Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Am I the only one who's finding it increasingly easier to get a hard-on for Amy Coney Barrett?

No. And it’s about time somebody finally said it.
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Posted

She's always been sneaky-hot. Don't let that or her relative decency (relative to Sam Alito) fool you into thinking she doesn't suck, though. 

  • Hook 'Em 8
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, Nivek said:


Why do you use the Nazi social media platform?

1) Because there’s more there

2) Because retreat is not attack

No offense,  but lefties need to stop withdrawing from spaces they disapprove of. It’s not just an expression of privilege and cultural snobbery, it’s also a recipe to lose often. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, South Austin said:

Am I the only one who's finding it increasingly easier to get a hard-on for Amy Coney Barrett?

Wear a rubber, dude. You know she's not having an abortion. 

  • Haha 6
  • Drool 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

1) Because there’s more there

2) Because retreat is not attack

No offense,  but lefties need to stop withdrawing from spaces they disapprove of. It’s not just an expression of privilege and cultural snobbery, it’s also a recipe to lose often. 

Withdrawing from twitter wasn't about disapproval. It was recognition that it wasn't an effective platform any longer (ignoring for this conversation that it's just a shitty user experience now). When Elon can program the algorithm to automatically disappear any liberal tweets that start getting too much attention, you gotta find a new battleground.

On the attack/retreat analogy, Washington pretty much won the American revolution by being very good at retreating. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
30 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

She's always been sneaky-hot. Don't let that or her relative decency (relative to Sam Alito) fool you into thinking she doesn't suck, though. 

That's a good thing, isn't it?  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
41 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

On the attack/retreat analogy, Washington pretty much won the American revolution by being very good at retreating.

You’re not George Washington

Posted
53 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

lefties need to stop withdrawing from spaces they disapprove of.

This reads to me like you’re lecturing “you shouldn’t leave that bar bc some Nazis showed up.” Nah, man. I’m not saving humanity with my tweets. Elon can have his circle jerk and I can better manage my own social media diet. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

This reads to me like you’re lecturing “you shouldn’t leave that bar bc some Nazis showed up.” Nah, man. I’m not saving humanity with my tweets. Elon can have his circle jerk and I can better manage my own social media diet. 

No. Twitter is not a bar, and I am lecturing.
Even in its current state, twitter is the world’s most important and influential attention gathering platform, and attention is the currency of politics in 2025. We withdraw at our peril, for multiple reasons. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
Posted
1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

No. Twitter is not a bar, and I am lecturing.
Even in its current state, twitter is the world’s most important and influential attention gathering platform, and attention is the currency of politics in 2025. We withdraw at our peril, for multiple reasons. 

Gonna have to disagree with you on that one, chief. It’s a cesspool of disinformation and propaganda and its chatbot is spewing white apartheid drivel now.

Posted
1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

No. Twitter is not a bar, and I am lecturing.
Even in its current state, twitter is the world’s most important and influential attention gathering platform, and attention is the currency of politics in 2025. We withdraw at our peril, for multiple reasons. 

You're arguing that we should go try and win all our money back at the triple zero roulette wheel. Twitter is juicing conservative extremism, and you're gonna be bringing piss to a shit fight if you think you'll be anything more than the whipping boy on those platforms.

Attention is the currency, and brother, not much aside from amygdala response gets the attention of chuds. Nothing matters until it affects them. Telling them how bad things are only encourages their actions to drag the bar lower.

You're not gonna win with LOGIC and FACTS when they don't give a flying fuck about those things.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 2
Posted
8 minutes ago, royiv said:

Gonna have to disagree with you on that one, chief. It’s a cesspool of disinformation and propaganda and its chatbot is spewing white apartheid drivel now.

And then getting called out, and then hilariously outing itself. 

7 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Attention is the currency, and brother, not much aside from amygdala response gets the attention of chuds.

