Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, hobbes2702 said:

Doesn’t matter how many political parties, if you support fascism you’ll find a way to support fascism. 

You are correct, but these people couldn't just paint you as the singular other side of the coin if there were more political parties. 

Posted
9 minutes ago, Red Five said:

I pay no attention to the NFL, but I’m pretty sure Cousins isn’t a HOF QB.

For your information, Cousins led the league last year...in both interceptions and fumbles.

 

  • Haha 2
Posted
2 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

MAGA baby !!!! f those socialist libs !!!!!!

more lib tears !!!

 

IMG_3266.jpeg

What is an intelligent person supposed to take from this map?  I'm sure you're trying to make some point here, but I'm not sure exactly what it is?

  • Fuck You 12
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, RockwallJim said:

What is an intelligent person supposed to take from this map?  I'm sure you're trying to make some point here, but I'm not sure exactly what it is?

I like to think of myself as a marginally intelligent person. So here is my shot:

I think the point is is that blue states generally contribute to DC while the red states are generally takers I think. Therefore the Republicans are the real socialists or maybe that Republicans will suffer more from MAGA's actions so it will be them who will be crying.

Something like that.

Edited by Valmy77
  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

I think the point is is that blue states generally contribute to DC while the red states are generally takers I think.

The joke's on you, those states are only red or green, no blue.

  • Haha 7
Posted
1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

The joke's on you, those states are only red or green, no blue.

Damn. Maybe I am not marginally intelligent after all.

  • Haha 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Valmy77 said:

I like to think of myself as a marginally intelligent person. So here is my shot:

I think the point is is that blue states generally contribute to DC while the red states are generally takers I think. Therefore the Republicans are the real socialists or maybe that Republicans will suffer more from MAGA's actions so it will be them who will by crying.

Something like that.

Even though on this map the 2 largest "electoral points to Trump States" are in the column with net dollars towards DC as were 3 others....for a total of 5 states.. while there was the exact same number, 5, of "electoral points to Harris States" that were net dollars from DC.  Seems this map (to an intelligent person) displays nearly zero correlation.   BUT NEVER LET FACTS GET IN THE WAY OF A GOOD STORY, RIGHT?

  • Fuck You 7
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, RockwallJim said:

Even though on this map the 2 largest "electoral points to Trump States" are in the column with net dollars towards DC as were 3 others....for a total of 5 states.. while there was the exact same number, 5, of "electoral points to Harris States" that were net dollars from DC.  Seems this map (to an intelligent person) displays nearly zero correlation.   BUT NEVER LET FACTS GET IN THE WAY OF A GOOD STORY, RIGHT?

That is all true yet the correlation seems pretty clear even for the marginally intelligent.

And Michigan, Wisconsin, and Nevada may have just barely gone for Trump in 2024, but are hardly "red" states. They are swing states that can go either way. Two have Democratic governors. So I think you are intentionally obtuse. The only two true red states that are contributors to DC are Florida and Texas. That's it.

Edited by Valmy77
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
8 hours ago, BevoAbyss said:

Does not matter. 

The full-on 100% fascist takeover is underway and succeeding. The legacy & mainstream media have completely failed us and are doing next-to-nothing to stop it. Hell, they can't even call "fascism" what it is: FASCISM.  

The fascism has been obvious since Trump-MAGA appeared on the scene, if not much sooner. (First table is from 2023, slightly modified to include Project 2025). 

And many posters/law dogs repeatedly told us that the "Wheels of Justice" move slowly, but inexorably to justice. 

I posted the Nazi-MAGA table in 2024 and was told I was wrong. I am sure some posters will soon say it again.

We have a huge percentage of this country (perhaps 80-95%) who simply do not fully grasp what is unfolding before their eyes. 

Legacy Failure.jpg

NAZI MAGA 2024.jpg

Interesting chart, although written with a very marginal grasp on facts or reality.   Allow me to pick this apart point by point.   Let's begin with "throngs of racist fascist christians".  Are you under the impression that Nazism had christianity as a core tenant of that political movement?

