mostly reader's comments

« First    « Previous    Comments 46 - 85 of 85    Last »

  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2018 Jun 17, 2:21pm     ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag      

Just in case someone still doesn't get level of racism embraced by the hardcore left, pay attention to post #84. Apparently, concept "All lives matter" is something to be ridiculed.

You can't make this up.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2018 Jun 17, 4:15pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

bob2356 says
mostly reader says
Just in case someone still doesn't get level of racism embraced by the hardcore left, pay attention to post #84. Apparently, concept "All lives matter" is something to be ridiculed.

Ridiculing conservatives is racism? What race is conservative?
I am saying that ridiculing racially inclusive slogan - "All lives matter" - is
racist. This is obvious to anyone with a brain cell (which rules out the author of #84)
How the fuck did you go from this to "Ridiculing conservatives is racism"??
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2018 Jun 17, 4:42pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Feux Follets says
Oh boo hoo hoo - those mean liberuls posted a cartoon about conservatives. Oh boo hoo hoo hoo
Learn the difference between "mean" and "sad divisive losers".
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 9, 12:46pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Aphroman says
Innocent until proven guilty

The right wing nuts are out of control with baseless accusations

If you are referring to Kavanaugh, he didn't just win in the court of law. He won in the much tougher court of "is it likely that it happened?". Much tougher for the accused. Which makes your post a complete strawman.

Unless you are stating that it's unlikely that attackers in the video are from the left. Is that what you are stating?
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 11, 7:03am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Good question, actually. Are there stats on recent leftist mob violence in relaxed (shall issue, stand your ground) vs. restrictive zones?
It would be somewhat skewed because the former tend to be right-leaning to begin with, which would reduce the possibility of such a thing and also imply that the police would be doing their job in the event that it occurs. Still, it would be a data point.
Gut feel says that it should be next to non-existent in firearm-enabled zones, but data is better than gut feel.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 11, 11:50am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Misc says
It's not just the Left that is violent. Police (typically Right leaning) shoot and kill about 100 un-armed people a year. I haven't seen statistics for those they shoot but aren't killed. Additionally, there are plenty of incidents of police beating up folks, intimidating people, using unreasonable force and generally harassing law abiding citizens. Yes, the left is violent, but so is the Right.
2 problems here
1: "kill 100 un-armed people" is an irrelevancy because "unarmed" doesn't mean "unjustified". Ok, I'll buy that there's a number of unjustified shootings. Which takes me to the next point.
2: what makes you think that those who engage in unreasonable brutality are Right? In San Jose, in San Diego, (in how many other places?) the police all but played into the left agenda during anti-Trump riots. Whether or not police at large is right-leaning or left-leaning is irrelevant. Only a small percentage of the police engage in use of unreasonable force, what makes you think that they are not from the left component?

Here's statistically valid approach: IF you gather political leanings of "bad officers" AND compare it against right vs. left composition in the overall police force AND discover that first right/left ratio is greater than the second right/left ratio THEN you'd have a point.
I'm sure that you haven't done any of that. Long story short, this is not a valid argument. If this is the best there is, OP title is correct.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 11, 4:51pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Resort to rape in female jail? This beats "can't get laid with $1000 in a whore house".
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 17, 4:19pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

I actually went through the trouble to read the article. Yes, despite VOX being the source.
It's an illogical hit piece. Because they equate hostility to mass immigration with racism. Even when they do the math on the number of people who switch votes, they compartmentalize these two (very different) standings into one: "attitudes towards racial minorities AND hostility to mass immigration". Not a mention of how much of it is "attitudes towards racial minorities", and how much of it is "hostility to mass immigration". "If my neighbor ate a chicken while I went to bed hungry, on average we ate half a chicken each".

I repeat: they intentionally mixed up two different concepts: "mass immigration" and "attitude towards minorities" to label them both as "racism". The cheaters can't make the case any other way.

This is fully consistent with another popular sleigh of hand: "immigration" vs. "illegal immigration".

On a semi-related note. OP: seek help. Mental help. This is a pressing issue. I'm serious.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2018 Nov 18, 6:51pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

> Can Judaism survive without anti-semitism?
We don't know, it's never been tried.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2018 Dec 25, 9:31pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

jazz_music says
Onvacation says
What felony?

Current news, not counting lots of other plain, painful truth: Donald Trump told a subordinate to commit a crime, a felony violation of United States campaign finance law. He conspired with an allied supermarket tabloid newspaper chain to do the same. In the campaign's closing days, both routed huge hush-money payments directly related to the election through other accounts for the sole purpose of concealing them from the public.

Both that subordinate, Michael Cohen, and the head of the National Enquirer-owning newspaper chain, American Media Inc., are now cooperating with federal prosecutors.

Maybe your point is that Trump can use his pardon power to save himself from being indicted.
In case you missed it: Cohen has been sentenced to 3 years in prison. I doubt that he'd be getting this sentence if he had damaging stuff on Trump. He is cooperating for sure, yet he can't offer anything to get himself out of prison. Who knows Trump's dark secrets better than his lawyer? Yet the above mentioned lawyer can't buy his freedom by giving information. It appears that information from a highly motivated source which was so close that it was only attorney-client privilege away, doesn't hurt Trump. How do you interpret that?