It doesn’t have to. The problem with leftists is that you only talk to yourselves and act offended when the mostly apolitical majority doesn’t come to you. And that’s who the left is abandoning on Twitter.  Never mind the fact that once you leave you don’t actually see the discourse anymore (as demonstrated above).

Posted
1 minute ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

It doesn’t have to. The problem with leftists is that you only talk to yourselves and act offended when the mostly apolitical majority doesn’t come to you. And that’s who the left is abandoning on Twitter.  Never mind the fact that once you leave you don’t actually see the discourse anymore (as demonstrated above).

The "apolitical majority" is the the equivalent to the citizenry of Weimar Germany while Hitler was rising to power. Being """apolitical""" is extremely political in itself. It leads to leaders Blacklab reflexively suppressing reporting on repressive actions by the government. 

Defending their farcical apolitical stance is giving them permission to not think critically. Fuck that noise, they need to wake up and smell the ashes of democracy that THEIR FUCKING VOTES AND INACTION delivered to us all.

 

There's no discourse because what's there to discuss? Just HOW evil the trump administration is? How far are they lying? Got any deck chairs you're looking to rearrange on the Titanic?

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
11 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

And then getting called out, and then hilariously outing itself. 

Do you honestly believe that had any impact on the people on twitter that you think need to be reached? I don’t.

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

No. Twitter is not a bar, and I am lecturing.
Even in its current state, twitter is the world’s most important and influential attention gathering platform, and attention is the currency of politics in 2025. We withdraw at our peril, for multiple reasons. 

I get that it is still a high usage platform around the world and perhaps there is some merit in not ignoring it altogether. I personally have never had an account on there because to me it seemed like something that would not be an enjoyable experience to use it.

I do agree that attention is the main currency in politics. I can keep up with AOC on Instagram when she does a live chat. Crockett does them as well. I appreciate their candor and honesty and I feel they make effective use of social media in a good way. There are others as well, but those are just a couple of examples of Democrats who understand how to reach their constituents and other like-minded people.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
49 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

And then getting called out, and then hilariously outing itself. 

It doesn’t have to. The problem with leftists is that you only talk to yourselves and act offended when the mostly apolitical majority doesn’t come to you. And that’s who the left is abandoning on Twitter.  Never mind the fact that once you leave you don’t actually see the discourse anymore (as demonstrated above).

The problem isn't attention.  It's language.  As in, foreign language.

Non-MAGA world speaks a language that includes things like rational connections, evidence-based reasoning, shit like that.  Might as well be speaking a dead dialect of Tagalog to MAGAs, who speak a language of insane inflammatory lies and lizard-brain trigger words.

Reality: trans people and trans athletes are a non-issue, and have no impact on your life.

MAGA: TRANS SATANISTS HAVE TAKEN OVER OUR SCHOOLS AND ARE EATING THE DOGS AND EATING THE CATS AND FORCING EVERY CHILD TO CHANGE GENDERS AND THE HUMAN RACE JUST WENT EXTINCT!

In shorter form, "A lie gets halfway around the world before truth puts on its boots."

Reaching those people requires VASTLY more than "getting their attention." It involves telling them superior, more inflammatory lies than our opponents are telling them.

DONALD TRUMP SUCKED XI'S DICK AT THEIR LAST MEETING.  HE TOOK A SECRET BRIEFCASE FULL OF 1 TRILLION DOLLARS, PROMISING TO DESTROY OUR ECONOMY.  AND THE NEXT DAY, HE ANNOUNCED TARIFFS THAT HURT THE US MORE THAN THEY HURT CHINA.  AND HE ALSO SENT A SECRET MESSAGE TO JOE BIDEN SAYING "WE DID IT!"

Seriously.  We just need an "insane MAGA lie generator" running 24/7, to see what sticks.

 

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Captainant said:

The "apolitical majority" is the the equivalent to the citizenry of Weimar Germany while Hitler was rising to power. Being """apolitical""" is extremely political in itself. It leads to leaders Blacklab reflexively suppressing reporting on repressive actions by the government. 

