#401 2016-07-20 17:29:19
In this day and age when Grand Central is guarded 24x7 by armed soldiers the chant against one of the presidential candidates is Lock Her Up which as a statement actually has some validity. Of course the irony of the fact that the candidate for these chanting folks is a spoiled brat game show host is completely lost on them.
Silly season indeed...
Offline
#402 2016-07-20 18:24:01
Emmeran wrote:
In this day and age when Grand Central is guarded 24x7 by armed soldiers the chant against one of the presidential candidates is Lock Her Up which as a statement actually has some validity. Of course the irony of the fact that the candidate for these chanting folks is a spoiled brat game show host is completely lost on them.
Silly season indeed...
I'll agree with Billary getting locked up, if Trump is put up against the wall and shot for all the people he fucked in failed real estate deals.
Offline
#403 2016-07-20 18:25:50
Wikipedia wrote:
Ressentiment , in philosophy and psychology, is one of the forms of resentment or hostility. It is the French word for "resentment" (fr. Latin intensive prefix 're', and 'sentir' "to feel"). Ressentiment is a sense of hostility directed at that which one identifies as the cause of one's frustration, that is, an assignment of blame for one's frustration. The sense of weakness or inferiority and perhaps jealousy in the face of the "cause" generates a rejecting/justifying value system, or morality, which attacks or denies the perceived source of one's frustration. This value system is then used as a means of justifying one's own weaknesses by identifying the source of envy as objectively inferior, serving as a defense mechanism that prevents the resentful individual from addressing and overcoming their insecurities and flaws. The ego creates an enemy in order to insulate itself from culpability.
Another aspect of ressentiment is the projection of real grievance from a source perceived to be too powerful to attack onto an imagined source deemed to too weak or vulnerable to retaliate. This explains a lot about the current state of American politics, but in my humble opinion the best use of the word is to accuse Trump supporters of it and then watch their reaction when you condescendingly explain that it's actually pronounced “ruh-sohn-tee-mohn”.
Last edited by Tall Paul (2016-07-20 18:26:49)
Offline
#404 2016-07-22 21:00:25
#405 2016-07-22 21:38:38
Seemed shrill and off-key, like Tommy Chong after a late night and before his first good hit of the day.
Offline
#406 2016-07-22 22:38:36
Shaolin Vp
Auto-edited on 2020-08-02 to update URLs
Offline
#407 2016-07-23 21:42:35
choad wrote:
Seemed shrill and off-key, like Tommy Chong after a late night and before his first good hit of the day.
Well, he has been chillin' on his farm for, like, a year or something.
Offline
#408 2016-07-24 10:53:17
#409 2016-07-24 11:05:22
Aude wrote:
I thought he was going to destroy America? Fuck that was anti-climactic
Offline
#410 2016-07-24 17:47:26
Emmeran wrote:
Aude wrote:
I thought he was going to destroy America? Fuck that was anti-climactic
I have yet to see a single Gun Confiscation Squad on my street this entire eight years. What gives?
Offline
#411 2016-07-27 13:35:01
If you're still on the fence, this might push you over the edge...
Last edited by lechero (2016-07-27 13:36:23)
Offline
#412 2016-07-27 16:00:13
lechero wrote:
If you're still on the fence, this might push you over the edge...
On the fence regarding choosing Hitler or Stalin??
Nah - Snoopy gets my vote.
Offline
#413 2016-07-27 16:30:42
lechero wrote:
If you're still on the fence, this might push you over the edge...
Just gotta go clean out my ears with an icepick.
Offline
#414 2016-07-28 15:21:47
#415 2016-07-29 03:59:16
Offline
#416 2016-07-29 09:33:10
Very convincing. Where do I vomit?
lechero wrote:
If you're still on the fence, this might push you over the edge...
Offline
#417 2016-07-29 16:32:49
#418 2016-07-29 23:36:08
Something you won't see on CNN.
Offline
#419 2016-07-29 23:43:30
Devout corruption vs. elitist showmanship?
What to choose, what to choose, what to choose??
Fuck it, I choose bourbon.
Offline
#420 2016-08-01 00:51:16
#421 2016-08-01 19:47:00
Offline
#422 2016-08-02 01:28:08
#423 2016-08-02 09:12:11
Tall Paul wrote:
Trump admits he's going to lose.
