Recent comments

  • Would You Ban All Guns If You Could?   6 days 18 hours ago

    #28: "They seem to forget to use muskets. I notice it's ok when you bring up FDR...yet if I put out info on T. Jefferson it's a problem for you. Different strokes for different folks?" --HC

    #23: "But I'm still not sure what you are ultimately trying to say. Sorry. Can you elaborate a little more?" --ds

    Uhhh ...please go back and point out specifically where I said or even intimated that it's "a problem" for me that you posted quotes of Jefferson. You can't because I didn't.

    Jumpin' Jaysus, Mary, and Joseph! What is it with you Grumpy Trumpy dolls and straw-man arguments and ad hominem attacks?! Please review the definition of the ad hominem debate tactic: It's fine to insult (I love 'em.), but you must at least add a little bit of honest substance in a response to a response in a debate (which is basically what a public forum is) for it not to be considered a logical fallacy.

    Other infected spittle that flies out of the slobbering mouths of right-wing swamp critters (Ah c'mon, can't ya feel the love between the lines?): false equivalency; false moral equivalency; correlation vs causation, faulty analogy; non sequitur; red herring; slippery slope; cherry picking; circular reasoning; and ...drum roll... failing occam's razor (my all-time favorite troll turd, because it opens the door to some really easy bullying, lol).

    Don't mean to single you out too harshly though; it's easy for all of us to fall into the same traps, which I am certainly guilty of way too many times to count despite trying to check common reasoning mistakes ...ah, at least some of the time maybe? Human nature.

    For a comprehensive list and examples (worth a read):

    https://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/eng207-td/Logic%20and%20Analysis/most_common_logical_fallacies.htm

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

    https://www.pcworld.com/article/184426/illogic_of_the_web.html

    I enjoyed reading post #16 actually. Sorry, was just baiting you with my own jamb-packed, run-on sentence but was sincerely interested in hearing your own voice and takes, maybe a synopsis of all the quotes or something. Haha, so my "big ego" can horse it in and rip ya a new one! Oh well.

    Geez, lighten up, gals.

  • Would You Ban All Guns If You Could?   6 days 21 hours ago

    #31: Holy bigdickinthemouth, Batman! You must be a real hit with your students! I bet they can't wait until the bell rings.

    I am sooo sorry -- not! -- that my big ego and bullying has you sooo upset. YES! SUCCESS! Another Trump snowflake melts in the heat ...of honest scrutiny. Clearly the "bullying" (or rather, the simple pointing out of deliberate lies and blind hypocrisy, albeit with a bit of colorful street language) is most definitely working as evidenced by your miffed retort.

    What is not working however -- in fact is backfiring badly -- is the pathetic schoolyard bullying of the overweight, over-the-hill, limp-dicked, creepy-old-man, pussy-grabber, criminal rapist whom you are so eager to emulate. As long as were 'splainin' things here, why don't you fess up and explain your sick infatuation with this pervert?

    Crickets...

    BTW, My preferred method of aggressive ridicule (so well earned) is not for "everyone" -- said bullying is tailor made with loving care exclusively for you and your fellow "washed-up righties." ("That's not an insult, just the truth." -- Ou812) But don't get all chubbed up just yet, ya feckin' chancer; this here, ah, big 'ol "ego" will horse it into ya hard and leave ya spent! (Insert evil cackle-whinny here.)

    Hint on logic: Don't lead with your "dumb shit" jab and then end with being the whiny little bitch about bullying. Hypocrisy in; hypocrisy out. Is that all you retained from watching Imus in the Morning? LOL.

    Clarification on straw-man argument: Please demonstrate -- in your own words, dick-breath, not mine -- where I'm lying or being inconsistent in any way shape or form in the two quotes (thank you) that you have so honored me with by citing in full ...mostly?

    (FYI: It's not spelled "lieing", Ms./mr. "Teach" ...unless you're "lieing" about that too, which is, mmm, starting to sound veeery suspicious.)

    Pardon me salty alley tongue, dingleberrie, but what feckin' bum's butt did you pop out of? I think 2950-10K is right -- when all is said and done, the bottom line is you really are just plain ass stupid, as in low IQ.

    There is simply no other logical explanation when the evidence is displayed right directly in front of everybody's eyeballs on a public forum in plain English. Pretty damn hard to ignore or deny. I actually feel a tinge of compassion for what you must suffer in life.