Defending their farcical apolitical stance is giving them permission to not think critically. Fuck that noise, they need to wake up and smell the ashes of democracy that THEIR FUCKING VOTES AND INACTION delivered to us all.

 

There's no discourse because what's there to discuss? Just HOW evil the trump administration is? How far are they lying? Got any deck chairs you're looking to rearrange on the Titanic?

Ma’am this is an Arby’s 

2 hours ago, royiv said:

Do you honestly believe that had any impact on the people on twitter that you think need to be reached? I don’t.

Then you don’t understand how population-level opinions shift. It probably made an impression on about a 1-2mm* people who are mostly indifferent, and made them slightly less indifferent to the next thing they see, tomorrow. 
 

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

The problem isn't attention.  It's language.  As in, foreign language.

Non-MAGA world speaks a language that includes things like rational connections, evidence-based reasoning, shit like that.  Might as well be speaking a dead dialect of Tagalog to MAGAs, who speak a language of insane inflammatory lies and lizard-brain trigger words.

It is a language problem, but it’s an attention problem first. The way MAGA teaches their language to people who do not speak it yet is to do their work in places where liberals and refuse to go. MAGA wins by default because they assert themselves in the public square and violate norms, so liberals and leftists retreat to safe spaces with rules and talk to each other. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
  • Like 1
Posted
28 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

MAGA wins by default because they assert themselves in the public square and violate norms, so liberals and leftists retreat to safe spaces with rules and talk to each other. 

George Floyd protests were everywhere in this country (and world-wide). They violated norms. Sure, not like a Boogaloo Boi murdering 2 LEOs, but at least one cheesecake (and probably more) were stolen from a Cheesecake Factory. What do you think the longterm effects of that were on American public opinion? 

Posted
5 minutes ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

George Floyd protests were everywhere in this country (and world-wide). They violated norms. Sure, not like a Boogaloo Boi murdering 2 LEOs, but at least one cheesecake (and probably more) were stolen from a Cheesecake Factory. What do you think the longterm effects of that were on American public opinion? 

Incredibly important and profound. Don’t fool yourself. 

Posted
48 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

It is a language problem, but it’s an attention problem first. The way MAGA teaches their language to people who do not speak it yet is to do their work in places where liberals and refuse to go. MAGA wins by default because they assert themselves in the public square and violate norms, so liberals and leftists retreat to safe spaces with rules and talk to each other. 

Go read a history book. This isn't unique to MAGA. The nazis very successfully suppressed Liberal (capital "L") thought and discourse by convincing their idiot chuds that they were BETRAYED from the inside. That their nation was brought low by AN INTERNAL ENEMY (!!!!)

Let me know when you're starting to put two and two together to figure out they're running the same playbook on immigrants and those who would stand against them.

Shit man, they're arresting and charging judges. They're arresting lawyers at international crossings. You're worrying about tiddlywinks while a freight train is bearing down.

2 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Incredibly important and profound. Don’t fool yourself. 

Yeah and those dirty Ghormans had it coming amirite?? They should not have disengaged themselves from the galactic discourse, otherwise the Empire might have spares them

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
16 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Incredibly important and profound. Don’t fool yourself. 

You overrate the importance of those protests.

You underestimate the nearly completed playbook they've run to complete a fascist takeover.

You're talking votes and changing minds, when your thoughts should be on plans to shelter/help escape targets of the regime, and how and where weapons should be cached for what's coming.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
5 hours ago, ChiTownDoc said:

#anal

Ever go to someone's house and see they have a welcome mat in front of the back door? Makes you wonder. [Freud}

  • Haha 4
Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Go read a history book.

Um perhaps you should. Specifically William Shirer’s “Nightmare Years.”
 

Y’all win! Y’all have convinced me to valiantly run away like Sir Robin.

