Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

What rule did she break? The one where as a representative in Congress you put common sense and decency and the interests of Americans above all others.  

So, your typical turd-in-the-punchbowl nonsense.  Got it.  Carry on.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Yeah I'm not following how Katie did anything wrong or "broke a rule." She's on record as wanting Israel to stop their attacks and let humanitarian aid into Gaza, so attempting to undermine the USA's ability to send more weapons and armaments to them makes sense. I agree it's dumb to have an exception for one specific country, as if they aren't able to commit atrocities as well as anyone else. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

So, your typical turd-in-the-punchbowl nonsense.  Got it.  Carry on.

It's an interesting exercise flushing out what triggers weirdos like willfully and fudge. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, Dutchrudder said:

She's on record as wanting Israel to stop their attacks and let humanitarian aid into Gaza, so attempting to undermine the USA's ability to send more weapons and armaments to them makes sense.

While it’s important to place the blame at the feet of Republicans, it is equally important to note that House Progressives and the Squad are joining forces with Mike Johnson to prevent a vote on a bill that their party supports and negotiated. 
 

Posted
1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

While it’s important to place the blame at the feet of Republicans, it is equally important to note that House Progressives and the Squad are joining forces with Mike Johnson to prevent a vote on a bill that their party supports and negotiated. 
 

The Democrats opposing it believe Israel is actively committing genocide against the Palestinians and they don't want to fund that. 

The Republicans don't want to send more arms to Ukraine because Russia is getting its collective ass kicked and many of them are funded by it. 

I think there is a slight difference here in the reasoning.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 3
Posted
10 minutes ago, Dutchrudder said:

The Democrats opposing it believe Israel is actively committing genocide against the Palestinians and they don't want to fund that. 

The Republicans don't want to send more arms to Ukraine because Russia is getting its collective ass kicked and many of them are funded by it. 

I think there is a slight difference here in the reasoning.

Fuck those people. 

Posted

Anastasis is quoting people (including me) from another thread. It’s super clever.  Also, he very much wants to see Russia win and Ukraine lose and anything that advances Russian interests he celebrates. 

Posted
21 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Anastasis is quoting people (including me) from another thread. It’s super clever.  Also, he very much wants to see Russia win and Ukraine lose and anything that advances Russian interests he celebrates. 

giphy.gif&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=b087ad72f3e58a4

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Dutchrudder said:

Which ones?

Not sure.  I think that it was directed towards democrats that break the rules, and in particular progressives. 

Sorry Dutch, I was just parroting some of the absurd criticisms lobbed toward Porter in another thread. Imagine being pleased with Adam Schiff over Katie Porter as a CA Senate candidate. Real big brained stuff. Like suggesting that Porter is acting to advance Russian interests. 

Edited by Anastasis
Posted
16 hours ago, Anastasis said:

It's an interesting exercise flushing out what triggers weirdos like willfully and fudge. 

AKA trolling. Well stated. 

  • 3 months later...
Posted
14 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

 

 

Some ticket of Porter and Mayor Pete would fucking dominate.  Simple, to the point explanations of how shit is broken and how it should work and why.

Posted
7 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Some ticket of Porter and Mayor Pete would fucking dominate.  Simple, to the point explanations of how shit is broken and how it should work and why.

Not picking on you, but do you really think the problem in the electorate is that they just need someone to explain “how shit is broken”?  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

Not picking on you, but do you really think the problem in the electorate is that they just need someone to explain “how shit is broken”?  

Yes, I think it would be helpful.  People don't understand the basics of government.  I'm not saying it would swing cult members, but I bet it could get some non-voters out.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • 7 months later...
Posted
Just now, Gil Bang said:

meh.  

I like her a lot, as an attack dog.

I'm not sure I like her as an executive.  

I don't like her for one big, big reason: she is a woman.  That means she will never be respected and will never go far.  The Dems need to stick with middle-aged and above white men.

That is not based in any way on what I think about her merits or anyone else's.  That is based entirely on how shitty I have observed the American electorate to be.  The American people want a mediocre white man running things.  They insist on it.  They'll vote for a puffed up white male charlatan before they'd vote for a female Nobel Laureate.

  • Rage+1 2
Posted
4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I don't like her for one big, big reason: she is a woman.  That means she will never be respected and will never go far.  The Dems need to stick with middle-aged and above white men.