Trump fears election could be 'rigged'
And he's right, it is rigged; everybody gets to vote - not just the ultra right wing mouth breathers.
Offline
#424 2016-08-02 16:03:17
Baywolfe wrote:
And he's right, it is rigged; everybody gets to vote - not just the ultra right wing mouth breathers.
Try telling that to the Bernie supporters.
Offline
#425 2016-08-02 18:52:39
#426 2016-08-02 21:50:19
Aude wrote:
Baywolfe wrote:
And he's right, it is rigged; everybody gets to vote - not just the ultra right wing mouth breathers.
Try telling that to the Bernie supporters.
I voted (in a primary for the first time in my life) for Bernie, but since he was only a Democrat from two minutes before entering the race and until two minutes after he conceded I can understand why the DNC tried to undercut him. Not saying I agree, but I do understand.
Offline
#427 2016-08-03 12:20:53
I have to agree with TP. The symmetry of having a temporary democrat running in the primaries at the same time there is a temporary republican running is, at the very least, interesting. It is not surprising that the apparatus of each party was less than welcoming. In fact, one could say the democrats were more effective than the republicans at warding off their interloper.
Offline
#428 2016-08-03 18:17:17
Auto-edited on 2020-08-02 to update URLs
Last edited by lechero (2016-08-03 18:17:33)
Offline
#429 2016-08-03 20:44:15
Tall Paul wrote:
Aude wrote:
Baywolfe wrote:
And he's right, it is rigged; everybody gets to vote - not just the ultra right wing mouth breathers.
Try telling that to the Bernie supporters.
I voted (in a primary for the first time in my life) for Bernie, but since he was only a Democrat from two minutes before entering the race and until two minutes after he conceded I can understand why the DNC tried to undercut him. Not saying I agree, but I do understand.
No it was the Russians!! The Russians made them rig elections....
Buy more bombs!!!
Offline
#430 2016-08-04 14:28:32
Fled wrote:
I have to agree with TP. The symmetry of having a temporary democrat running in the primaries at the same time there is a temporary republican running is, at the very least, interesting. It is not surprising that the apparatus of each party was less than welcoming. In fact, one could say the democrats were more effective than the republicans at warding off their interloper.
I was thinking about this yesterday, contrasting how weak the parties have been in promoting their own candidates, even "fake" ones, against how strong they are at projecting strength along party lines. Then I realized why. They don't care. Both parties have pretty much conceded the presidential race. They know the real power is in the Senate (with the check book) and in the House (with nominations and bill creation). Toss in a few key governors and the parties don't even need the President any more. Sure, it's nice to have it, better if you also control at least one side of the legislature, but not critical. They can even kill Supreme Court nominations with a few tasty leaks, so why take the risk?
The president takes more heat and is so mercilessly monitored and Monday morning quarterbacked in the popular media that it may actually be detrimental. Many more chances for the party to get burned than to make hay if your functionary is the lighting rod. Better to have someone you can throw under a bus the first time they slip up and say something like "niggardly" near a microphone. "Was never really a [party] anyway"....
So have your little party and pick the Prom King. But against the dozens of 30 year terms in the Senate and the loosest campaign finance regulations in 100 years, it matters as much as a fart in a hurricane. Might as well be the Queen for all the real power that rests in the Executive branch these days.
Offline
#431 2016-08-05 12:50:12
Tall Paul wrote:
I voted (in a primary for the first time in my life) for Bernie, but since he was only a Democrat from two minutes before entering the race and until two minutes after he conceded I can understand why the DNC tried to undercut him. Not saying I agree, but I do understand.
Would you agree, then, that the political parties have entirely too much control over our electoral process? Consider who owns them.
Offline
#432 2016-08-05 16:57:19
GooberMcNutly wrote:
Might as well be the Queen for all the real power that rests in the Executive branch these days.
Yup - the most notable thing about Obama is that he didn't embarrass us on the world stage.
I'm not a conspiracy guy but the Republicans haven't tried to win a race since 2004.
Offline
#433 2016-08-13 22:23:07
#435 2016-08-21 18:34:51
~ click ~
Auto-edited on 2020-08-02 to update URLs
Offline
#436 2016-09-03 04:23:13
Leader of the Danish Green Party, Alternativet, speaking the universal language.
