Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, Fastbreak said:

3d6cc9b6efd83852f4bef72ef1143838.png

"Mike Lee, seen here demonstrating the average penis size of a Republican male voter, noting that porn really upsets them because it often 'contains unrealistic depictions of penis size, often larger than 4 inches,' urges for its ban to save GQPers from hurt fee-fees."

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, Underdog said:

How much can one person get if they were to bombard Rep Lee’s X timeline with porn? Asking for a friend, of course. 

How much what?  Money or time in jail?

Posted
2 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

"Mike Lee, seen here demonstrating the average penis size of a Republican male voter, noting that porn really upsets them because it often 'contains unrealistic depictions of penis size, often larger than 4 inches,' urges for its ban to save GQPers from hurt fee-fees."


The measurement between his thumb and forefinger is larger than 4”. 

I understand the humor and all. But for the record that’s more than 4”.

And just so everyone knows where I stand on the issue, I’m against the ban. Full stop.It’s ridiculous.  

But also let’s all establish that the size that the joke would make you think he’s indicating here with his hand is objectively larger than 4”.

Definitely bigger than 4”.

  • Haha 3
Posted

The measurement between his thumb and forefinger is larger than 4”. 
I understand the humor and all. But for the record that’s more than 4”.
And just so everyone knows where I stand on the issue, I’m against the ban. Full stop.It’s ridiculous.  
But also let’s all establish that the size that the joke would make you think he’s indicating here with his hand is objectively larger than 4”.
Definitely bigger than 4”.

I don’t think you know what 4 inches is. Between my thumb and forefinger is 3.8 inches. I wear a l/xl golf glove so not extremely small hands.
Posted
7 minutes ago, Fastbreak said:


I don’t think you know what 4 inches is. Between my thumb and forefinger is 3.8 inches. I wear a l/xl golf glove so not extremely small hands.

Im sorry you’re riddled with Boutonniere deformity and arthritis.

But I do respect your commitment to playing golf and being active.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

isn't pornhub a canadian company? anyway, these people love to shoot themselves in the foot. let's see how quickly action is taken when the porn tap is turned off. lol, dipshits

That’s what I thought when they took it from us Texans.  Instead, it was another example of the slow creep of lost freedoms that the frogs boiling in the pot barely noticed.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
3 hours ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

isn't pornhub a canadian company? anyway, these people love to shoot themselves in the foot. let's see how quickly action is taken when the porn tap is turned off. lol, dipshits

So subject to the new foreign movie tariffs?

Posted
9 minutes ago, Disco Strangler said:

That’s what I thought when they took it from us Texans.  Instead, it was another example of the slow creep of lost freedoms that the frogs boiling in the pot barely noticed.  

Much like Texas, this is all ridiculous. They could never police the amount of pron on the internet.  The only people that were affected by the Texas law are people that never knew how to get it in the first place. 

Posted

If I ate one of those mass produced extruded cheese balls every time these guys (it's almost always the 'red-pilled *guns-eagle-freedom-Jesus-mansplaining' males that do this) tossed around the word "Marx" or "marxist," I would be as orange as the current leader of our country.

It's such a tell, and I highly doubt they could truly connect the dots between economic and government (political) systems and the differences, histories, and nuances of each. But damn, they sure do know how to projectile vomit the talking points.

 

*unashamedly stolen from @Brisketexan

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

If I ate one of those mass produced extruded cheese balls every time these guys (it's almost always the 'red-pilled *guns-eagle-freedom-Jesus-mansplaining' males that do this) tossed around the word "Marx" or "marxist," I would be as orange as the current leader of our country.

It's such a tell, and I highly doubt they could truly connect the dots between economic and government (political) systems and the differences, histories, and nuances of each. But damn, they sure do know how to projectile vomit the talking points.

 

*unashamedly stolen from @Brisketexan

 

 

I doubt they could even tell you what Marx’s first name was.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
On 5/14/2025 at 7:53 AM, Mrs Whiggins said:

If I ate one of those mass produced extruded cheese balls every time these guys (it's almost always the 'red-pilled *guns-eagle-freedom-Jesus-mansplaining' males that do this) tossed around the word "Marx" or "marxist," I would be as orange as the current leader of our country.

It's such a tell, and I highly doubt they could truly connect the dots between economic and government (political) systems and the differences, histories, and nuances of each. But damn, they sure do know how to projectile vomit the talking points.

 

*unashamedly stolen from @Brisketexan

 

 

I stop people who throw shit like that around and ask them to explain what they mean. What do you mean "lgbtq is a marxist construct? please tell what marxism is, how that applies in this scenario, and what historically lead this conclusion?" ok, that's what I want to say. What usually comes out is some version of "you don't know what fucking marxism is, shut the fuck up." lol

Edited by Longhorn_Fan68
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Haha 2
Posted (edited)
On 5/13/2025 at 2:26 PM, speed817 said:

WTF was that?!?!

