Jump to content

Eskimohorn

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    4287
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Eskimohorn

  1. Disagree. S2 had some issues (as noted above), but the quality across the board in every department was better than S4
    S4 feels like an HBO Max show rather than a Sunday night HBO headliner in terms of quality 

    There was some quality setup and atmosphere in early episodes of S4, with Jodie Foster bringing the heat with a masterclass in expletive ranting.

    Then her character turned dumb, unzipped her fly with info about the mining corp, got bitch-slapped by them, changed her mind, then another character abruptly changes directions by murdering everyone.

    Think they ran out of episodes to tell this story after realizing they put too much atmosphere and back story in the first couple. Now I dont care but I was watching intently before everything unraveled and dead ended.

    Now the duo is hiding another homicide then they think they’re gonna find the killer and bring them to justice? And who’s gonna do this when the mining company controls Alaska and gets away with murder? So what if you find something down there?

    s2 started slow, suffered greatly from every VV and Kelly Reilly scene (unwatchable), and was a dud outside of a few set pieces.
  2. There were at least two people just standing there filming. I'm assuming neither of them were seriously injured. Is it too much to ask for those 2 to fucking do something instead of trying to get tiktok views?
    Also - it doesn't seem like it was an "attacker". It's not like it was a live shooter. 

    zTejas is action star Jason Statham

    giphy.gif
  3. That actually is exactly what it says. A similarly tortured reading as your Second Amendment interpretation if applied to the First Amendment would mean that the right to peaceably assemble is only protected if the group is petitioning the government. 

    I dont see the connection. In context, militia is like 50% of the text. You have to revise its interpretation to make it relevant and do some mental gymnastics to apply it to more circumstances than having rights to carry for service in militias and being able to be trained and outfitted (well-regulated) without impediment by the government.

    Phrases have meaning. i.e - I enjoyed your mom’s company…in bed. Remove “in bed”. That phrase drastically changes and limits what it means. The 2nd amendment has an “in bed” qualifier both literally and in framers intent.

    I’m no lawdog, but I’m more inclined to side with 1800-1990 scotus over Rehnquist/Roberts courts on gun regulation (aside from the weird decisions that cropped up).

    IMO, 2nd amendment was redefined at the close of the 20th century by rightwing activists. How is that even debateable?
  4. Back then in Oklahoma, 50 looked like 80, but also agree that from an artistic and authenticity standpoint, Leo and DeNiro were too old. But it probably would not have been greenlit for theatrical release without them.

    Not to fanboy too much, but PTA or Coens would have nailed an adaptation revolving around the Osage undercover work, which could have weaved FBI and Osage seamlessly.

    It would have been true crime, but have heart and not have glorified the US govt involvement, or put glamorous actors portraying evil characters.

    And it might have been difficult, but I was surprised Burkhart reveal was so early. But Scorsese took a different path and it worked in its own way.

  5. But it's not the right thing to do. The language of the 2nd Amendment in no way limits protected firearm use to militias. It basically says in modern message board English "Because access to firearms is required to organize a militia and being able to organize a militia is so fucking important, you can't make any laws limiting access to firearms."
    Yes it's antiquated as hell and should be repealed, but that's what it says.

    But the 2nd amendment doesnt say that, that wasn’t the original intent, and prior to 1990 and for 200 years thats not how courts interpreted it. We banned the shit out of guns, with broader authority given to States.

    Congress can set the number of SCOTUS seats. Should democrats secure control over both bodies, they should ignore the gentlemen’s agreement and use their authority to set the number of seats. There is no unspoken rules about these things anymore. And it’s not even unethical. It’s authority they have.

    But it’s largely academic, If we talking moving our country to being a functional democracy, there’s about a dozen major things that need to change.
    • Hook 'Em 1
  6. the "Or we get" is doing a lot of work there. You "get" judges when they die, retire or you blackmail them into retirement. I don't know how you can adjust that without appearing to be especially political with the courts. FDR tried to stack the courts but he was rebuffed and he was a really popular POTUS. 
    Maybe you could get some consensus around putting term limits on SCOTUS judges which would mean every president could start their term by appointing 2 judges but I think you would run the risk of that getting struck down by SCOTUS which would put everyone in an awkward bind. 

    It would be far easier to have Congress use their authority to pack courts than repeal 2nd amendment. Or same difference.
  7. Of course not. That's not how government works. The only way to fix it is for congress to pass constitutional amendments with super majorities and for states to adopt or to gain a majority on the supreme court. The Heler decision takes the ability away from almost everyone to actually fix the problem.