    But the dreary truth marches on...

    ...And some feckface needs it 'splained. Jaysus sufferin' f*ck! 63 million of these complete idiots voted! It's no goddamn wonder we now have "F*ckface Von Clownstick" twittering juvenile ego sh*t in the Oval Office crapper and the McTurtle-Ryan sideshow herding hissy-fit cats in Congress.

    Every single nook and cranny on planet f*cking Earth is stuffed full of glaring blaring, chirping, chattering TV screens, gigantic ones, teeny ones, and all the shapes and sizes in between. And spare-arse Bachmann-gobshite, LMOA, wearin' her swamp sh*t-blinders and dickhead ear plugs, stuffed all the way into what passes as a brain, is as baffled as bullsh*t that someone who doesn't own one of those goddamn hunks of worthless plastic crap and wasted resources, and who doesn't live in a sealed-off tomb, would somehow know about all the "Repetitive nonsense that means nothing and in the end is just boring as hell!"

    Yup, 2950-10K ask the exact right question: "Are you stupid?"

    And, are we clear here, boys and girls, er, "my followers"? LOL! So that there is absolutely no confusion, I dare mingin' molly, or anyone else stubbornly still reading this screed, to get through just one "normal" day in Happy Brainwash Land without having ubiquitous robot TV trolls clawing at your poor beat-down frontal lobes. Good luck with that. Ya can't avoid the little f*ckers; they're poppin' up every-goddamn-where like stupid troll posts!

    My personal form of protest that I highly recommend: At every possible opportunity despite angry glares, hit the little, almost hidden OFF button -- at the stores, shops, eateries, bars, schools, doctor office (especially), or any-damn-where else they might jump out to git ya. (Lightening keeps me from the churches.) Abso-goddamn-lutely I quit watching the idiot-f*cking-box! Can't explain it more directly.

    And I'm so goddamn damn glad that I did ...a long, long time ago in a distant galaxy. Poor another pint o' Guinness. Ahhh, what a relief! Now that's real freedom, buddy, not the hollow "liberty and freedom" motto tattooed on the fatty biceps of some bogger eejit with a pussgut hidin' his clackers.

    "Idiot box," by the way, is the most accurate name for it. Sorry to throw around more irritating details, those damnable "details!" (Thanks again, granny, for studiously perusing my latest work product here -- it's a "Christmas gift" meant for you too.) But, yes, as you might suspect, brain scientists have demonstrated that corporate TV programming's long-term effect on concentration can be worse than alcohol and drugs.

    Contrary to old wives' tales (no offense, granny), the conscious and deliberate human mind never multi-tasks very well, because the process of thinking happens basically in chronological succession, which means it happens one thought at a time. That means, in turn, although we certainly can purportedly "multi-task," we really can't perform each sub-task very efficiently or sufficiently. Only when we can focus without undo distraction (given the numerous other unavoidable demands in our rat-race world) on one task at a time do we get good at each of them. Plus, anxiety levels plummet and life is a more easy-going, pleasant experience after you hit the OFF button.

    Ergo, TV "users" subject to constant marketing every five minutes during commercials, and broken-up, rapid-fire action every few seconds during regular programming, are retarding their active thought constructs through the sheer volume of endless interruptions and glitzy, addicting distractions. Long term exposure to such a bombardment of the senses severely shortens attention span -- which is borne out by the disjointed thought patterns of Grumpy Trumpy dolls every day on this blog, although it would be unfair to blame it all on the TV industry. Sometimes basic stupidity is congenital.

    And for that I have great sympathy. Hard to say it, but it's not really a gobshite's fault that he or she or whatever felt compelled to vote for another born fool. You know -- science.

    Thanks again for shoppin' at our lil' house o' whores. Ya'all come back now. Hope not too many of yer fartstrings were pulled, troll-shites. (Now leave a "Grant" on the dresser and pull yer manky trousers back up, skank. Yer trunks are leapin' wi' dingleberries!)

    slán

  • Would You Ban All Guns If You Could?   1 week 4 hours ago

    #30: Nothing but emptiness.