Offline
#437 2016-09-05 10:40:52
#438 2016-09-05 20:39:28
Farewell to a classic cunt. No doubt she and Nancy R. are air-kissing each other's cheeks in Hell right now.
Fixed link - square
Last edited by square (2016-09-05 22:42:39)
Offline
#439 2016-09-07 09:58:26
George Orr wrote:
Farewell to a classic cunt. No doubt she and Nancy R. are air-kissing each other's cheeks in Hell right now.
Fixed link - square
I've met her a couple of times when I worked with Regnery publishing. She just seemed like one of those ladies that wants to be put on a pedestal and treated "specially" and didn't care what she had to say to get there. She would literally stand by a door in a room full of men, waiting for one to open it for her, that kind of attention whore. Just like most of the ego-maniacs that I worked with there, "conservatism" was just a branch of genre fiction, something that had a pre-built market and was easy to sell books to. But some of them actually believe the BS they are peddaling, they are the dangerous ones.
Still, she published her "last" book yesterday. Nothing left but for Regnery to put out a bunch more compilations. All of her books made money, that's what the editors always said. No need to stop now, I'm sure they are already working on printed compilations of her blog posts and columns.
Offline
#440 2016-09-10 14:03:19
#441 2016-09-10 18:46:55
George Orr wrote:
This season keeps getting siller.
I doubt this will hurt him with his followers, though.
He also wants to do away with the Johnson amendment. Would that I could live just long enough to see radical Muslims take over this country by walking down the road paved by radical Christianity.
Last edited by Baywolfe (2016-09-10 18:47:13)
Offline
#442 2016-09-11 20:50:07
Offline
#443 2016-09-11 21:34:04
Baywolfe wrote:
George Orr wrote:
This season keeps getting siller.
I doubt this will hurt him with his followers, though.He also wants to do away with the Johnson amendment. Would that I could live just long enough to see radical Muslims take over this country by walking down the road paved by radical Christianity.
Good luck with that one in this modern world...
Offline
#444 2016-09-11 22:17:23
I hear Hillary collapsed in NYC today. 
~~ clicky ~~
(Too soon?)
Last edited by whosasailorthen (2016-09-11 22:18:53)
Offline
#445 2016-09-12 10:24:14
whosasailorthen wrote:
I hear Hillary collapsed in NYC today.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/09/ … 690850.jpg
~~ clicky ~~
(Too soon?)
I'm more concerned for the horse than Hillary.
Everywhere I've ever seen these carriage rides, the human element is inevitably someone who should not be allowed to keep animals. All over the world, cities, towns, tourist meccas. Every. Single. Time. the animal is obviously neglected and the human is ignorant, callous and apathetic.
Probably because we own horses, but the lack of focus on equine abuse in the civilized world is unbelievable.
Offline
#446 2016-09-12 10:42:58
XregnaR wrote:
I'm more concerned for the horse than Hillary.
Everywhere I've ever seen these carriage rides, the human element is inevitably someone who should not be allowed to keep animals. All over the world, cities, towns, tourist meccas. Every. Single. Time. the animal is obviously neglected and the human is ignorant, callous and apathetic.
Probably because we own horses, but the lack of focus on equine abuse in the civilized world is unbelievable.
I'd own horses if I had the time, they are far less troublesome than politicians (particularly carpet baggers like Hillary).
Offline
#447 2016-09-12 19:49:36
#448 2016-09-13 12:45:05
XregnaR wrote:
Probably because we own horses, but the lack of focus on equine abuse in the civilized world is unbelievable.
I agree. But I'm assuming you don't use your horses to make money. From Cinderella rides to equine logging, I see working horses get put through stuff that would give your average pasture ornament a nervous breakdown. But, then, people treat their vehicles the same way. Human nature and all that....
Offline
#449 2016-09-13 15:21:02
choad wrote:
Sopranos episode, take 2.
http://boingboing.net/2016/09/12/donald … rth-o.html
Nothing about this guy would surprise me or would make his adoring followers run away, I suppose.
I don't even think he's evil. He's just another functioning Sociopath and a textbook Narcissist.
Offline
#450 2016-09-13 19:16:32
Baywolfe wrote:
Nothing about this guy would surprise me or would make his adoring followers run away, I suppose.
I don't even think he's evil. He's just another functioning Sociopath and a textbook Narcissist.
If so we should send him an invitation to join us here...
Offline
