY person and do that.  And that includes YOU, and ME.

     

    So, all the motivations/incentives are in play here.  Oppose this policy because you are a genuinely decent altruistic person.  Oppose it because you are a selfish person (I don't want that to happen to me or mine).  Oppose it because you have a belief in the Rule of Law that may be motivated by selfishness, selflessness, or a combo of both.  All the reasons align.

    The only reason the other way is that you think that YOU, and your interests/desires, benefit from this particular departure from the Rule of Law.  But in the end....see point 4. You're wrong about thinking that this will be good for you in the long run.  Suck up to a lawless regime, and it works great....until it doesn't.....

    a3dr9cuht4h51.jpg?width=1080&crop=smart&

     

  4. 1 minute ago, royiv said:

    Did you miss the part where he’s moving from Singapore? I don’t think housing prices in London will phase him.

    Yeah, saw that.  Still, there's a range.   We had a friend living in Singapore for a while, and she lived in a pretty small cube (nice cube....but still small).  Rents in both places (central city) are pretty similar.

  5. Housing ain't cheap.  Find someplace that is on a decent transport line (tube or bus) that gets you to work with a relatively low amount of hassle. E.G., my daughter lives in Hackney - the Mildmay line from Hackney Central to Camden Road will get you there in 25 minutes.

    You single?  If so, you've got lots of options for where to live.  But truly, look at bus and tube routes, and then pick your place based on that.  Depending on budget, there are plenty of small flats, or if you're up for a co-living deal (private room and en suite, shared kitchen and common area), there are a lot of those that are plenty nice.

    And honestly, once you get out of classic "central London," the rest of London living isn't as expensive as people often think (my daughter bitches about it, but that's because she's young and poor working her first job -- everything's "expensive" when you are making entry-level money).

  6. 2 minutes ago, immamac said:

    Good-faith has no enforcement mechanism and is abused by those with weak character or bad intent. 

    And to address this separately, it matches with my last point above.  Good-faith has a HUGE enforcement mechanism.  That mechanism is "if I follow the rules, and avoid hurting others, then I contribute to a system and order where others will follow the rules, and avoid hurting me."  What we often think of as altruism can and often does serve a selfish purpose.  It's the "today you, tomorrow me" ethos.

    As a lawyer, I see it plainly.  When opposing counsel asks if I will agree to an extension for him to respond to my discovery requests, I almost always quickly agree.  Sure, because "don't be a dick for no reason" is part of our rules.  But also, I act that way because I want other lawyers to treat me the same; when I call and ask for an extension, I want them to say "sure, Brisket, you got it."

    I use the term "gentlemen's agreement" for a reason.  Ordered society has rules -- some of them are unwritten, apply in certain classes, etc.  "There are some things a gentleman simply doesn't do."  In the end, that's all any set of rules is: a mutual agreement, that brings mutual benefit.  One person/side opting out of those rules may bring a temporary advantage to that side....but it won't last.  If you decide that stealing needs to be the new order of the day, then you're ahead of the curve, and will probably be able to steal some good shit.  But once your way of thinking prevails....then you best sleep with one eye open, because someone is now coming to steal all YOUR shit, including the shit you stole from someone else.  

    These aren't deep thoughts.  They're baseline principles of moral philosophy.  And we have a whole segment of society thinking that they've figured out a loophole or some shit.  They haven't.  They're just breaking everything, and all of us - including them - are going to feel the consequences.

  7. Just now, immamac said:

    Good-faith has no enforcement mechanism and is abused by those with weak character or bad intent. 

    The main issue plaguing us right now is avarice. I forget who, but someone put an excerpt from one of the founding fathers calling out the dangers of it. I honestly didn't know what it meant and looked it up and it clicked. 

    Definition of avarice: "The desire for wealth and possessions, sometimes to the point of hoarding or being miserly. It often involves a strong desire to accumulate and keep what one has, rather than sharing or using it." 

    Just my opinion this is why you see a breakdown in the fabric of society. Everyone is better off than they have ever been and somehow there is an insatiable need for more. 

    The irony of me posting a TLDR, but here it is: a functioning society has its selfishness and its empathy in some sort of healthy balance.  When selfishness overwhelms empathy, here we are.

    The irony is that empathy - things like not stealing someone else's stuff - actually serves selfish ends.  Because it builds a society where I don't steal your stuff....and you don't steal MY stuff.

  8. 4 hours ago, HenryJames said:

     

    That is a shitty piece, because of verb tense.  There's no "are learning."  It's "have learned."  The template is out there, it has been since early in his first term.

