Jump to content

Huckleberry

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    14426
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    22

Posts posted by Huckleberry

  1. Just now, formermav43 said:

    So if you claim to care about 1) reducing spending, 2) cutting taxes and 3) the deficit as the Reason article opines, you’re just supposed to throw up your hands and say screw it when you can’t muster enough support for 1? What criteria determines that 3 is more important than 2? And if you vote not to cut taxes, how are you not susceptible to the same criticism of inconsistency, given those 3 priorities? 

    I'm assuming that all three are relatively equally important to someone who claims them as his three principles.

    If you vote to cut revenue without decreasing spending then you are sacrificing two of your three principles to achieve the third.

    It's also simple logic. If your budget is in a deficit position and you want to tackle all three of those things, reducing spending has to be the first thing to happen. You don't take the lower paying job before you reduce your expenses to get out of debt.

  2. Perhaps when you have been in the Senate for 8 years and you've had plenty of time to realize that your efforts to reduce spending, while not wrong at all in and of themselves, have been completely fruitless and a total failure, you shouldn't vote to massively reduce revenue if you claim to care about the deficit.

    • Like 3
  3. That may be true, but I'm only talking high versus low. Look at the strike zone shown on the screen here. An automated strike zone would add a damn foot to the top of that zone. A foot!

    Bellinger struck out swinging at a 95mph fastball at the top of the displayed zone. Imagine having to cover another foot vertically.
    4882fe20b28f46236a325440ea0d63f0.jpg

  4.  
    you can't help yourselves
    Trump was swept into office as a pushback upon the divisiveness of Harry Reid and Barrack Obama
    mid terms turned out perfectly for Trump with these four United States of by God America hating bitches..pushing the party further left and forcing the only Dems with a chance to come along for fear of being labled "racist"
    Keep doing you and we will keep Trump ensconsed 
    You are enabling the very thing that you hate....but the Republicans are "self-unaware".
    Hahaha

    Snowflake snowflake snowflake

    Look at the baby cry

    Somebody called racism racist, stop being accurate or I'll keep being racist!
  5. Brendan Hunt's straight man assistant coach gets me every time.

    "Wales? Wait, that's another country?"

    "Yes and no."

    "How many countries are in this country?!?"

    "Four."

  6. BRACKET CONTEST!

    image.thumb.png.5a533da83fe7187331e9462f55b12926.png

    For each of the two Texas brackets, enter your picks and let's see who wins this thing. You will get the following points for correct guesses in each bracket:

    Games 1 and 2 - 1 point
    Games 3 and 4 - 2 points
    Game 5 - 3 points
    Game 6 - 4 points
    Game 7 - 4 points

    Game 7 rule - You can state a team that you think wins Game 7 or you can say None if you think the bracket champion will finish undefeated. If you choose None then you only get the 4 points if your chosen Game 6 winner is the team that finishes undefeated.

    Tiebreaker - Total runs scored in the two brackets' final games, whether it's 6 or 7 doesn't matter.

    My entry:

    Texas East:

    Game 1 - Lamar National
    Game 2 - Post Oak
    Game 3 - Post Oak
    Game 4 - Western Hills
    Game 5 - Lamar National
    Game 6 - Lamar National
    Game 7 - Post Oak

    Texas West:

    Game 1 - CC National
    Game 2 - Midland Northern (upset alert!)
    Game 3 - Midland Northern
    Game 4 - McAllister Park
    Game 5 - McAllister Park
    Game 6 - McAllister Park
    Game 7 - McAllister Park (vengeance complete!)

    Tiebreaker - 19

  7. 3 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

    In that case, I apologize to you personally.  Not to any other fuckheads who vote for him, just to "own the libs".  They can keep punching themselves in the dick.

    lulz at you for believing that BS

    • Like 1
  8. 2 minutes ago, TtomTerrific said:

    this is inaccurate.

    we discussed this years ago.....you and I.

    long before Trump was even a political actor....my entire message was that the divisiness being celbrated would awake a very ugly part of America that I didn't want to see awakened, but here it is...it is reality...Donald Trump is our fucking President and will be again.