    Mommy the Monitor strikes again! She wants us all to follow her shining example and just post pissy little inconsequential remarks like hers, which on further examination have no real-life significance outside of her cavernous skull. She's good at counting paragraphs, not so good at reading them. (And she even had two fingers left on one hand!) That's okay; after years and years of absorbing bumper-sticker slogans passed off as "news" for lazy minds, it's understandable why Republican Trumpies can only handle a few lines of text before they're hopelessly confused.

    For instance, granny loves to quote me out of context, one paragraph in particular that evidently fascinates her childish mind, but then can only comprehend half of it, totally missing the overall point. ("Ooowww, four lines of text -- my head hurts!")

    Note to mommy: Square pegs don't fit into round holes. Each thread of discussion is a unique combination of factors, so trying to apply an out-of-context quote from one thread to another in a different context, in order to falsely insinuate some sort of hypocrisy, is maybe -- maybe -- at the 6th grade level of reading comprehension and composition, and is intellectually dishonest. (No offense to 6th graders.)

    Back to this thread though: Smack dab at the end of the post immediately preceding yours (hard to miss), what part of "...other than to tease you or for a spring board, I really don't care what you think or why..." don't you understand?

    Don't flatter yourself, óinseach. Your anemic posts are neither politically incorrect nor politically insightful nor hard to handle. They're just foolish. However, you and your butt buddies provide a constant source of fodder to demonstrate the paucity of the so-called "conservative mind," which definitely is not conservative and plainly has no mind. So I'll read (or not) Trump troll's inane comments and respond (or not) as I wish. That is the full meaning of your borrowed quote, in case you need the original author to spell it out, which obviously you do.)

    Hotdamn, your eyeballs and brain must really be hemorrhaging now -- that was more than two sentences! Count 'em up, granny; it'll entertain you until your grandkids show up with a new set of Tinkertoys.

  • It Doesn't Cost Billionaires Anything To Oppress You   1 week 9 hours ago

    Hot Coffee, You should add references and facts with all of your opinion. Otherwise it is just opinion.

  • It Doesn't Cost Billionaires Anything To Oppress You   1 week 12 hours ago

    Oldskoold,

    I'm pleased to discuss your post.

    I guess because I grew up in S.F. I have always had friends of many different backrounds.

    I don't recall even being aware of racial issues until I was 12 years old and took a trip to Tennessee. After a day or two I asked several relatives where the black people were.

    They didn't want to answer but eventually I was told they had there own part of town.

    Came home to S.F. and continued on with my friendships.

    I still have those friends and our conversations about race are always easy,comfortable,

    and honest on both sides. One girlfriend who grew up in Texas wouldn't go back there for any reason due to race relations.

    So S.F. is 99% Dems as I have always been, but this last election and my dislike of Hillary,

    changed something for me....I felt like I woke up in the twillight zone...couldn't believe the way my party had changed and how they were running around in dumb p*ssy hats,

    and being generally hateful. I still hope they come to their senses.

  • It Doesn't Cost Billionaires Anything To Oppress You   1 week 13 hours ago

    # 5

    Oh; there are many racist "D's" and they don't realize it. Thank you for replying/commenting by the way, sincerely. The racism I refer to is; as I witnessed recently, "white people (friends/coworkers) " congregated in a public venue and one decides to enter that realm with conversation. He looked both ways and backwards before speaking. It wasn't a terrible remark but; why feel as though you must look? I call it "latent racism". Something I have been guilty of engaging in ocassionally in my time here. My point is; they/I ocassionally, don't even realize it.

  • It Doesn't Cost Billionaires Anything To Oppress You   1 week 14 hours ago

    #4

    I have 8 aunts and uncles from South Carolina ...1 of the 8 is a racist. They do exist however compared to 50 years ago much had improved..yet I now see that the left is promoting it...as if they don't want to let it die a natural death. It is their Trump card so to speak...so if 1 of 8 is racist perhaps the other 7 don't appreciate being falsely accused.

    Especially forgotten are all the whites that marched in support of MLK or Ceaser Chavez.

    My point, what is the point of insulting 7 non racist people to convict 1 racist?

    Or as in my post above why pretend that there are not any racist democrats when clearly there are.