 

23 hours ago, royiv said:

Ignorance and brain rot.


What’s even worse is that dude is 100% convinced that he’s the smartest person in every room and knows the ‘real’ truth.

Imagine walking the earth thinking so little of everyone else around you or that we’ve all been blinded by some global plot… that the most successful century of any country ever in existence was somehow a failure.

This is why we see the kind of abject cruelty and inhumanity in the conservative movement. Everyone else is irredeemable in their eyes.

Why this has taken hold, idk for certain.

I have my theories, though.

1.) the concentration of wealth and the lack of real wage growth

2.) Civil rights for historically marginalized groups like women, African Americans, and the LGBTQ+ABCD 867309 community has taken away the government sanctioned subjugation and made the white majority fearful of losing their wealth, power, or status

3.) The lack of a shared sacrifice for the country at large. The top tier of folks did not face the same kind of pain from the last wars, recessions, pandemic, etc.

4.) the lack of government accountability due to money being speech and the Supreme Court allowing corruption now.

Edited by Dnaguy
  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, Dnaguy said:

2.) Civil rights for historically marginalized groups like women, African Americans, and the LGBTQ+ABCD 867309 community 

In the end, this is the bulk of it.  And the hell of it is, while it's immoral and shitty, it's not entirely irrational.  Why?  Competition.

In 1950, there was a pool of jobs for people of moderate skill and middling to decent intellect.  Who was the pool of people who could be hired for those jobs?  White males, almost exclusively.  Truly, like 95% of those jobs went to white males, easy peasy.

Then...the civil rights movement (both culturally and legally). Now, black people, hispanics, etc. are the competition.  Think of autoworker jobs.  Surely at the end of WWII, those were 95% or more white males.  By the 1970s, a shitload of those jobs were going to minorities.  But wait, there's more: WOMEN.

Starting in the 1970s, women began entering the workforce - and colleges and universities -- en masse.  So, for even the more "skilled" jobs....white males have to compete with women as well.  Hell, I see this in my profession (legal) and my wife's (ordained, seminary-trained minister).  College enrollment is 60-40 female to male.  When looking at candidates to hire for legal jobs, or a seminary-trained job....the majority of the better candidates are female.

White males didn't get dumber, or less qualified, in general.  It's just that EVERYONE ELSE was, over time, freed from social and legal encumbrances that kept them from openly competing for the work white men had reserved exclusively for them.  There used to be 10 million sweet-spot jobs open every year, and white males - being the only legit pool of candidates - got 95% of them.  Today, those same 10 million jobs are sought by white males, minorities (male and female) and women.  Used to be that white males got 9.5 million of those jobs.  Today, they only get 6 million of those jobs.  From the white male perspective, they just LOST 3.5 million jobs.  And, mathematically, they're not wrong.  

The TLDR version: When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.

To take it to the question, asked in callous and insulting manner as is the Surly way, what are we going to do with our mediocre white males?  Because....relative to where they were 75 years ago, even 40-50 years ago....they're taking it in the shorts.  And they are, in an understandably human way, pissed about it.

 

 

19 minutes ago, speed817 said:

Do they grab the same 25 people every time???

I wish.  The supply of Dunning Kruger "Conservatives" is near limitless.  It is America's greatest natural resource.

Edited by Brisketexan
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
On 5/12/2025 at 12:45 PM, High Plains Drifter said:

 

I we are going to compare test scores and money spent with other countries, we need to account for the fact that other countries' high schools are not de facto minor league sports franchises, meaning other countries don't have sports or spending on sports at their high schools like we do. 

 

 

For the same reason that poor people vote against their own best interest. Watch her video, and change "poor" to "women". Change "vote against their own best interest" to "botox their lips". 

 

 

You didn't have Conservative "Flair". Yes, its a thing. To post there, you have to have conservative "flair" on your posts. You get flair by having a posting history that is "conservative". Moderators will judge your posting history and award flair if they deem you conservative enough. 

No flair= posts deleted. 

Happened to me as well. 

 

a19d8a11-b683-4ae7-83c9-645036caafbb_text.gif.2677fb926fa1dbe0f019bfbccfb1f6d0.gif

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

The guy in the hoodie is a fucking moron. 

Look at that fuckwad's haircut.  And he's wearing a blazer over a hoodie?  And he doesn't know the difference between facts and opinions.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
17 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

In the end, this is the bulk of it.  And the hell of it is, while it's immoral and shitty, it's not entirely irrational.  Why?  Competition.

In 1950, there was a pool of jobs for people of moderate skill and middling to decent intellect.  Who was the pool of people who could be hired for those jobs?  White males, almost exclusively.  Truly, like 95% of those jobs went to white males, easy peasy.

