Jump to content

Brisketexan

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    54609
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    331

Everything posted by Brisketexan

  1. Does make you wonder how many of the brave MAGA second amendment warriors against govt overreach will come to her defense when the regime comes for her. What’s that? Not a single fucking one will? Yeah…that’s what we all knew.
  2. Saw this elsewhere: we’re getting shitty fascism; the trains don’t even run on time because we don’t have any damned trains.
  3. Excellent call. And we actually love Din Tai Fung.
  4. Fair. And honestly, that would be more transparent than the use of government forces to suppress voters in Dem areas.
  5. It's America 2025. These idiots would pour some Tide Pods on top and wonder why it didn't work.
  6. I mean, "pick the town with good-time stores and fried chicken joints" woulda been persuasive to 1998 Brisket. And 2025 Brisket.
  7. Is it insanely stupid and evil? Yes? Then in this timeline, of course it's real.
  8. You become the dominant power structure in the country, beholden to no laws, rules, or norms? I mean, if we're learning from current circumstances.
  9. It's like you never met these famous asian pilots: Yeah, yeah. We're all going to hell. Bonus: we're already there.
  10. You mean…pardon them, right, governor?
  11. Between our DA's likelihood of botching the prosecution of these assholes...and our governor's likelihood of pardoning them...I wouldn't be counting on justice being done.
  12. Well, being that Mary's actual name was Maryam and Joseph's was Yosef.....then......
  13. Yet....old Don will never, ever, ever get the connection between his two posts. These are idiots who praise the sky for dishing out rainstorms, then bitch about getting wet.
  14. So, my thought was "boycotting ABC advertisers, and letting them know, might be more effective." Then, I googled a list of ABC advertisers. And man, it explains why legacy media is in the shitter. Seems like 2/3 of the ads are for prescription drugs (none of which I use). Then there's a fair amount of PI lawyers. Again, I don't use them. Auto manufacturers....I'm not buying any cars anytime soon. Some bigger outfits, like Verizon and whatnot. But goddamn. Even looking for something I COULD boycott is a chore. That can't be good for the ad sales department. Shit, if you banned prescription drug advertising, I'm pretty sure every legacy broadcast company would go tits-up the next day.
  15. Yep. I read the full context of his discussion. The end-point being, use violence, all the way up to lethal force. Against -- his word -- "foreigners." Doesn't matter who they are, why they are there, anything. Child fleeing violence? Whip 'em. There's literally nothing that MAGAs won't excuse, because the truth is, THEY LIKE IT. I'm glad that you are so foolishly honest about your beliefs. Really pulls back the curtain on how y'all think and about your purported "Christianity." I remember well, in the Gospel of Trump, how Jesus said "but when the foreigner shows up, start with non-lethal force (rubber bullets, tear gas), and escalate to lethal force. It's absolutely cool if you whip the foreigner." Yep, I'm looking for a church where we can say that in some sort of prayer of affirmation. Sad thing is, I'm sure I could find quite a few.
  16. @Enchubben...I guess I don't "understand context" here, right?
  17. I have a real simple question for the MAGAs. And show you have some balls and actually answer it now. If Trump suspends all or part of the 2026 midterm elections, and/or the 2028 presidential election, will you (a) be fine with it, (b) say you're not fine with it, but still support the admin, or (c) conclude that's out-of-bounds, and fully oppose the move, including no longer supporting the administration that ended elections in America? It's actually important that you go on the record, and you know it is.....because we're rapidly moving to the point where that action is more likely than not to take place.
  18. You mean "whataboutism, built on a platform of false equivalency." For example, they respond to coercive threats against ABC's very licensure by saying "whatabout when the Biden admin pressured FB to remove disinformation during COVID??????" Those are not equivalent things (per Cornell law's nice summary of First Amendment law on such matters): So, first, they state a false equivalency, THEN use it to bolster the tu quoque logical fallacy. A fallacy on top of a fallacy. It's akin to justifying the crime of murder by saying "the other guy is a criminal too" when all he did was jaywalk. Except in this case, the action they are pointing to doesn't even violate the law. They are effectively saying their action of murder is okay because one time, some other guy said "man, I wish that dude would just die already." There is no intellectual honesty on the right. None. It's amazing to see. From William F. Buckley to....fucking this shit.
  19. Well, see, that's news they don't want to hear. They want to do their "la la la I can't hear you!" routine whenever absolutely naked fascist shit happens (by the way, "stuff that is actually happening" is called....wait for it...."news.")
  20. Joe Rogan today:
  21. FIF accuracy. Utterly ignore the fucking TORRENT of right-wing rage, countless death threats, calls for political violence, extermination, exile, etc., and calls to imprison/eliminate the entire political opposition, in favor of focusing on....I don't even fucking understand what he's focusing on. He's a giant piece of shit, that's all that can be focused on.
  22. Ahh yes, back to the the one-two punch of the false equivalency logical fallacy (the Biden admin working to persuade FB = the Trump admin threat to punish ABC) AND the tu quoque logical fallacy built on the bedrock of false equivalency. Your execution is flawless. Well-done.
  23. I'll suggest that the average prisoner is way more "redeemable" than the average MAGA. Mostly because a higher percentage of prisoners would concede that their criminal action was wrong. ZERO MAGAs would so concede.
  24. Here is how. The Cornell Law School has a great commentary site on the Constitution, including the First Amendment, which does a good job of summarizing the point: Open threats were made by the chair of the FCC. I expect that we'll also find that similar, stronger statements were sent to ABC privately. Conveying a threat of adverse government action to punish speech is 100% unconstitutional. Yet, you support and defend it still.
  25. You are answering the wrong question. Did the Biden admin threaten to use the full force and power of the US government to shut down FB altogether if it did not yield to the admin's desires? There's a rather huge difference between that, and simply making the ask, even in the form of impassioned and repeated entreaties. That's it. That's the question. AND, by the way, if the facts reveal that's what the Biden admin actually did, it would be wrong and I would oppose it completely. Because my support of this nation and the Constitution is not contingent on who I voted for or which viewpoint I support. I will not be an adherent of the "tu quoque" logical fallacy, which is apparently a bedrock principle in MAGAland: attribute some misconduct to the Biden admin, and use it to justify, excuse, and allow any and all misconduct by the Trump admin. Wrong is wrong. That's the difference between y'all and the rest of us.
×
×
  • Create New...