  • Fuck You 12
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Valmy77 said:

That is all true yet the correlation seems pretty clear even for the marginally intelligent.

And Michigan, Wisconsin, and Nevada may have just barely gone for Trump in 2024, but are hardly "red" states. They are swing states that can go either way. Two have Democratic governors. So I think you are intentionally obtuse. The only two true red states that are contributors to DC are Florida and Texas. That's it.

Ok, great.  So now we are subdividing states by truly red, kinda red, kinda blue and truly blue?  Are we also going to create a purple state group? It appears you are trying to now shift from a statistical conversation to a nuanced conversation.  

  • Fuck You 7
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, RockwallJim said:

Even though on this map the 2 largest "electoral points to Trump States" are in the column with net dollars towards DC as were 3 others....for a total of 5 states.. while there was the exact same number, 5, of "electoral points to Harris States" that were net dollars from DC.  Seems this map (to an intelligent person) displays nearly zero correlation.   BUT NEVER LET FACTS GET IN THE WAY OF A GOOD STORY, RIGHT?

Or you could look at that map and infer that there are a lot of people out there that vote against their own self interests. Let’s take West Virginia as an example. In the most recent election, voters in West Virginia went for Trump 70/30. West Virginia is the second most federally dependent state in the union. Trump ran on a platform of slashing government jobs and spending on federal programs so those cuts would hit West Virginians hard, yet they overwhelmingly voted for the platform. 

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, royiv said:

Or you could look at that map and infer that there are a lot of people out there that vote against their own self interests. Let’s take West Virginia as an example. In the most recent election, voters in West Virginia went for Trump 70/30. West Virginia is the second most federally dependent state in the union. Trump ran on a platform of slashing government jobs and spending on federal programs so those cuts would hit West Virginians hard, yet they overwhelmingly voted for the platform. 

Got it.  So the idea is now we lump voters into a monolith on a state by state basis and project how, from behind our computers the 'why' of the way each person votes?  Seems like a great idea.

  • Fuck You 6
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
Just now, RockwallJim said:

Got it.  So the idea is now we lump voters into a monolith on a state by state basis and project how, from behind our computers the 'why' of the way each person votes?  Seems like a great idea.

What are you blathering about? It’s pretty well understood that a whole lot of people vote against their own best interests. This isn’t some new phenomenon.

Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, RockwallJim said:

Ok, great.  So now we are subdividing states by truly red, kinda red, kinda blue and truly blue?  Are we also going to create a purple state group? It appears you are trying to now shift from a statistical conversation to a nuanced conversation.  

I was not aware purple states did not exist. I thought we had been talking about them forever. The swing states. Are you accusing me of making up this concept? You kidding me? This is why I think you are playing stupid or being intentionally obtuse

And I am not shifting anything. I was just explaining the point the map was trying to make. You didn't use any statistics besides going "hey there are five here vs five here" I didn't see a statistical breakdown of Democratic states versus Republican states.

And just because I find the point the map is trying to make doesn't mean I find it very convincing. Every single state is very divided into Republican voting areas versus Democrat voting areas. If we were really going to analyze this concept from a serious perspective we would probably have to break it down by county. But that is rather stupid. It isn't a joke or point that serious that deserves this kind of obsessive analysis. Most farming areas get federal subsidies, and most farming areas vote Republican so...that's a thing. For whatever that's worth.

And we have kind of weird things like Alaska, which has tons of natural resources and a small population, being presented as a big taker of federal money. But it is probably true in a technical sense, as there are lots of federal lands there. Similarly Hawai'i has a lot of military bases and so forth. 

I don't think the map means that much, but at least I am smart enough to understand the point being made.

Edited by Valmy77
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, royiv said:

What are you blathering about? It’s pretty well understood that a whole lot of people vote against their own best interests. This isn’t some new phenomenon.

First off, I haven't blathered once. I also don't think I ever brought up anybody voting for or against their interests.  What I brought up was the reductive nature of that map and the fact it doesn't nearly present the 'gotcha moment' they thought it did.   Which is why I asked what exactly the point of it was?