That is not based in any way on what I think about her merits or anyone else's.  That is based entirely on how shitty I have observed the American electorate to be.  The American people want a mediocre white man running things.  They insist on it.  They'll vote for a puffed up white male charlatan before they'd vote for a female Nobel Laureate.

counterpoint: it is California.  Not Pennsyltucky. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, Nivek said:

counterpoint: it is California.  Not Pennsyltucky. 

Sure.  But we need to be grooming national leaders.  Time to get back to the basics: mediocre white men.  The future looks like this:

 

13douthatNew-zcjv-mediumSquareAt3X.jpg

zktm7rdbgpr91.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&a

Texas-Attorney-General-Ken-Paxton.jpg

You may hate that truth - I certainly do - but that doesn't make it any less true.

We are seeing the resurgence, with a LITERAL vengeance, of the mediocre white man.  He's sick and tired of having what is rightfully his STOLEN by.....well-educated and competent women....and smart, hardworking minorities.  IT'S JUST NOT FAIR!  And....the electorate seems to agree with them.  So, play by the rules of the game that are in place, and play to win.

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Sure.  But we need to be grooming national leaders.  Time to get back to the basics: mediocre white men.  The future looks like this:

 

13douthatNew-zcjv-mediumSquareAt3X.jpg

zktm7rdbgpr91.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&a

Texas-Attorney-General-Ken-Paxton.jpg

You may hate that truth - I certainly do - but that doesn't make it any less true.

We are seeing the resurgence, with a LITERAL vengeance, of the mediocre white man.  He's sick and tired of having what is rightfully his STOLEN by.....well-educated and competent women....and smart, hardworking minorities.  IT'S JUST NOT FAIR!  And....the electorate seems to agree with them.  So, play by the rules of the game that are in place, and play to win.

 

I didn't expect to feel so conflicted by your post.

You know, as a middle aged mediocre white man with mediocre white sons and grandsons.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
23 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Sure.  But we need to be grooming national leaders.  Time to get back to the basics: mediocre white men.  The future looks like this:

 

13douthatNew-zcjv-mediumSquareAt3X.jpg

zktm7rdbgpr91.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&a

Texas-Attorney-General-Ken-Paxton.jpg

You may hate that truth - I certainly do - but that doesn't make it any less true.

We are seeing the resurgence, with a LITERAL vengeance, of the mediocre white man.  He's sick and tired of having what is rightfully his STOLEN by.....well-educated and competent women....and smart, hardworking minorities.  IT'S JUST NOT FAIR!  And....the electorate seems to agree with them.  So, play by the rules of the game that are in place, and play to win.

 

Nah, California politicians are unelectable on a national stage, regardless of sex and race. Have you seen what the current CA governor looks like?

Right wing Media will spend their entire tenure poisoning the waters making it a non-starter.

  • Like 1
Posted
39 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:
49 minutes ago, Nivek said:

 

Sure.  But we need to be grooming national leaders.  Time to get back to the basics: mediocre white men. 

So you’re saying I should step up?

  • Haha 1
Posted
31 minutes ago, Foosters said:

Nah, California politicians are unelectable on a national stage, regardless of sex and race. Have you seen what the current CA governor looks like?

Right wing Media will spend their entire tenure poisoning the waters making it a non-starter.

Too handsome and too good of hair?

Posted
8 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

Having a gorgeous head of hair is what sunk Mitt Romney 

I can see it. At a certain age, it really is the only flex that draws the resentment and hate and full ire of many a sad man.

  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

*slowly puts down beer* I've got mediocre coming out my ass.

We don’t need to know the results of your Cologuard test.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
7 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Sure.  But we need to be grooming national leaders.  Time to get back to the basics: mediocre white men.  The future looks like this:

 

13douthatNew-zcjv-mediumSquareAt3X.jpg

zktm7rdbgpr91.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&a

Texas-Attorney-General-Ken-Paxton.jpg

You may hate that truth - I certainly do - but that doesn't make it any less true.

We are seeing the resurgence, with a LITERAL vengeance, of the mediocre white man.  He's sick and tired of having what is rightfully his STOLEN by.....well-educated and competent women....and smart, hardworking minorities.  IT'S JUST NOT FAIR!  And....the electorate seems to agree with them.  So, play by the rules of the game that are in place, and play to win.

 

Mediocrity would be a massive leap forward from these clowns.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
5 hours ago, safe sex said:

Newsom also threw trans people under the bus during his interview with Charlie Kirk, so he's got that going for him too 

I don’t think admitting there’s some sincerity in the electorate about their feelings in regards to trans participation in female sports is throwing the entire group under the bus.  
 