  • It Doesn't Cost Billionaires Anything To Oppress You   1 week 14 hours ago

    Great Job Jayemal! I have seen the Reverend Dr. in person in Asheville NC. He is the true and present MLK of our time. No offence to Thom whatsoever. God is God. I don't think I need an intermediatery to funnel through as in Jesus or any others to speak and pray. Perhaps that was the reason kings like "King James" authorized the rewriting (or writing) of the Bible. Seems these southern white males want to comix and constrew the Old Testament with the new. The old testament seems rather "Sharia" law to me.... Actually after rereading Thoms post before posting this, i'm not sure how he trashed religion..... However; I'm hitting send! Enjoy and comment as appropriate. Remember though; this comes from a Southern White pater figure of two sons who share my resolve.

    And yes; Hotcoffee, they are racist. I see and hear it most days. Not as frequent though.

  • It Doesn't Cost Billionaires Anything To Oppress You   1 week 15 hours ago

    I guess it isn't racist when Hillary tells the super predators that they need to be brought to heel, or calls Donna Brazile a brain dead buffalo.

    I really expect better from you Thom....you know darn well most people are not racist on either side. However there are some racists on both sides. You are promoting hate of republicans while closing your eyes to democrats that do the same thing.

    Neither side is clean, the hypocrisy is blatant.

  • It Doesn't Cost Billionaires Anything To Oppress You   1 week 16 hours ago

    If you have wealth and power, you wish the status quo to prevail. Change is a threat to the status quo by it's very nature. Conservatives (real conservatives) seek to maintain the status quo. When you want to conserve something you don't seek to change it.

    I am reluctant to refer to many republicans, that I speak with today, as "conservatives". There seems to be a disconnect between the ideologys of the republican party, of the past, with the direction of the party today.

    Law and order seems to get lost, in the lack of interest in making sure that people purchasing guns (handguns and assault weapons), are able/capable of making responsible decisions. At least as responsible as we would expect from someone with a drivers license. Protection of property rights?: why is it that my community has no right to protect it's water supply from a corporation looking to find a cheap way to expose of waste?

    The framers of our constitution had no interest in our rights. That's why you have no rights in the body of the constitution. The "bill of rights" are simply ten amendments to the constitution added/negotiated to get the constitution ratified. The constitution was written by the rich for the rich. Property and commerce, these are the only two rights fully protected by the framers of the constitution. Every thing else was fluff.

  • It Doesn't Cost Billionaires Anything To Oppress You   1 week 17 hours ago

    Tom, don't trash religion. MLK called out the U.S. on racism, militarism, and materialism. If only we listened to our prophets, in MLK's case one who spoke to us from the Christian heritiage, but we have had secular prophets and ones from other religions. The Rev. William Barber III, is re-igniting MLK's Poor Peoples' Campaign. He welcomes allies from all faiths and no faith, but it is obviou his inspiration and energy comes from his Christian faith. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Relgioin, like everything else on this earth, can be used for good or ill. MLK and Barber used and are using it for good. Let's celebrate than and contribute to their efforts.

    Also, come up to date on new insights into the Adam and Eve story and St. Paul who said in Christ there is "no male or female, Greek or Jew, slave or free." Yes, he had things to say about women not speakng in church to some of the churches he founded. This was in areas where he thought female leadership (which he praises in letters to churches in other locales) would only cause them more persecution and grief than they were already getting. Also, in my church we just call "God," "God" we don't use any pronoun. There is a lot more insight and revelation needed here, but dissing the whole thing is not useful.

  • Would You Ban All Guns If You Could?   1 week 18 hours ago

    Never mind the amount of guns. $$$ The gun makers and NGA are addicted to money. $$$ Not even a freight train will stop them..

    Gun Insurance would put a damper on things. You don't have to register your stash of guns (for the paranoid) - Just have insurance if someone gets hurt. No insurance? Jail time! And allow people to carry guns at gun shows to show how safe they are. In fact, make it mandatory at gun shows.. Show the world how safe you feel around other gun owners! Let's put that on camera!

    Enact laws that would incrementally punish people more with larger clips if they get into a shooting incident. More bullets more time. No execeptions. No excuses.

  • Would You Ban All Guns If You Could?   1 week 18 hours ago

    It would help if Eric Holder, Ollie North and all those in between didn't keep fast & furious gun drops going.

    Cartels from South of the Border, Bulgaria, and serveral other countries bring their big bad guns to their illegal pot grows in California. Home invasions happen regularly.