    Or, we get judges on the supreme court who correctly (or more correctly) interpret the 2nd amendment as it was for 200 years. We banned the shit out of weapons of war at the state and federal level for the longest time.

    The 2nd amendment permitted communities to raise militias with adequate arms without obstruction from a central government. Militias are codified in the Constitution, even to repel armed insurrections when called. The federalist papers outlined this need, so citizens could defend themselves from “Natives, Foreign Invaders, and Armed Factions.”

    But, militias were made irrelevant with the need for a professional standing army and reserve guards. Alas, the right wingers have redefined this right as a right to open carry and get any weapon, whether the person is properly trained and/or willing to serve to protect their community and be accountable.
    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Haha 1
    • Rage+1 1
  8. Texas Tech Home Football Schedules - The History and Quality Run Deep
    2024
    Abilene Christian (1st meeting)
    North Texas (6th meeting)
    Arizona State (5th meeting)
    Cincinnati (2nd meeting)
    Baylor (81st meeting)
    Colorado (11th meeting)
    West Virginia (14th meeting)
    2025
    Arkansas Pine-Bluff (1st meeting)
    Oregon State (2nd meeting)
    BYU (3rd meeting)
    Oklahoma State (51st meeting)
    Kansas (26th meeting) 
    UCF (2nd meeting)

    giphy.gif
  9. the at&t commercials were already annoying and terrible, but now that lilly has run the gamut of showing off her body for clicks amd atte ruin, then getting fat and hiding her body behind behind counters and shit in every ad, then trying to shame people for noticing that she got fat and made the decision to hide her body, only to lose the weight, get some work done on her face, and now once again feature her full body in every ad makes me hate the ads that much more. she wanted the attention when she was hot, then she tried to shake people for giving her attention, and now she’s asking for the attention again. fuck off lilly.
    oh yeah, tourney time coming up, which means we’ll be seeing lilly (assuming she’s not fat and hiding behind stuff again) about 15-20x a day again. can’t wait.

    I understand your sentiments but no one deserves online and in-person creeps, including but not limited to full-on pervs, and implicit and explicit threats of violence and rape.

    This is what women have to deal with. Know two women that received these types of threats, for having the temerity to express their opinions online as subject-matter experts in technology and football.
    • Hook 'Em 1
  10. Seriously, if I got a 17-year sentence like Proud Boys idiot Joe Biggs, I would spend every day wondering how I allowed myself to get sucked into such a ridiculous situation. Of course, he may be too stupid to process information. 17 years (which may be reduced) is an incredibly long time.

    Sucked in? He was the ring leader for Trump’s version of the brown shirts. He was standing by until they announced the date to disrupt the peaceful transition of power.
    • Hook 'Em 2
  11. When these guys showed up I was done with Star Wars.
    It became a Muppet movie for kids.

    giphy.gif
    Remember me, you do not

    giphy.gif

    Yeah, I can see how that would be annoying.

    In 1983, there werent any mofos complaining about ewoks in ROTJ in a movie trilogy that featured tons of little people in outfits.

    After the internet was invented, people heard about the change from Wookies to Ewoks, reflected on the prequels, and started that shit.
    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
  12. I am really coming around to the idea that Trump needs to remain alive for the next 10 months.  Haley would probably beat Biden.  I doubt DeSantis or Vivek could, but Haley might be able to do it. But Biden will destroy Trump, especially now that Republicans refuse to work with him on closing the border. 

    I’d take a Haley victory right now over any double digit % chance dotard regains presidency. I detest her politics but am more confident she’s not a Rapture candidate or the last President. Biden is not a strong incumbent and is vulnerable to say the least.
    • Hook 'Em 2
  13. I'm sure all the people who thought it was hilarious that time Biden lost his balance on a bike will also find it hilarious when Dotard starts falling all the time. 

    He works 20 hours a day, is making deals with dozens of foreign countries to make America great, still gets 36 holes in, and is banging a supermodel. With any luck he’s got the Nobel Prize already.
    • Haha 1
  14. Yea to the detriment of the entire tone and gravitas of the movie, in this instance. 

    The poison apple scene occurred in part of the movie showing a young physicist trying to find his calling and he was flailing.

    It was later used to establish scenes with Nelson Bohr (Branaugh). The poison apple was used here at various points to set up various ethical questions about Opp, including how could a man make a bomb that could destroy the world.

    And you’re worrying about the one time he poisoned an apple for one man?
×
×
  • Create New...