    Gee, who is it that is celebrating divisiveness and constantly messaging with how other people are different and scary? Who could it be? I just don't know, will Tom help us figure it out? It's another conundrum that keeps flummoxing some of the posters around here.

    Oh wait, I think he's got it! It's not the most visible person on the planet constantly making divisive comments and tweets, IT'S THE DEMOCRATS WHO ARE RESPONDING TO HIM! That is who is at fault! By golly I think he's figured it out.

    Complete. Joke.

    • Like 4
  9. 39 minutes ago, TtomTerrific said:

    look....you are wrong and I know that you won't hear it, while Henry Gondorf laughibly posts about "self-unaware Republicans"....but your race baiting party with its stragey of divisiviness is the reason that this clown is our President and in a position to make these ridiculous "tweets".....it's you, mother fucker...it's you.;

    You draw upsides based upon race, you better have the majority or you are going to lose.

    I begged y'all not to, but it was the best pom pom fest ever while it was good, and now where are we?

    thanks a lot, asshole. 

    Yes, tell us more about how Trump is the Democrats' fault while you bitch about Democrats and don't bitch about Republicans.

    You're a complete joke.

  10. 13 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

    Liz jumps into the fray to defend *checks notes* the woman who has handed Trump even more racist weapons.

     

    I would hope that isn't defending Pelosi but publicly telling Pelosi to stop backing down like a wimp.

  11. the Dems are destroying us by making this a race baiting bitch fest and not running the numbers.
    particularly disappointed in Huckleberry, what with his statistical chops.
     
    you can't win this
    stop doing this
     
    You're disappointed that I mocked you? Most mocked people feel the same way.

    Your fake concern deserves nothing other than mockery. As usual you show up out of the blue and whine about Democrats while ignoring the Republican contributions to the shit show. It's transparent, disingenuous, and stupid. So it will be mocked endlessly. Good luck.
    • Like 1
  12. Also, people who are convinced that it would help hitters are putting a lot of faith in something that may be completely wrong. Did y'all not see the video of the minor league all star game strike call? That was a strike because it was sinking heavily but crossed the front edge of the plate with part of the ball even with the hollow of the batter's knee. Pretty much every human umpire ever would have called that a ball. It was a strike.

    Next tell me how much hitters are going to love strike calls on 100mph fastballs that cross the plate at a height halfway between their waist and the top of their shoulders. Those are never called strikes right now. They should be. I actually think an automated textbook strike zone will help pitchers, not hitters.

  13. "Look guys, there were dozens of people in a group all doing the same thing. This guy picked out the minorities and insulted them and told them to go back where they came from. He did not insult the white ones or tell them to go back where they came from. Are you guys saying that implies something? I don't know what it could imply. My mind is boggled. I am truly stumped. Just flummoxed, I tell you."

    • Like 7
  14. 1 minute ago, Asithappens said:

    What I've seen from past pages (giving reasons, not conclusions, i.e., saying "I know racism when I see it" doesn't provide a reason, even if the statement is true) is that the primary reason is that Trump wouldn't/didn't say the same thing to white European immigrants/non-native Americans. Which seems to imply what, I don't know.

    It's also interesting that if one uses the argument that Trump's assertion that native-born women of color "originally came" from other countries is racist, then why isn't the term "African-American" also inherently racist? 

    Yeah, here's the problem. If someone treats people of other races and ethnicities badly, insults them, disparages them, or ridicules them based on their origin while never treating people of their race and ethnicity badly in the same context, that implies racism. Saying "which seems to imply what, I don't know" immediately after discussing that kind of behavior just makes you sound stupid. So congratulations.

    • Like 3
  15. Yeah, this wasn't even a thing that got talked about until Mike Davis was penalized 15 yards for holstering his guns in Lubbock in 2012.