    Police at least an hour away from most invasions.

    #28

    They seem to forget to use muskets. I notice it's ok when you bring up FDR...yet if I put out info on T. Jefferson it's a problem for you. Different strokes for different folks?

  • Has Corporate Speech silenced my own in Government?   1 week 20 hours ago
    Quote RichL1004:

    I apologize for the confusion. Had been up for way too long. Yes I understand that they can only run the ads; in a sense "campaign" for certain issues. This was their way around the whole issue. You are correct. I was thinking of how there could be a resolution to try and limit the political biasses from running those ads. That is what I meant by using the term campaign. I will try to be more careful with my words instead of just a generalized way especially when my generalization is incorrect so thank you for that.

    I'm skeptical of government regulation of political speech. The law in question with the CU case would prohibit the Sierra Club from taking out an ad pointing out that candidate X has a poor record on environmental voting 60 days before an election. Does that not seem to create a 1st amendment issue to you?

  • Would You Ban All Guns If You Could?   1 week 21 hours ago

    @29 Dumb Shit
    Your statement "'I'm more of a reader than a watcher and, when not traveling, usually write in a room full of books, magazines, and various other reference materials, which are consulted regularly as well as the internet. I quit watching TV after Bush, Cheney, the fossil fuel industry, defense contractors, Wall Street Bankers, right-wing think tanks, and corporate media pundits used that platform to lie our nation into wars for oil and profit."

    If the above is true, that you quit watching TV, than explain this " I really don't care what you think or why, since you only seem to play on the surface and can only offer the same old right-wing crap that blares out nonstop over the airways, cable, and the internet swamp. Repetitive nonsense that means nothing and in the end is just boring as hell!

    Are you lieing in the first part or the second part

    You really are on an Ego trip, a delusional one I might add. Quit trying to Bully everyone, it's not working here.

  • Would You Ban All Guns If You Could?   1 week 21 hours ago

    Rather than constructing eight paragraphs of response, why don't you just follow this sage advice, especially the last sentence.

    Mr. Ed sez, “You're not Mommy the Monitor. This is a free-speech zone, so post as much or as little as your black heart desires. If you can't handle my politically incorrect posts, then don't read them and don't respond.”

  • Would You Ban All Guns If You Could?   1 week 22 hours ago

    #22.

    Oh I see; now it's all about "creating a persona" for myself and not the subject matter. Strange. Why would you think that -- because that is what you are trying to do?

    In your mind evidently, revealed by your own words, posting on Thom's blog is all about shallow, high-school-level ego games and no substance, scoring drive-by hits on the stupid liberals in a vain effort to mollify the sneaking hunch that you might have wasted years of precious life totally hornswoggled by liars who call themselves "conservative" -- one of the most abused misnomers of all time.

    All ego and no substance. Other than Republican programmed talking points, it's all ya got. So naturally you can't handle detail. I just try to describe what's already there, right out in front of God and everyone to see. It has nothing to do with me personally, even though you continually try to make it so. Therefore, I just give you a taste of your own medicine, and try to have fun with it. That's all; pretty straight forward stuff, no? Why do you ascribe an ulterior motive?

    Of course the devil is in the details, especially when you're dealing with the empty rhetoric and lies of Republicans. Since you seem obsessed by my process of writing in fleshing out the pithy, half-baked thoughts of trolls -- where wingerisms fall apart -- I'll admit that drilling down past the baloney does take some effort. Obviously.

    I'm more of a reader than a watcher and, when not traveling, usually write in a room full of books, magazines, and various other reference materials, which are consulted regularly as well as the internet. I quit watching TV after Bush, Cheney, the fossil fuel industry, defense contractors, Wall Street Bankers, right-wing think tanks, and corporate media pundits used that platform to lie our nation into wars for oil and profit.

    As we all know, writing is a continuous struggle to say what one means so that there is no question about a taken position, right or wrong, good or bad. To be honest, failure is more common than success in this never-ending uphill battle. I wouldn't be a pimple on a real writer's ass, like Thom -- it takes way too much time and dedication, and I hate sitting on my ass for long periods of time -- it aint healthy.

    Sooo... what exactly is it about that process that "gives [me] away" in your little troll mind? More curious, why do you and the other trolls post here? You sure love to ascribe to others your own subjective interpretations and biases, with no credible outward evidence, but never explain yourself.

