Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 hours ago, RDCanecutter said:

Sewage Plant job makes a man step outside of society's expectations.

That is just a fancy UT-educated, big-wordy way to say what blue collar people know from childhood

IMG_3458.jpeg.5c75714f131ceb2cbac98c4a13e290bc.jpeg

  • Haha 5
  • Drool 1
Posted
On 10/3/2024 at 10:00 AM, C-Man said:

The smooth-brained Q-addled folks in my social media feeds are now talking about how Hurricane Helene was a government-created storm designed to wipe clean vast areas of western NC (and other locations) so "they" could strip-mine lithium or something like that. One guy who I met at the State Fair of Texas kickoff golf tournament a half-dozen years ago, who went to St Mark's, Greenhill and Duke, has completely fallen off the Q conspiracy ledge in the last 9-12 months. He said Helene is not dissimilar from the "Maui landgrab." His descent into this idiocy is as fascinating as it is sad.

Well, lepidolite, which is the mineral that lithium comes from, is mined in western NC. Checkmate libtards.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, jw4381 said:

Well, lepidolite, which is the mineral that lithium comes from, is mined in western NC. Checkmate libtards.

There are other lithium feldspars out there. Lepidolite is a secondary source of that metal.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
8 hours ago, Willfully Horn said:

There are other lithium feldspars out there. Lepidolite is a secondary source of that metal.

Ok I was only familiar with lepidolite. The Harding Mine is near here- it was a source of lepidolite when it was in production. 
 

So spodumene also occurs in that area. Double checkmate, libtards. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Underdog said:

"Court marshaled" 

Give ChatGPT a little time to work out the kinks, for pity's sake.

Edited by jimmyjazz
  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
Posted
1 minute ago, Scheiss Meister said:

"High ranking position in the military" = E-4 or O-1, maybe O-2.

Member of the corps of cadets.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
On 10/3/2024 at 9:56 AM, NeverMarryAStripper said:

Why are they standing in front of a flag from the mid-1800s? From 1867 to 1877, the U.S. flag had 37 stars.

Because that's where we're headed if we didn't get this right.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
4 hours ago, Willfully Horn said:

Fuck SCOTUS in its skunk ass for making misinformation protected political speech. Those members who supported the protection of misinformation need to be removed from the bench. Full stop.

Just so you know, no court, including the Roberts court, has expressly held that false or mis- information is protected by the First Amendment.

The seminal case on the matter was decided in 1964, NY Times v. Sullivan, which makes the First Amendment a limitation on the ability to sue for defamation, which requires proof of falsity.  It is the source of the actual malice standard for public figures.  That was decided by the Warren Court, not what most would consider a conservative court.

The closest it has come is US v. Alvarez, with a plurality opinion including RBG and Sotomayor holding that the Stolen Valor Act was unconstitutional and rejecting the government's position that falsehoods are not protected by the First Amendment.  Alito, Thomas, and Scalia dissented, arguing that falsehoods actually were excluded from protection of the First Amendment.

So, be careful who you want removed from the bench, there.

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Just so you know, no court, including the Roberts court, has expressly held that false or mis- information is protected by the First Amendment.
The seminal case on the matter was decided in 1964, NY Times v. Sullivan, which makes the First Amendment a limitation on the ability to sue for defamation, which requires proof of falsity.  It is the source of the actual malice standard for public figures.  That was decided by the Warren Court, not what most would consider a conservative court.
The closest it has come is US v. Alvarez, with a plurality opinion including RBG and Sotomayor holding that the Stolen Valor Act was unconstitutional and rejecting the government's position that falsehoods are not protected by the First Amendment.  Alito, Thomas, and Scalia dissented, arguing that falsehoods actually were excluded from protection of the First Amendment.
So, be careful who you want removed from the bench, there.
 


Nah, I’m pretty comfortable removing those fucksticks
  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted
1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Just so you know, no court, including the Roberts court, has expressly held that false or mis- information is protected by the First Amendment.

The seminal case on the matter was decided in 1964, NY Times v. Sullivan, which makes the First Amendment a limitation on the ability to sue for defamation, which requires proof of falsity.  It is the source of the actual malice standard for public figures.  That was decided by the Warren Court, not what most would consider a conservative court.

The closest it has come is US v. Alvarez, with a plurality opinion including RBG and Sotomayor holding that the Stolen Valor Act was unconstitutional and rejecting the government's position that falsehoods are not protected by the First Amendment.  Alito, Thomas, and Scalia dissented, arguing that falsehoods actually were excluded from protection of the First Amendment.

So, be careful who you want removed from the bench, there.

 

Thanks for your post. I’m not accustomed to memory glitches, and I believe I read about a ruling, in the last few years, that affirmed misinformation was protected political speech.

