| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
All I know is thanks to Weird Al, I feel better about my life.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
All I know is thanks to Weird Al, I feel better about my life.
...and not just because of this election, either. Weird Al is the man.
Trump's lawyers say it's unfair to judge Trump for the things he said
It's also apparently unfair to judge him on the things he's done as well.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Seeing all you people jump all over that guy, slamming him left and right for nothing at all is making me want to vote for Trump just to spite you all.
Sadly, as pointless as that would be (as we have no way of knowing how you voted, or why), that is far from the worst reason I've seen someone give to explain voting for Trump.
Which, if you think about it, is really kinda scary.
This is why Paizo is (rightly) perceived as an liberal echo chamber.
Hey, we don't all have an entertainment -- sorry, "news" -- network devoted entirely to being our echo chamber. Some of us have to make do.
I only echo the chamber of my thoughts about being a 12th level paladin of Torm from 2nd edition stuck in this reality.
Also yes, bugley, Weird Al IS the man.
Wikileaks threatens surprise in store for Tim Kaine and dnc chairwoman Donna Brazille.
I wish they'd just give people birthday cakes instead of leaks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*Tosses popcorn into mouth*
Given the fizzle of that promotional event, their claims of surprises don't really surprise (or interest) me anymore...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I... I've just run across a nightmare-inducing Zardoz-inspired photoshop on Twitter. NSFYourSanity, if you've seen Zardoz you receive an additional -2 penalty on your SAN check.
|
I... I've just run across a nightmare-inducing Zardoz-inspired photoshop on Twitter. NSFYourSanity, if you've seen Zardoz you receive an additional -2 penalty on your SAN check.
... I know enough of that movie and it's characters... for that to be scarily f@~*ing accurate...
wizard . . . of . . . oz.
wizard . . . of . . . OZ.
wiZARD . . . OZ.
wiZARDOZ.
ZARDOZ!!
(Seriously, it was, like, Sean Connery's finest acting ever.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Um, Hunt For Red October, if there's someone else that can play a Scottish Russian Naval Commander better, I haven't seen it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Come on, are you trying to trigger him? Can't this be a safe space?
Yeah, come on people. We need to be nicer and try not to offend these rugged individualist conservatives just because they're supporting a sexist, racist Know Nothing. If they can't handle robust political debate, we can make this a safe space for them.
To a Trump supporter, simply reporting accurate facts about the man, would violate their requirements for a safe space.
The truth has a liberal bias.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I see conservative tokenism is alive and well. What does it matter that millions of LGBTQ people despise your candidate and your movement? Hah! You'll show them with your *four* (all male, 3/4 white + wealthy) gays! Relevant
Same thing is done with black people. "Sure we poll at less than 5% nationally with black Americans, but hey--Bill Cosby and Ben Carson like us!"
The main reason Trump is going to get crushed is because millions > four. So go wild, vote for Trump, have yourselves a big 'ol primal scream and pick a fight with a RINO defending a House seat. Cuddle up to dudes hollering about globalism & Jewish conspiracies and tell yourself whatever you need to to stay the course. Makes my job that much easier in '18.
Oh for crying out loud, perceived by whom? I am extremely skeptical that anyone with any political power whatsoever thinks they should stay away from the Paizo off topic message boards because our opinions are biased.So you support Trump because of his willingness to start a twitter war with the 1%?Check his Twitter feed
Seeing all you people jump all over that guy, slamming him left and right for nothing at all is making me want to vote for Trump just to spite you all.
This is why Paizo is (rightly) perceived as an liberal echo chamber.
I probably am pretty liberal (maybe extreme sometimes, afterall, I was a Bernie fan)...but I actually would agree that Paizo is rather liberal and at times pretty strongly adamant against conservatives.
It isn't extreme liberal though, as there are ideas and opinions that I have that are actually decidedly left of what is normal on Paizo from what I gather.
(or maybe I'm just so far left I'm right? In otherwords I'm a FAAAAAR right conservative!!! Which would make sense why a lot of my ideas are seen as utterly ridiculous by some here. :P)
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
It doesn't surprise me that Thiel and co are not making a big deal about conversion therapy. They are wealthy, independent adults. The real problem with conversion therapy is all those folks who don't fit into that category, especially teens who might get shipped off against their will and have to endure the sort of psychological abuse associated with conversion therapy.