I know the LGBTQ community feels very under threat, but if they are going to make Dems die on that hill then they might as well join MAGA.  

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
19 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

I don’t think admitting there’s some sincerity in the electorate about their feelings in regards to trans participation in female sports is throwing the entire group under the bus.  
 

I know the LGBTQ community feels very under threat, but if they are going to make Dems die on that hill then they might as well join MAGA.  

Lol, queer people can't make Democrats do shit. Democrats don't HAVE to go talk to Charlie Kirk and say it's so "deeply unfair" for trans girls to play sports when there are about 10 trans girls playing NCAA sports and when the federal government is trying to completely erase trans people from public life.

Quote from Kirk:

Quote

“You have an opportunity to run to the middle … you right now should come out and be like, you know what, the young man who's about to win the state championship in the long jump in female sports,” Kirk continued, misgendering a high school track player in California. “That shouldn't happen.”

Did y'all know a trans boy won multiple Texas wrestling championship because he was forced to compete against cis girls? Mack Beggs. Never gets brought up in these discussions because the right only gives a shit about policing trans girls

 The more you give up the more the right will demand from trans people because it's not about sports and fairness!

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
7 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Sure.  But we need to be grooming national leaders.  Time to get back to the basics: mediocre white men.  The future looks like this:

 

13douthatNew-zcjv-mediumSquareAt3X.jpg

zktm7rdbgpr91.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&a

Texas-Attorney-General-Ken-Paxton.jpg

You may hate that truth - I certainly do - but that doesn't make it any less true.

We are seeing the resurgence, with a LITERAL vengeance, of the mediocre white man.  He's sick and tired of having what is rightfully his STOLEN by.....well-educated and competent women....and smart, hardworking minorities.  IT'S JUST NOT FAIR!  And....the electorate seems to agree with them.  So, play by the rules of the game that are in place, and play to win.

 

Agree with need to groom national leaders. Still, I suspect Katie would be uniquely formidable as leader of a state, and we need that, too.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
53 minutes ago, safe sex said:

Lol, queer people can't make Democrats do shit. Democrats don't HAVE to go talk to Charlie Kirk and say it's so "deeply unfair" for trans girls to play sports when there are about 10 trans girls playing NCAA sports and when the federal government is trying to completely erase trans people from public life.

Quote from Kirk:

Did y'all know a trans boy won multiple Texas wrestling championship because he was forced to compete against cis girls? Mack Beggs. Never gets brought up in these discussions because the right only gives a shit about policing trans girls

 The more you give up the more the right will demand from trans people because it's not about sports and fairness!

With all due respect, I think it’s obvious why they don’t care. In their view it’s still a girl besting girls. They don’t buy into the girl being a boy, and so it doesn’t get brought up because there is nothing to be upset about to them.

Thats like saying “did you know the butch lesbian struck out all the cisgender girls in softball and nobody says that’s unfair!” Because that’s the status quo and she’s in the appropriate league (as far as traditional people who care about trans sports, are concerned).

Edited by Vegas64
Posted
50 minutes ago, safe sex said:

The more you give up the more the right will demand from trans people because it's not about sports and fairness!

I’m sure you already know this, but the ethics or justice of it don’t matter if you don’t have public opinion, and the GOP has made sure this (and probably anything civil rights related) is tied up in a general rejection of the lefts assertion over cultural issues.  
 

I get the whole “this is super important to me and my community and we should fight for it”, but right now it’s going to drag down candidates that would otherwise be good allies for the other 99% of issues that community generally supports.  
 

I’m sure this will feed into the anxiety many in the LGBTQ community already feel, but you’re going to see more of this as the ‘28 potentials start trying create something that’ll ignite some grass roots energy.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
29 minutes ago, StassneyHorn said:

Allow me to be the first to congratulate Katie Porter on winning the governorship of the most important state in the union, California.

If Harris runs, Harris wins. 

  • Haha 2
Posted
2 hours ago, safe sex said:

Did y'all know a trans boy won multiple Texas wrestling championship because he was forced to compete against cis girls? Mack Beggs. Never gets brought up in these discussions because the right only gives a shit about policing trans girls

Yeah, the talking point I hear from the rank and file is "somebody has to protect our girls".  Nothing about trans boys.

And, as others have said, it's a tiny fraction of athletes.  I'm pretty sure there could be a reasonable science-based standard that would level the playing field, but that's not the agenda.

  • Hook 'Em 1


×
×
  • Create New...