    Then the media proceeded to get everything wrong as they tend to do when Mack Brown, rightfully, stated that if that's a penalty then the horns down should be a penalty. It's really pretty simple. Either it's all a penalty or none of it is a penalty. Texas spent 60 years not complaining about the horns down gestures from opponents until the moment we were flagged for doing the same thing to another team. There's literally no intelligent argument that can be made to contradict what Brown said then and what we're saying now.

    Call it the same both ways. That's it. I don't care which way they decide to do it, just enforce it equally.

    • Like 6
  16. I don't command that anyone vote any way; I simply do not have that power. I can, however, mock their stupid choices. Which I am doing and will happily do when you guys inevitably don't vote for the only legitimate contender to our racist, lunatic, child rapist president.
    Oh, my bad. I didn't realize your latest misfire was about the 2020 general. I already mentioned I'm voting for the Democrat in the general specifically because of the current state of the GOP.

    It's hard to keep track of the number of things you're wrong about.
  17. 6 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

    OK cool you're Latino dumbshit who wants the elderly and poor to die in the street instead of a white dumbshit who wants the elderly and poor to die in the street

    Yeah, that's not really close to accurate at all, but good effort I guess. This is the part of the discussion where you start losing it and start lobbing wild accusations because you know you goofed. If you have anything substantive to add I'll go ahead and listen.

    This is the exact problem with people who need to categorize and label everyone in order to understand the world. In the head of simpletons like you, voted for Gary Johnson = staunch libertarian = wants no government = probably an anarchist in all reality. Unfortunately, there are lots of different reasons to vote certain ways, and there are lots of different people who believe in the varied concept of "fiscal responsibility." Sure, some don't want the government to spend money on anything. Some don't want the government to spend money on anything but themselves. Others think fiscal responsibility means that the government should be as efficient as possible and expenses should be focused on programs that benefit the governed society as a whole. You know, things like helping the poor and elderly instead of spending three times as much as anyone else on the military so that we maintain access to oil that comes from oppressive dictatorships.

    But you have to put down the label maker to figure things like that out. Good luck.

    • Like 2
  18. 20 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

    The problem, at least as far as the survival of the Republic goes imo, is that we have undermined the structural balance between the branches of government.  The executive has been granted far far far too much power, and congress has abdicated their responsibilities on everything from foreign to economic policy.  I would argue as well that we have undermined the balance inherent to federalism as well, centralizing too much power in Washington. If you want to discuss the survival of the Republic, I think that those structural issues need to be part of the discussion.  I think the Republic survives the GOP, I am not sure that the Republic survives the consolidation of power at the federal level in the executive branch. 

     

    6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


    I don’t disagree with this at all. The problem with creating a dictatorship is that it ain’t always your dictator in the office. It’s a dumb, shortsighted, self-destructive path. Which is also our new national motto.

    Exactly. But we should be careful, soon NowThis will be here to explain how he is the only one who thought of this.

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
  19. 1 minute ago, DixonHur said:

    Exactly, we have to remember all the times he's told white, male Christians to "go back" where they came from.  

    Oh wait, it's never happened.

    Does xenophobic sound better to you?

    It's not xenophobic, it's racist.

    3 of the 4 targets were born in the United States of America. They are not foreign. They are more American than the man's wife. The man's white wife, of course.

  20. It's just tuition and it's similar to programs other universities in Texas have. The good news if you're a Texas alum is that it matters enough to get extensive media coverage when it's the University of Texas. A&M and Tech have similar programs and Rice, although not public of course, instituted something similar recently.

    • Like 1
  21. So the pollsters have Sanders somewhere between 2nd and 5th in New Hampshire. So do I and I haven't even thought about New Hampshire since the last time I watched Tom Hanks guess South Hampshire on SNL Celebrity Jeopardy.

Ă—
Ă—
  • Create New...