    Those questions are only rhetorical, granny; like I said, other than to tease you or for a spring board, I really don't care what you think or why, since you only seem to play on the surface and can only offer the same old right-wing crap that blares out nonstop over the airways, cable, and the internet swamp. Repetitive nonsense that means nothing and in the end is just boring as hell!

    Are the details of that position clear enough for you now?

  • Would You Ban All Guns If You Could?   1 week 23 hours ago

    K2 #24. Haha, Okay got it. Sorry, I was just baiting HotCoffee with a little light-hearted tongue and cheek humor. A little too subtle perhaps? Her point in her double posts was elaborated on quite sufficiently for both threads I would think, right? It was an interesting read, and with such long posts she is a gal after my heart.

    };--))

  • You Are Not Free If You Can't Afford Healthcare   1 week 1 day ago

    It appears someone missed their meds.

  • Would You Ban All Guns If You Could?   1 week 1 day ago

    Off topic but don't know where else to put this.

    I was researching the proposed budget and IRS revenue projection and ran across this info regarding unemployment benefits and who pays for it. I've often argued that this is NOT paid for by workers but by employers and some people actually thought it was the FICA tax which is for SS. Here it is straight from IRS website.
    "Federal Unemployment (FUTA) Tax
    Employers report and pay FUTA tax separately from Federal Income tax, and social security and Medicare taxes. You pay FUTA tax only from your own funds. Employees do not pay this tax or have it withheld from their pay. Refer to Publication 15, Employer's Tax Guide and Publication 15-A, Employer's Supplemental Tax Guide for more information on FUTA tax."

  • Would You Ban All Guns If You Could?   1 week 1 day ago

    I completely agree that guns should be registered and I think the insurance requirement is a good thing. I don't agree that manufacturers should be able to sell to the general public weapons whose only possible use is killing human beings. I don't hunt but I can't imagine that you go after squirels or rabbits with an AR 15. I also think hunters and target shooters have time to reload so don't need 30 round clips. If we add to registration and banning assault weapons a data base that keeps information on felons and mentally unstable individuals, that would consitute effective, sensible gun control. You do have to accept that some people who might be perfectly willing to us guns responsibly will get caught up in the unstable or criminal labels but I think we just hve to accdpt that.

  • Would You Ban All Guns If You Could?   1 week 1 day ago

    Thom,

    I will not go through all your points with my counterpoints except for one, just for the sake of brevity. Registration.

    Consider a law that requires registration of firearms: a convicted felon can not be convicted for failing to register a gun, because it is illegal under Federal law for a felon to possess a firearm; but a person who can legally own a gun, and fails to register it, can be punished.

    The Fifth Amendment, Self-Incrimination, and Gun Registration https://www.firearmsandliberty.com/cramer.haynes.html

  • Would You Ban All Guns If You Could?   1 week 1 day ago

    If you can't figure out what Hot Coffee is saying, maybe I can help.

    To summarize, the point the Founding Fathers were making is:

    Any Government who does not trust their citizens to own firearms, itself cannot be trusted.

    History is repleat with examples.

    K2

  • Would You Ban All Guns If You Could?   1 week 1 day ago

    HotCoffee. What's your point? Nothing wrong with doing so, but you just posted a long list of the same exact cherry-picked quotes twice, yesterday and today, from a lot of different people who lived a long time ago in a completely different, pre-industrial, mostly hunting and agricultural era where guns were a completely different technological beast and which had a totally different significance to everyday survival than what the reality is today in the postmodern era with a professional, highly sophisticated and mechanized standing army, along with a permanent, well-equipped national guard to protect us.

    But I'm still not sure what you are ultimately trying to say. Sorry. Can you elaborate a little more?

  • Would You Ban All Guns If You Could?   1 week 1 day ago

    And you stud muffin, clearly spent too much time on the DuckDuckGo machine trying to create a persona for yourself. Next time don't put in so much detail, it gives you away.

Trump Is Using Racist White People To Make The Rich Richer

There is this whole mythology that Donald Trump came to power because 53% of white women voted for him, because 66% of white working men who didn't have a college degree voted for him.

That may be, but those are not his constituents. Those are his suckers. Those are his rubes.