Going back to an earlier conversation (because I was unavailable): I think that both libertarianism and communism is both are formed from a virtue.
Communism from altruism/generosity and libertarianism from Honesty/integrity.
And honestly this is why they both fail in practice so far, they don't address their associated vice; communism and sloth and libertarianism and greed.
Capitalism works because at it's core it is based on vice, so appeals to the lowest common denominator. This also allows us to dress it up over time to conform to societal tolerances.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Explain to me why the Koch brothers are so thrilled with Trump's tax cuts that they don't want their people supporting him and are refusing to spend any money on him.
Trumps a sinking ship.
When trump goes, he's dragging the senate with him.
President + democratic senate= Bernie sanders on the supreme court if she wants.
Then there goes citizens united and the koch's brothers ability to overtly buy elections and KEEP getting those tax breaks.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One of my best friends is a republican, we talk politics without taking it personal or getting upset with each other.
We both agree that Trump shouldn't be president though. :-)
Explain to me why the Koch brothers are so thrilled with Trump's tax cuts that they don't want their people supporting him and are refusing to spend any money on him.Trumps a sinking ship.
When trump goes, he's dragging the senate with him.
President + democratic senate= Bernie sanders on the supreme court if she wants.
Then there goes citizens united and the koch's brothers ability to overtly buy elections and KEEP getting those tax breaks.
Koch's not spending much money this election cycle is just practicality. a good chunk of major Republican donors consider this election a wash, and haven't contributed much, or as the situation worsened have withdrawn their support.
I thought this was interesting:
The inherent problem of propagating a message that is distasteful or annoying to the people who are most likely to be able to afford your services.
In a completely predictable turn of events, Trump threatens to sue the women who have accused him of sexual assault.
1) As noted by the New York Times, I think it is, a Libel and/or Slander case would be pretty hard for him to prove, given that recording.
2) He often threatens lawsuits without actually making them. He seems to be one of the people who likes to use them as weapons against anyone he dislikes or disagrees with, so... *Shrugs*
Hi Dave.
I don't think your Bush anecdotes prove your point, or even necessarily support it. The argument you advanced was that Trump is an enemy of the 1%. That's a broad claim, that he'd oppose the power of that class in general.
The Bush anecdote is narrow. Even if we expand it beyond the Bushes individually and assume that he does this to other people too (and I won't argue, he does), it shows that he's against personal rivals of his within the 1%.
It doesn't show that he opposes the class itself.
I think in order to demonstrate the latter you need different evidence on a scale larger than this or that single one percenter.
Now, I'm not saying that nobody within the silver spoon brigade has ever sided against their class as a whole, some have - I'm just saying that I don't see how doing so necessarily follows from the type of individual rivalries that you cited.
Might as well say that, as Augustus was a bitter enemy of Antony, Augustus was anti-elite. We know how THAT turned out, don't we?
(I'm aware that I am not responding to your whole post - but since the majority of your post is Bush, and it seems to make up the foundation of your argument on this point, I'll focus on it).
Hi Dave.
I don't think your Bush anecdotes prove your point, or even necessarily support it. The argument you advanced was that Trump is an enemy of the 1%. That's a broad claim, that he'd oppose the power of that class in general.
The Bush anecdote is narrow. Even if we expand it beyond the Bushes individually and assume that he does this to other people too (and I won't argue, he does), it shows that he's against personal rivals of his within the 1%.
It doesn't show that he opposes the class itself.
I think in order to demonstrate the latter you need different evidence on a scale larger than this or that single one percenter.
Now, I'm not saying that nobody within the silver spoon brigade has ever sided against their class as a whole, some have - I'm just saying that I don't see how doing so necessarily follows from the type of individual rivalries that you cited.
Might as well say that, as Augustus was a bitter enemy of Antony, Augustus was anti-elite. We know how THAT turned out, don't we?
(I'm aware that I am not responding to your whole post - but since the majority of your post is Bush, and it seems to make up the foundation of your argument on this point, I'll focus on it).
