Jump to content

Tuco

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    3276
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Tuco

  1. And it gives the people supporting her in the state a reason to keep returning her.
  2. Here's the thing about Trump: if you look at any time he declared bankruptcy, he was claiming that it wasn't going to happen up until the moment that it did. He's never going to publicly concede the inevitable. But, he still signed the papers in the end.
  3. The lawsuit is fucked up for multiple reasons. Obviously, there is the question of standing and states' right - "the law". Obviously there is the fact that the basis for the challenge lacks any compelling evidence - "the facts". But something I think what is being under-appreciated is how fucked up it is that the official state governments are using not only the tax dollars, but the authority, of the state to pursue a purely political endeavor. This is not fighting for water rights for all Texans, or even a partisan policy issue like abortion rights. This is purely an attempt to install a political ally, and using the state government to do so. It is extremely similar to what Trump got impeached for - using the government's funds and position for purely political gain. It is corruption, right out in the open.
  4. I don't remember that one. But, it's okay to be a whore, as long as your father-in-law is your client. (Genesis 38:12 through 28)
  5. I'd talk shit, but I assume Nebraska will join the lawsuit in the next 24 hours. But, this does allow them to actually introduce evidence at the SC level, right?
  6. There was actually some sort of unknown there. If 2000 was a tightrope walker juggling lit torches high above the ground, 2020 has been a group of performance artists smearing feces on themselves while singing God Bless America. 2000 was "what's going to happen next?" 2020 is "what the fuck is this?"
  7. The second amendment is now a greater threat to democracy than a safeguard to protect it.
  8. This thread moves fast, so maybe it's already been addressed, but TwiceHorn's guess is correct. She sent sex videos to her boyfriend's ex-wife. She is a naughty girl. classy
  9. Calling Epoch Times a far-right media network is missing a good part of the story. Epoch Times is the associated with Fulan Gong, a religious movement which has been persecuted by the Chinese government. It was started by a Fulan Gong adherent, and is basically the anti-Chicom Chinese paper. Do you remember those Iraqi dissidents who manipulated the US government into invading Iraq? Well, it's like that, only with a little bit of cultish doomsday appeal thrown in for good measure. This NBC article is interesting.
  10. I think you are reading too much of a character arc here. Kemp could get away with disenfranchising a million voters, so he did. He can't flip Georgia to Trump, so he won't. Trump asking him to do so is like the old proverb "nothing is impossible for the person who doesn't have to do it." If Kemp could flip the state while maintaining plausible deniability, he certainly would. Edit - And his original actions had nothing to do with Trump. He did it for himself.
  11. Subscribed.
  12. In case you are trying to remember who Corsi is, he was subpoenaed to testify by Mueller. The report indicated he had possessed knowledge that WikiLeaks had obtained Podesta's hacked emails. From his wiki page:
  13. So, you think the DOE should just set efficiency standards without any evaluation of whether they are achievable? They aren't limiting anyone from developing alternatives to these filtered techs, just establishing which techs are feasible/affordable as the basis for a reasonable goal. ["Additionally, it is DOE policy not to include in its analysis any proprietary technology that is a unique pathway to achieving a certain efficiency level."] If someone approaches the DOE and says they could achieve a certain watts/cycle based on using laser cannons, the DOE doesn't just want to set the standards at that level and fuck over the manufacturers, and subsequently the public, when the manufacturers fail to achieve that target. Or, let me guess, you don't think the DOE should set efficiency standards beyond what is currently on the market?
  14. For what it's worth, I see a bigger issue with industry codes than (direct) government regulations. For example, the International Plumbing Code is not developed by government agencies, but rather by the ICC, a private non-profit that is made up of industry stakeholders. While that may sound great, those stakeholders often represent the companies which will directly profit from more conservative rules. The IPC is then broadly adopted by local jurisdictions, giving those privately developed rules the force of law. More government could help. If the feds were to set up an organization to engage the private boards, review the rules, and then publish their recommendations on which rules to strike at the local level, it could help protect public from onerous requirements.
  15. Did you read it? Most of it is not the modifications of the rule itself, but rather the rationalization of it dealing with environmental impact, cost impacts, employment impacts, etc.. In other words, most of it is an argument that it is a "smart" regulation.
  16. Right now I think it's questionable on whether Kemp makes it through the primary. If he does, I think Abrams wins in a walk. Trumpsters will not vote for Kemp and he can't win without them.
  17. Unfortunately, no. There is a third group of people who think Q is fucking crazy, furrow their eyebrows at Trump feeding the bullshit, but still voted for him because a) a) money, b) abortion, c) socialism, d) fear of holding cops accountable, e) they vote R no matter what.
  18. Yep. But it would be nice to get every Republican on record either voting the for the Constitution or voting for Trump.
  19. Cool. I had not seen that. It was initially dismissed, but was reversed on appeal. Just settled a couple of weeks ago, but terms not disclosed.
  20. And correct me if I am wrong, but it is pretty damn difficult for a public figure to win one of these cases. Not to say they wouldn't bring a case as a nuisance. So, whether the attack on a politician was factual, the impact on the social media platform would most likely be the same - defending against a nuisance lawsuit they would likely win. The truth would have little financial impact on the provider.
  21. My bigger concern is that every site that posts anything controversial is going to be shutdown. I'm not normally a big fan of liability protections, but I could certainly see Devon Nunes filing lawsuits every time someone pretends to be his cow. Maybe Twitter and Facebook are big enough to push back on that, but would Surly?
  22. This is pretty much where I am. I do believe there needs to be more tools to combat disinformation, but I don't this is a great one. It seems to be taking a sledge hammer where a scalpel is needed. For one thing, there are plenty of media outlets that are not protected, but still are able to push disinformation - think OAN, FoxBusiness, Newsmax. All they do is work around the current slander/libel laws. FoxNews reporting on Seth Rich is a great example. They were caught red-handed fabricating absolute bullshit about Seth Rich to support a host of conspiracy theories, Rich's family sues, but since Seth was dead, there was no injured party in the case. FoxNews, or anyone else, can push whatever lies they want as long as long as there is no financial impact on someone with standing. It's not criminal, and there is no one to bring a civil case. How do we change that? If you don't change that, it seems fairly easy for on-line sources to work the same tricks. Reversing 230 might address 50% of the current disinformation campaigns, but those bullshit producers will change the form of their lies, but not the function.
  23. Is there anything that Brisket saying that you think is out of the realm of possibility for us damned dirty apes? Maybe I misunderstood your point.
×
×
  • Create New...