A quick search gets bogged down with a recent decision regarding social media, so I will take your word on the subject, at least until I have the time to track down whatever it was that sourced my memory. I will keep my mouth shut on the subject until then.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted

I perused the Conservative and Republican forums on Reddit. Holy cow. Talk about an echo chamber of delusion. They’ve structured these forums so that dissenting viewpoints that point out disinformation aren’t allowed. As a result, none of the ridiculous posts of disinformation are ever challenged. This reinforces their delusion even further. It’s really concerning. These people are living in a fantasy world. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Willfully Horn said:

Thanks for your post. I’m not accustomed to memory glitches, and I believe I read about a ruling, in the last few years, that affirmed misinformation was protected political speech.

A quick search gets bogged down with a recent decision regarding social media, so I will take your word on the subject, at least until I have the time to track down whatever it was that sourced my memory. I will keep my mouth shut on the subject until then.

It's one of those things that doesn't quite line up.  Thomas' most fervent wish is to overrule Sullivan. And that would probably most squarely remove 1A protection from false or mis- information. 

The most recent decisions of the Roberts court actually favor regulation of misinformation, in result if not reasoning. 

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, C-Man said:

 


Nah, I’m pretty comfortable removing those fucksticks

 

What he was arguing for was the opposite. The fucksticks actually argued that falsehoods weren't protected. 

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Like 1
Posted
3 hours ago, TheStoicPaisano said:

Struggle with this guy’s cadence even when he stumbles on a good point. This is not one of those times.

 

I reiterate my position that Teslas are MAGA hats on wheels. I just assume the driver is a Trumper when I see one these days.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
I reiterate my position that Teslas are MAGA hats on wheels. I just assume the driver is a Trumper when I see one these days.

In the past two days, I’ve had a Tesla turn the wrong way down a one way street and defiantly drive right at me as I honked at him, and another make a u-turn in the middle of the road, just whipping around and fuckig over people in both direction. So, yes, narcissist assholes.
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Rage+1 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


In the past two days, I’ve had a Tesla turn the wrong way down a one way street and defiantly drive right at me as I honked at him, and another make a u-turn in the middle of the road, just whipping around and fuckig over people in both direction. So, yes, narcissist assholes.

The Daily Show Wow GIF by The Daily Show with Trevor Noah

  • Haha 4
Posted
2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

What he was arguing for was the opposite. The fucksticks actually argued that falsehoods weren't protected. 

And I’m arguing that despite them being on the right side on that particular ruling, I’d like all three of them thrown out of the Court.

  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, C-Man said:

And I’m arguing that despite them being on the right side on that particular ruling, I’d like all three of them thrown out of the Court.

Well Scalia, or God, took care of that for ya.

  • Haha 3
Posted
1 hour ago, royiv said:

I reiterate my position that Teslas are MAGA hats on wheels. I just assume the driver is a Trumper when I see one these days.

My wife drives one. She loves it but I tell her this every day. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
On 9/30/2024 at 10:42 PM, Pancho said:

 

What are the odd of a 40 vs torn down goalpost? Nashville isn’t that big of a city. Maybe they met last night?

 

IMG_0239.png

Edited by TheStoicPaisano
  • Drool 1
Posted
23 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Periodic reminder that the GOP actively breaks government so it can run on a platform of broken government. They are very excited to delay and obstruct disaster relief to a swing state in October so they blame the administration.
 

 

can Biden issue an executive order or is there some "back pocket" work-around here?

Posted
2 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

can Biden issue an executive order or is there some "back pocket" work-around here?

Executive can only redirect funds that have already been allocated (which it is doing); it cannot spend funds that Congress has not voted on. You need a supplemental, this is the same movie we saw with Ukraine funding last year.  
 

The GOP will eventually vote one through but they want to ride out the current (Elon-driven) wave of “the gub’mint ain’t there for y’all” and then have headlines on money coming closer to Election Day. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Rage+1 3
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Executive can only redirect funds that have already been allocated (which it is doing); it cannot spend funds that Congress has not voted on. You need a supplemental, this is the same movie we saw with Ukraine funding last year.  
 

The GOP will eventually vote one through but they want to ride out the current (Elon-driven) wave of “the gub’mint ain’t there for y’all” and then have headlines on money coming closer to Election Day. 

I hope the people trying to collect the splinters of their lives have a second to take notice of the GOP efforts to obstruct relief. There's that h-word again

Edited by Longhorn_Fan68
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 4
Posted
Just now, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

I hope the people trying to collect the splinters of their lives have a second to take notice of the GOP efforts to obstruct relief. There's that h-word again

This is not a comment on what we should do, because helping Americans recover from a disaster that wrecks lives is the right thing to do no matter who the Americans are. 
 

Appalachia is the largest per capita recipient of federal largesse and they consistently vote red.  This is not an area prone to reflection. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 5
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
On 10/4/2024 at 9:43 PM, tx 3 putt said:

 

 

Frustrated Headache GIF by Kelly Clarkson

How disgusting that an ex-military member gives a Purple Heart to a draft dodger. Even if Trump can’t stop the offer, a decent would refuse to take that from a vet. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
5 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

How disgusting that an ex-military member gives a Purple Heart to a draft dodger. Even if Trump can’t stop the offer, a decent would refuse to take that from a vet. 

Pretty much anyone not named Trump would have said "No, no, I can't accept this.  You earned it, I did not."

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1


×
×
  • Create New...