    He runs one basic play.  And defensive coordinator worth a shit long ago figured out how to counter it.  He runs it three times, the defense stands firm, h gets a half yard, declares that he scored a touchdown, and walks off the field raising his fist in triumph.  Repeat ad infinitum.  

  9. 12 hours ago, Sawbonz said:

    image.jpeg.89028c3d9b2241ad7930a5c6c5515e2f.jpeg

    I know this is funny, and ironic, and all that stuff....but it's also spot-on.  Because in the end, that's all any laws, rules, etc. are.  Because at their foundation, they rely on one thing: good-faith.

    The strength of the Rules of Professional Conduct is not really the enforcement mechanisms behind them.  The strength of the Rules is 1) the expectation that most all lawyers will follow them, and 2) the good-faith belief in those rules and the effort attorneys make to actually follow them.  As a result, 99% or some similar percentage of lawyers act within those rules.  And we don't do so because we fear losing our license (I mean, we don't want to lose our license, for sure).  We follow the Rules because they are good, and when we all follow them, they make our profession, the justice system, and our society better.

    Our laws are no different.  I expect that most of y'all generally follow the law (let's leave out traffic laws and laws against smoking dope with your mistress and such).  Is the reason that you don't murder or steal because you are afraid of the enforcement mechanism of prison, or is it because you have a moral compass of some sort?  That is, you don't steal because you believe that stealing is wrong, or you at least believe that we have a better society when we all operate under a common code that stealing is wrong.

    That's good faith.  That's a reflection of the fact that ALL rules are, at their foundation, simply a "gentlemen's agreement."  Their strength is not in their enforcement mechanism (yes, having such a mechanism emphasizes that the rules are a real thing).  Because once it gets to enforcement, the rule has failed.  And importantly, if enough people (and the critical mass isn't a majority...it's much, much smaller....think 3%) decide that the rules aren't for them, and they are just going to disregard them, then the whole fucking system breaks down.  A society can't have an enforcement mechanism sufficient to handle more than 1-2% of people opting out of the law or rules.  

    This is back to what I've been warning about on this board, in my life, at Bar presentations, etc. for a decade now: the Rule of Law is just an agreement.  And if enough people opt out of that agreement, then it is dissolved.  Enforcement won't and can't fix it.  The fix is....don't opt out of the Rule of Law.

    That goes for society.  It goes for the legal profession.  It goes for everyone and everything.  So, Bozo can lament that lawyers don't do enough to enforce against bad lawyers.  In doing so, he sounds like a good "tough on crime" Republican, saying that we just need more prisons.  No.  The only thing that will really have any effect is....we need fewer bad lawyers.  We need fewer people who are good with committing crimes.  Sure, enforcement is a thing, it should exist, it should be used, and it can surely be reformed, made more robust, etc. in any number of contexts.  But the reason that we're seeing members of the legal profession behaving badly and against the Republic is because . . . a critical mass of society has chosen to do and support the same.

    We had a gentlemen's agreement to operate under objective rules.  A particular segment of society, our political class, our legal profession, etc., have chosen to opt out of that agreement.  They have simply decided that they are no longer going to follow it.  Once that happens....it's over.  No amount of rule-based enforcement will make a shit.  Because opting out of the Rule of Law is necessarily opting into Rule of the Boot and Gun.  Once that's done, then the only curative mechanism is opposing Boots and Guns.  It's a stupid, self-destructive path to follow.  But, it's the path that a critical mass has chosen, so that path is our destiny.  You can try to pretend the old order still exists, matters, and can solve things.  But you're just pretending.  

  10. Nonnas.  A cute little movie about an Italian American guy who opens a restaurant on Staten Island with Italian nonnas as chefs.  It’s got a nice cast like Lorraine Branco and Linda Bartalini, but it’s really a love story to Italian American families and their food.  

    Linda Cardellini…who is an all-timer.
    And Susan Sarandon…who is a hall-of-famer.
    Saw it last night, liked it. I love food and family stuff, though.
  11. Oh this means he's definitely been filmed having sex with a cow while a transvestite Filipino midget fingered his butthole.  

    That’s fucking sick.
    They’re called “little people,” asshole.
  12. An article about how the federal courts can enforce their orders. https://www.justsecurity.org/113218/federal-courts-enforce-orders-without-marshals/
    This might be how the shooting starts.