Then...the civil rights movement (both culturally and legally). Now, black people, hispanics, etc. are the competition.  Think of autoworker jobs.  Surely at the end of WWII, those were 95% or more white males.  By the 1970s, a shitload of those jobs were going to minorities.  But wait, there's more: WOMEN.

Starting in the 1970s, women began entering the workforce - and colleges and universities -- en masse.  So, for even the more "skilled" jobs....white males have to compete with women as well.  Hell, I see this in my profession (legal) and my wife's (ordained, seminary-trained minister).  College enrollment is 60-40 female to male.  When looking at candidates to hire for legal jobs, or a seminary-trained job....the majority of the better candidates are female.

 

The pool of competition is significantly larger than this for “white collar” jobs like accounting, software development and QA, and graphic design.

In the 90’s, remote work was still uncommon. For the most part, people lived near their office.

In the 2000’s, remote work became more common. This grew the pool of candidates for a given job exponentially. I could hire someone working halfway around the world for any number of tasks. I worked for a company based in Irvine, CA and had development and QA team members in turkey, argentina, mexico, minnesota, and atlanta. This was never a problem for me as genX because I started my career and got experience competing against a smaller pool of candidates. Back then, jobs were found in the newspaper. This greatly reduced the number of candidates for a given job.

People starting their careers now face a much more difficult task. The pool of candidates is global and jobs are easily found via linkedin and indeed. Most applicants are filtered out systemically without even being seen by human eyes. I understand the frustration of people in the starting blocks of their careers.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
23 hours ago, royiv said:

I doubt they could even tell you what Marx’s first name was.

Saw a bumper sticker on Lamar the other day that said, "Bitches be shopping.  -Karl Marx"

Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

In the end, this is the bulk of it.  And the hell of it is, while it's immoral and shitty, it's not entirely irrational.  Why?  Competition.

In 1950, there was a pool of jobs for people of moderate skill and middling to decent intellect.  Who was the pool of people who could be hired for those jobs?  White males, almost exclusively.  Truly, like 95% of those jobs went to white males, easy peasy.

Then...the civil rights movement (both culturally and legally). Now, black people, hispanics, etc. are the competition.  Think of autoworker jobs.  Surely at the end of WWII, those were 95% or more white males.  By the 1970s, a shitload of those jobs were going to minorities.  But wait, there's more: WOMEN.

Starting in the 1970s, women began entering the workforce - and colleges and universities -- en masse.  So, for even the more "skilled" jobs....white males have to compete with women as well.  Hell, I see this in my profession (legal) and my wife's (ordained, seminary-trained minister).  College enrollment is 60-40 female to male.  When looking at candidates to hire for legal jobs, or a seminary-trained job....the majority of the better candidates are female.

White males didn't get dumber, or less qualified, in general.  It's just that EVERYONE ELSE was, over time, freed from social and legal encumbrances that kept them from openly competing for the work white men had reserved exclusively for them.  There used to be 10 million sweet-spot jobs open every year, and white males - being the only legit pool of candidates - got 95% of them.  Today, those same 10 million jobs are sought by white males, minorities (male and female) and women.  Used to be that white males got 9.5 million of those jobs.  Today, they only get 6 million of those jobs.  From the white male perspective, they just LOST 3.5 million jobs.  And, mathematically, they're not wrong.  

The TLDR version: When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.

To take it to the question, asked in callous and insulting manner as is the Surly way, what are we going to do with our mediocre white males?  Because....relative to where they were 75 years ago, even 40-50 years ago....they're taking it in the shorts.  And they are, in an understandably human way, pissed about it.

 

 

I wish.  The supply of Dunning Kruger "Conservatives" is near limitless.  It is America's greatest natural resource.

Couple the increased competition you describe with the stagnant wage growth that more or less started at the same time and continues, and even the white men with the decent jobs feel more oppressed by the relative lack of wealth.  That’s your late stage capitalism taking over and company profits/stock prices being the only thing that matters. 

Edited by Pato del Muerto
  • Like 1
Posted
23 hours ago, royiv said:

I doubt they could even tell you what Marx’s first name was.

It's Marky, and to be honest I'm not sure why the Funky Bunch are getting a pass here. 

  • Haha 6
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, GenXer said:

image.png.1e39ba45de42018b548865592ef3e84f.png

that's incredible. the most hilarious part to me is if that album cover were released today most would assume it's an ad for grindr or onlyfans

Edited by Longhorn_Fan68
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, tigol said:

Saw a bumper sticker on Lamar the other day that said, "Bitches be shopping.  -Karl Marx"

Saw a similar one that said "Bitches be lovin' oversize chest of drawers. -Karl Farbman" 



×
×
  • Create New...