  • Fuck You 5
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
Just now, Valmy77 said:

I was not aware purple states did not exist. I thought we had been talking about them forever. The swing states. Are you accusing me of making up this concept? You kidding me? This is why I think you are playing stupid or being intentionally obtuse

And I am not shifting anything. I was just explaining the point the map was trying to make. You didn't use any statistics besides going "hey there are five here vs five here" I didn't see a statistical breakdown of Democratic states versus Republican states.

And just because I find the point the map is trying to make doesn't mean I find it very convincing. Every single state is very divided into Republican voting areas versus Democrat voting areas. If we were really going to analyze this concept from a serious perspective we would probably have to break it down by county. But that is rather stupid. It isn't a joke or point that serious that deserves this kind of obsessive analysis. Most farming areas get federal subsidies, and most farming areas vote Republican so...that's a thing. For whatever that's worth.

And we have kind of weird things like Alaska, which has tons of natural resources and a small population, being presented as a big taker of federal money. But it is probably true in a technical sense, as there are lots of federal lands there. Similarly Hawai'i has a lot of military bases and so forth. 

I don't think the map means that much, but at least I am smart enough to understand that point being made.

Well, we can agree to disagree then.  I think that map, at best, was an attempt to push a narrative that doesn't match reality...especially when taking into account (as you've stated) the razor thin margins of voting within each state.  I think if you weighted each state's population (texas and florida being #2 & #3) you'd find that map doesn't really prove any theory at all...you know the whole correlation vs causation thing.

  • Fuck You 3
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
1 minute ago, BevoAbyss said:

Nazi Germany was an overwhelmingly Christian nation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nazi_Germany

54% Protestant

41% Catholic

That's 95%.

The chart is correct. There were throngs of racist fascist Christians who supported Hitler. Protestants the most. That's a fact of historical reality. 

Of course, to those who are not brainwashed and know real religious history, this is no real surprise. 

Now, be sure to tell everyone at the Megachurch tomorrow what you learned on the internet. 

 

Could you fucking temper the atheist talking points for a moment?  I've asked you a dozen times and you keep pushing the same shit, because you're a zealot.  There is a SIGNIFICANT faction of Christians who absolutely oppose the fundagelical viewpoint, but your bigotry doesn't let you see it.  Fuck you for being smart enough (allegedly) to grasp the concept but for refusing to even consider it.  You're as bad as the megachurch assholes.  Literally.  (And by that I mean LITERALLY.)

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 2
Posted
4 minutes ago, BevoAbyss said:

Now, be sure to tell everyone at the Megachurch tomorrow what you learned on the internet. 

 

Will everyone stand and slow clap?

Posted
1 hour ago, RockwallJim said:

Even though on this map the 2 largest "electoral points to Trump States" are in the column with net dollars towards DC as were 3 others....for a total of 5 states.. while there was the exact same number, 5, of "electoral points to Harris States" that were net dollars from DC.  Seems this map (to an intelligent person) displays nearly zero correlation.   BUT NEVER LET FACTS GET IN THE WAY OF A GOOD STORY, RIGHT?

You realize that there are 50 states, yes?

Posted
1 hour ago, RockwallJim said:

What is an intelligent person supposed to take from this map?  I'm sure you're trying to make some point here, but I'm not sure exactly what it is?

weird self own because it's pretty obvious what that map is saying. 

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, BevoAbyss said:

I see the apologists showed up on cue. 

Of course, not every Christian supports what's happening in America. But they are not running the show. 

But it seems the majority voted for Trump (see table below).

And the Christian fanatics who voted for Trump are running the show and they are imposing a fascist theocracy. That's a fact. That's Project 2025.

That Nazi German was overwhelmingly Christian is a fact. That does not mean every Christian supported Nazism. But it sure seems like most did. 

Those aren't "atheist talking points." Those are facts. Too bad y'all can't handle those facts because you were raised as Christians.

Adios.

Adios?  Are you turning tail, pussy?

1)  you don't know the actual numbers, you know the fractions.