    ^^^
    This.
    And for those of us wondering how we could serve the needs of the constitution and republic (non lawyers), that might end up being the way, if it comes to that.
    Especially any of y’all with military experience and a willingness to use it. The executive can co-opt people to be its militia. The judiciary can do the same, and legally. And yes, it may involve an armed confrontation with rogue US govt officials.
    That’s absolutely on the table nowadays.
  13. 50 minutes ago, Larry T. Spider said:

    However nobody really thinks it’s making our kids smarter, our parents happier, or our teachers more likely to stay in the profession. 

    Because....and this is super, super important to understand in Texas, 2025....NONE of those things are the goal of state leadership.

    Killing all public education.  That is the singular goal of our state leadership.  A future generation of malleable drones and slaves is the dream, and they are very close to achieving it.

  14. 2 minutes ago, MissingInAction said:

    If any of you know any young people trying to break into tech tell them to get certifications in low voltage cabling through BCSE. I had 6 certs through them for copper, fiber, splicing, end point termination, and safety.

    Its comes down to about 12 weeks of school. Six classroom and six lab.

    It's hard work but they'll make a fuck ton of money. If my body wasn't shattered I'd still be doing it.

    MIA, seen below, about to "fix the cable"....

    artworks-000113356116-1ayx8m-t500x500.jp

  15. 6 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

    A couple of months ago my mother randomly ranted about how unfair it is that Pete Rose is not in the Hall of Fame.  I was taken aback, as I didn't know anyone had thought about Pete Rose in years.  Finding out it's a MAGA thing makes SO MUCH sense now.

    Pete Rose: by all accounts, an epic asshole, treated other people like shit, broke one of the foundational rules of integrity of the game, almost certainly committed statutory rape.....shit, a list of accomplishments like that makes him a shoo-in for the MAGA Medal of Honor.

  16. 19 minutes ago, Satchel said:

    The corporatists are desperately trying to hold on to power. This is a shitty move:

    https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dnc-subcommittee-recommends-redoing-vice-chair-elections-putting/story?id=121751231

     

    The Democratic National Committee's Credentials subcommittee has recommended that the party should once again hold vice-chair elections over complaints that there were issues with how the balloting was conducted -- a move that places its vice chairs David Hogg and Malcolm Kenyatta in jeopardy of losing their positions.

    The recommendation, made after the committee's vote on Monday, comes after the party-wide officer races in February. The subcommittee's deliberations were based on a challenge filed by vice chair candidate Kalyn Free on how the election was conducted.

    Free's counsel argued that the way some of the voting was conducted allowed Hogg and Kenyatta to unfairly receive more votes than Free, who also sought a vice-chair role.

    If you think that the MAGA GQP is the greatest threat the Republic has faced since the Civil War (and you'd be right about that), what is your most-likely-to-succeed path at derailing it?

    1)  Contribute your time and money to the Democratic party, counting on it to get its shit together and mount an effective opposition?

    2) Join the Republican party, hoping and working to establish/build a counter-movement within the party to overtake the MAGA movement?

     

    At this point, I'm thinking the smart money is on option 2).  I mean, neither will work, but 2) has a much higher chance (think 5% chance vs. 1% chance).  

  17. 3 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

    IMG_4570.thumb.png.103aaa152b7e409801b2e98483ffd02f.png

    Art. Of. The. Deal.

    He is the poster child for "'good' is the sum of all the bad things that didn't happen."  He creates a situation in which near-infinite bad things could happen.  Then, he backs away from the situation that he created, points out that most (but not all) of the bad things that COULD have happened DIDN'T happen....and says "see, what a gripping victory I have delivered!"

  18. 1 minute ago, Post Oak said:

     

    Cons: will cost the state billions, cost each individual ratepayer hundreds, and increase the chance of outages.

    Pros: will make some campaign contributors, including a couple of very specific O&G types, lots of money.

     

    Yeah....everyone here knows that SAILS through, either this session or the next.

  19. 16 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

    "Money Account" might be what breaks me.

    Brought to you by the folks who will soon turn all educational institutions into The Donald Trump Center for Kids Who Can't Read Good and Who Wanna Learn to Do Other Stuff Good Too.

  20. 5 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

    Regarded.  Also probably sinister.  Some DOJ political hack, although a long-term one, Paul Perkins, appointed acting Register of Copyrights.

    Although it's an obscure position, the Register is usually an accomplished copyright scholar with industry experience of one form or another in the media world, so practical experience with both content authors and content publishers/distributors.

    NO DEI!  MERIT-BASED HIRES ONLY!!!!

    Jesus.  We live in the fucking upside-down.

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.