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
Posted
On 5/5/2025 at 7:33 PM, TwiceHorn said:

Because he accuses me of devil's advocacy for explaining how the argument goes.

To me, if you don't understand the problems and illegitimacies in the argument/decision and just criticize the decision, you're pissing in the wind.  

I mean, you're pissing in the wind either way, but it's a real megasquirt in a gale.

We don't kink shame here.

Posted
4 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

DONALD TRUMP SUCKED XI'S DICK AT THEIR LAST MEETING.  HE TOOK A SECRET BRIEFCASE FULL OF 1 TRILLION DOLLARS, PROMISING TO DESTROY OUR ECONOMY.  AND THE NEXT DAY, HE ANNOUNCED TARIFFS THAT HURT THE US MORE THAN THEY HURT CHINA.  AND HE ALSO SENT A SECRET MESSAGE TO JOE BIDEN SAYING "WE DID IT!"

Seriously.  We just need an "insane MAGA lie generator" running 24/7, to see what sticks

I would invest in a company that intentionally spammed conspiracies to target and take down Republicans. Some of those QAnon assholes would bite

Posted
9 hours ago, South Austin said:

Am I the only one who's finding it increasingly easier to get a hard-on for Amy Coney Barrett?

Yes. 

Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Um perhaps you should. Specifically William Shirer’s “Nightmare Years.”
 

Y’all win! Y’all have convinced me to valiantly run away like Sir Robin.

image.png.fde4269218fd1a5c12540dde55ff802e.png

8 hours ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

Sauer and RFK, Jr. and their fucked-up voices need to be thrown off a cliff.

Just thinking this myself.  

 

Edited by Bullneck
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted

I think bozo's point is that while Twatter may suck and us bystanders may want to get off, candidates, the party, and those that consider themselves thought leaders or persuaders need to stay on.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
19 hours ago, South Austin said:

Am I the only one who's finding it increasingly easier to get a hard-on for Amy Coney Barrett?

 

9 hours ago, DDD Dad said:

Yes. 

image.gif.128e13b677af9f8f93218f55ebcef45c.gif

  • Haha 4
Posted
10 hours ago, Pig Bellmont said:

I would invest in a company that intentionally spammed conspiracies to target and take down Republicans. Some of those QAnon assholes would bite

“Make the son of a bitch deny it”

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted

A bit of an explainer on injunction scope.  

In the usual case, an injunction applies only to the parties to the case:  the enjoined party cannot do unto the opposing party.  Most court cases only have application as between the two parties, except as one form or another of precedential value (law of the case, claim or issue preclusion, persuasive precedent, or controlling precedent) on other cases.

In a case where the government is a party, however, the injunction usually involve a determination that the government's action is invalid, and then, it's not so much the injunction, but the holding of invalidity that becomes the issue.  How far does that extend? 

In the usual case, a district court holding has limited precedential value:  it really only controls the parties before the court, and maybe (persuasive) other courts within the district.  Once it is affirmed by the court of appeals, it becomes a binding precedent in that circuit, and whatever states comprise it.  And becomes not controlling precedent, but "advisory" or persuasive to courts in other circuits  If ruled upon and affirmed by SCOTUS, it's nationally controlling precedent.

Which brings us back to the injunction.  How far should the government be permitted to continue to enforce a law or policy that has been held invalid by only one court.  Granted, that ruling in and of itself may cast the law or policy into serious doubt, but then there's Reed O'Connor.

Without extending the holding beyond the parties, you get a different ruling from every district court considering, some enjoining some not, and on differing grounds.  

Once it makes it to courts of appeal, you get something like 11 variants, one for each circuit.

You avoid that "chaos" by permitting either circuit-wide effect (11 variations) or national effect (no variations).

Apart from the current crisis issues, it's an interesting question.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
5 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Goddamn, y’all are dead set on missing the point. 

So you're saying on the outside we can't understand, and on the inside you can't explain?

  • Like 1


×
×
  • Create New...