2) do you actually think it's in our best interests to alienate a huge voting block THAT IS ALIGNED WITH YOU?

 

You have the tactical acumen of my chihuahua, and she's a fucking idiot.

Posted
7 minutes ago, BevoAbyss said:

I see the apologists showed up on cue. 

Of course, not every Christian supports what's happening in America. But they are not running the show. 

But it seems the majority voted for Trump (see table below).

And the Christian fanatics who voted for Trump are running the show and they are imposing a fascist theocracy. That's a fact. That's Project 2025.

That Nazi German was overwhelmingly Christian is a fact. That does not mean every Christian supported Nazism. But it sure seems like most did. 

Too bad y'all can't handle those facts because you were raised as Christians.

Adios.

 

2024 Voters Circled.jpg

"Ladder, pair of pliers, it's a different book"

SK

Posted
7 hours ago, BevoAbyss said:

Anyone here "Stand Up For Science" yesterday?

I took to the streets for the science rally, with cool sign in hand. Saw a boisterous, agitated, happy-dejected crowd of about 1000 people in the metropolis where I attended the really.

-- Crowd size was more than I expected, but tiny considering the million+ population of the metropolis and surrounding burbs.  So, about 1 out of 1000 people attended from the area.

-- Lots of funny and piognant signs. Too many to post here.  

-- Saw many faces that seemed depressed-dejected ... and downright angry.

The speakers (local scientists and local politicians) had their lines. But other than saying "fight back" and "demand a seat at the table," there was not much of a plan.

Two hours of a rally .... then it disappears. 

https://standupforscience2025.org

But, I feel good for going.

And trust me, my ongoing international art project will not ignore what is going down in America.

No fucking way! 

Science.jpg

This is literally the first I heard of it.  Great cause, shitty promotion.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Adios?  Are you turning tail, pussy?

What a badass! Beaver gonna fight me on the church parking lot? 

Lulz.

Across decades, I have written numerous articles and books that state my positions on a variety of topics that involve art, science, philosophy, politics, culture, and sometimes religion and beliefs. In public. With my name on it. Stuff that goes way way way beyond "atheist talking points" or stuff in Surly.

And no publisher or editor or reviewer or commenter has called me a "bigot." Or a "pussy." Only you Beaver. But, then, you're an internet tough guy, I guess.

"Adios" because it is pointless for me to continue. 

4 decades of debating with religious believers and apologists ... many with PhDs in theology at UT and elsewhere ... not merely your local megachurch bible thumper or online poster ... and I still can't fully remember that it is utterly pointless to argue with them. 

Yet, I still sometimes get sucked in. My bad.

There are no amount of facts or logic will convince anyone anything who believes that the Creator of a universe .... with two trillion galaxies and three sextillion stars .... stretching across 93 billion light years .... has a special behavioral plan ...  just for them ... on a fraction of a tiny ball of dirt and water ... orbiting a flaming ball of hydrogen ... in a remote part of a single galaxy.  

I am plainly stupid for arguing at all ... with any religious person in Surly .... or on this planet ... or in this galaxy ... or in this universe.

So, yes, adios. 

 

Edited by BevoAbyss
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 hour ago, RockwallJim said:

Interesting chart, although written with a very marginal grasp on facts or reality.   Allow me to pick this apart point by point.   Let's begin with "throngs of racist fascist christians".  Are you under the impression that Nazism had christianity as a core tenant of that political movement?

I think we found the less than marginally intelligent guy here.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Posted
1 hour ago, RockwallJim said:

Got it.  So the idea is now we lump voters into a monolith on a state by state basis and project how, from behind our computers the 'why' of the way each person votes?  Seems like a great idea.

Do you contest the contention that Trump's voting base is strong in states that take more than they give?

I mean, we're all awestruck at your point by point obfuscation that I bet makes you the smartest guy in the room with your pals, but can you deny the general correlation actually being discussed?

One doesn't have to delve into your poor grasp of history to answer that.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
On 3/5/2025 at 2:58 PM, wood said:

Absolutely 100% fearless. If I ever have to go into battle, I want her fighting beside me.