Until you tell me how handing the one percenters a massive tax cut is siding against them, that discussion is moot.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My impression is that Milo just hates third wave feminism (or feminism of any contemporary kind, really), PC culture (whatever that is), Islam, and BLM. Because Trump is a shining beacon for antisocial behavior and the whole alt-right theme of "restoring rights to oppressed white males", Milo backs him. Sure, Pence has some pretty scary anti-LGBT things going on, but it seems more like Milo is more interested in the reactionary spirit of their campaign platform on those particular issues, a la "Shrieking feminist harpies are swooping down to take away free speech and artistic freedom; Islam is a hateful religion that can't coexist with modern cultures, Striving for equality is really being discriminatory against white males, etc."
It's all intolerant nonsense, and his arguments really don't hold up upon close scrutiny. However, he does have a following so I will say he's pretty good at making a name for himself.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My impression is that Milo just hates third wave feminism (or feminism of any contemporary kind, really), PC culture (whatever that is), Islam, and BLM. Because Trump is a shining beacon for antisocial behavior and the whole alt-right theme of "restoring rights to oppressed white males", Milo backs him. Sure, Pence has some pretty scary anti-LGBT things going on, but it seems more like Milo is more interested in the reactionary spirit of their campaign platform on those particular issues, a la "Shrieking feminist harpies are swooping down to take away free speech and artistic freedom; Islam is a hateful religion that can't coexist with modern cultures, Striving for equality is really being discriminatory against white males, etc."
It's all intolerant nonsense, and his arguments really don't hold up upon close scrutiny. However, he does have a following so I will say he's pretty good at making a name for himself.
Yes, hating or bemoaning "PC" typically means hating other people's PC and being oblivious of one's own.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And where are these supposed videos.
No, that's okay, not my cup of tea.
Exactly. :-)
And thank you for providing it. :-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
RE: Trump advisors brag up a big speech about what he'd do in his first hundred days, and then spends at least fifteen minutes threatening to sue every woman that talks s%*@ about him.
Hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Right here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IuJGHuIkzY even if you don't accept the source, listen to what members of the campaign actually say and ask yourself if that is actually an okay thing to do, or a reprehensible act.
O'Keefe hasn't released a video which wasn't fraudulently edited yet. I see no reason to believe this one is any different.
That being said, the people in the videos are also NOT "people in her campaign". Rather, a PAC which Clinton's campaign is legally prohibited from coordinating with hired a consulting firm which hired those people as outside contractors. We're not talking 'inner circle' here... rather way out on the barely related fringes.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"The key is initiating the conflict by having leading conversations with people who are naturally psychotic. I mean honestly, it's not hard to get some of these a@@holes to pop off."
OK, I watched the video, and was glad to finally see what Trump had been talking about during the last debate. Thank you for posting the link.
The problem is that despite the scary music and choppy editing, the big shocking reveal is: if you protest a Trump rally, you will be attacked by mentally unstable people. I hate to break it to you, but this is more damning to Trump then Hillary. And I say that as someone who is probably the most critical of her in this thread. I also say it as someone who has done a fair amount of protesting, and have personally faced some scary physical violence while engaging in 1st amendment activity.
The other thing clearly shown is how PACs and super PACs co-ordinate, in this case through intermediaries. The only surprise there is that they bother with the intermediaries. I think everyone with a brain knows that PACs work basically in tandem with the candidates and/or national parties. If your candidate does not have a PAC/super PAC, then they can claim the moral highground. Not only does Trump have PACs/super PACs, but he is offering absolutely nothing that would clean up this broken system. I don't think Hillary is really going to do anything about it, but at least she speaks against it, for what little that is worth.
Yeah, the tapes paint a picture of some sleazy-as-f@@k people doing the Parties dirty work, but the important revelation is that Trump supporters are quick to violence when presented with opposing views. That is bad for Trump, and the 1st Amendment, not Hillary. EDIT: Well, it is bad for Hillary as well, as she has been immersed in this stuff for decades. I think this shows the value of smaller, third-party candidates who don't do the super PAC thing. I give Trump credit for self funding in the primaries (it must be nice...) but really this just shows Sanders was the real human among a bunch of zombie clowns.
EDIT: Also, if simple bird dogging works against you, you have absolutely no business running for public office. [Inset dog catcher joke here]