And not one of those cowards said a thing. Just roast them. EVERY. SINGLE. DAY. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
43 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Adios?  Are you turning tail, pussy?

1)  you don't know the actual numbers, you know the fractions.

2) do you actually think it's in our best interests to alienate a huge voting block THAT IS ALIGNED WITH YOU?

 

You have the tactical acumen of my chihuahua, and she's a fucking idiot.

Get your people back in line.  The rest of us are tired of their hypocritical asses fucking up everything.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
12 minutes ago, BevoAbyss said:

What a badass! Beaver gonna fight me on the church parking lot? 

Lulz.

Across decades, I have written numerous articles and books that state my positions on a variety of topics that involve art, science, philosophy, politics, culture, and sometimes religion and beliefs. In public. With my name on it. Stuff that goes way way way beyond "atheist talking points" or stuff in Surly.

And no publisher or editor or reviewer or commenter has called me a "bigot." Or a "pussy." Only you Beaver. But, then, you're an internet tough guy, I guess.

"Adios" because it is pointless for me to continue. 

4 decades of debating with religious believers and apologists ... many with PhDs in theology at UT and elsewhere ... not merely your local megachurch bible thumper or online poster ... and I still can't fully remember that it is utterly pointless to argue with them. 

Yet, I still sometimes get sucked in. My bad.

There are no amount of facts or logic will convince anyone anything who believes that the Creator of a universe .... with two trillion galaxies and three sextillion stars .... stretching across 93 billion light years .... has a special behavioral plan ...  just for them ... on a fraction of a tiny ball of dirt and water ... orbiting a flaming ball of hydrogen ... in a remote part of a single galaxy.  

I am plainly stupid for arguing at all ... with any religious person in Surly .... or on this planet ... or in this galaxy ... or in this universe.

So, yes, adios. 

 

So you care more about winning the theological argument than you do about the future of America?  What a typical American libertarian/atheist dipshit.  

And you were the one who said "adios", so try not to get too butthurt when somebody takes that as an admission that you can't hang.  I'm very impressed with your articles and books and decades and whatnot.  I'm sorry your editors didn't have the stones to call you what you are, which is a bigot.  Pussy.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Get your people back in line.  The rest of us are tired of their hypocritical asses fucking up everything.

I have no power there.  Work with those of us who are aligned with you.  I can't convince a racist trumpy voter to vote otherwise.  It ain't my crowd, just as it ain't yours.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

you do about the future of America?

If you're the future of America, then we're all fucked. World leaders in name calling!

Just like Trump, the guy you claim to oppose. Look in the mirror dude. You enable his fat ass.

Edited by BevoAbyss
Posted
1 minute ago, BevoAbyss said:

If you're the future of America, then we're all fucked. World leaders in name calling!

Just like Trump, the guy you claim to oppose. Look in the mirror dude. You enable his fat ass.

Yeah, you're the problem, not the solution.  The last time I voted for a Republican was in 1984 when I was snowed by Ronald Reagan's survival of a bullet.  But yeah, I'm your enemy, you fucking fool.

  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, BevoAbyss said:

Nazi Germany was an overwhelmingly Christian nation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nazi_Germany

54% Protestant

41% Catholic

That's 95%.

The chart is correct. There were throngs of racist fascist Christians who supported Hitler. Protestants the most. That's a fact of historical reality. 

Of course, to those who are not brainwashed and know real religious history, this is no real surprise. 

Now, be sure to tell everyone at Sunday School tomorrow what you learned on the internet. 

 

Not what I asked.  What I asked was if Christianity was a tenant of Nazism?  i.e. was it endorsed by the political ideology?

1 hour ago, South Austin said:

I hereby declare you Blather McBlatherton.

I've been called worse.

  • Fuck You 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, RockwallJim said:

Not what I asked.  What I asked was if Christianity was a tenant of Nazism?  i.e. was it endorsed by the political ideology?

I've been called worse.

*tenet

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
  • Haha 2


×
×
  • Create New...