"Breaking news: NOW President is REALLY in trouble" - after gazillion times, the pattern should be obvious to all except most wounded.
"There is this new evidence that is SURELY damning". Right.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2018 Dec 26, 8:48am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

jazz_music says
So you saw the list of criminal crap with Trump is involved in is huge and amounts to a lot more than news since you would never be most wounded as to not know.
You confuse quantity and quality.
No, I don't see "list of criminal crap". I see "IF he did that it would ALMOST be illegal" repeated over and over by different talking heads taking turns putting lipstick on "IF" and "ALMOST".
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2018 Dec 26, 8:51am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Evan F. says
Do you honestly think that cooperating with the feds is a complete get out of jail free card? You must watch too many movies and TV shows.

Cohen did illegal shit. He goes to jail as a result. Cooperating with Muller knocked it down from a possible 5 years to 3. Cohen should be thanking his lucky stars he got a 40% reduction in his sentence.
How does it work - sentence first, cooperation later? What if he gets his reduced sentence and then refuses to cooperate? The sentence can't be revised, can it? They can make your life better or worse while in prison, or negotiate parole, but that hardly applies here.

I don't mind being fact-checked on this. As of now, I think that you have no clue on the matter. The fact that he already received his sentence and it's an actual prison sentence means that his cooperation is useless to the feds.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2018 Dec 26, 12:40pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

jazz_music says
No that is absolutely not true.

Prove it. What's the most qualified accusation? Pick your best one.
Convince me. Pick your strongest accusation and existing proof for that accusation.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2018 Dec 26, 5:10pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

jazz_music says
mostly reader says
No, I don't see "list of criminal crap".

I see, well try looking at this top level summary of the worst of Trump's scandals then.

Trump's bullshit behavior really goes on over 40 years.
You don't get it.
I asked you for to put forth the strongest accusation on the list, with currently available evidence. Only one. The one that is most likely to result in conviction. That would be quality.
Instead, you again are going for quantity.
I actually called it, by stating above that you confuse the two. To which you said "No that is absolutely not true." - while continuing to do the same!
You can't make this up.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2018 Dec 26, 5:45pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

jazz_music says

> Why?
Why? Because that would be... wait for it... Quality! I'd either agree with you or explain why the evidence (which you'd also need to bring forth) is weak.

It was dishonest of you to deny my observation on the topic before, and it's dishonest of you to accuse me of tribal behavior now. You forewent any attempts at reason and went straight to ad hominem.

As for your list and "quality vs. quantity" dispute, fertilizer doesn't become gold just because there's a lot of it (although CNN might disagree)
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2018 Dec 26, 6:49pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

> jazz_music
> ...and Mueller is coming...
I asked for your best shot. Either the University charge, or Mueller.
If it's the University charge, you lose before the game starts. It in no way puts him in jeopardy, neither legal, nor as a President.
If it's Mueller, please specify the charge and related evidence.
Pick one. Your best one.

> You are tribal as Trump is a piece of shit.

Look. I can change my mind if I see right evidence. Two and half years of "But NOW we REALLY got him!" with no substance don't quite make that. It seems that "This morning DAMNING evidence!" news target some anti-Trump-porn masturbation club. Perhaps you want to look into that club if you are looking for real, not imaginary, tribes.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2018 Dec 27, 9:53pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

jazz_music says
Hollywood police have refused any more additional patrol for the protection of the Trump star on Hollywood's "walk of fame."
Google search shows nothing to that affect as of time of writing, and you are not giving source. Source?
Oh, and - aren't you supposed to be looking for "worst of the worst" on Trump's list of offenses? You know, the one that will get a conviction?
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2018 Dec 28, 5:06pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

jazz_music says
mostly reader says
Google search shows nothing to that affect as of time of writing,

How is it bullshit? Google search still doesn't return your line (that was my original point, plus the fact that you didn't provide your source).
To make it better: in your response, you are using YOUR OWN THREAD as a source!!!
To make it even better, that other thread (yours) didn't exist at the time of my writing. You added it later.

Now, there is indeed a link to a source at that other thread. That source is obscure enough that google search doesn't see it on first couple of pages that I checked. Which makes my original statement, you know, the one on which you called bs, still stand.

Do you realize how incoherent you are?

On semi-related note, did you completely give up on stating which charge should get Trump convicted?
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2018 Dec 28, 6:24pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

jazz_music says
mostly reader says
you are using YOUR OWN THREAD as a source!!!

The thread has a link.

That is not difficult.
You called BS on my statements that 1) you haven't provided the source (you haven't at the time of writing), and 2) your headline is not google-able (it wasn't at the time of writing, still isn't)

That was dishonest, and I'm not letting it slip.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2018 Dec 28, 7:06pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Onvacation says
mostly reader says

On semi-related note, did you completely give up on stating which charge should get Trump convicted?

Back on topic. Can anyone state ONE convictable high crime or misdemeanor commited by Trump?
Just one?
There are potential charges, but for the real ones evidence is weak AFAIK. CNN experts might tell you differently, but if you filter out obvious propaganda most of it boils down to "IF he did that it would ALMOST be illegal" and the ones that are impossible to prove without mind-reading.
I'm thinking - to convict, they'd have to establish chain of command going to him, and for that they'd to get to someone close to him within that chain. Which is why when this whole Cohen business unveiled, I thought that it's somewhat likely.
But then Cohen was sentenced. I interpret it that he had nothing.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2019 Jan 29, 4:37pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag      

Kakistocracy says
God only knows the U.S. has a stellar record in going into these places and turning them around huh ?

Anyone bothered to check how things are going in the Middle East recently ?

Classic whataboutism.

How's weather in Olgino? Don't freeze your butt off waiting for the bus after the shift, comrade.
LOL. My reaction, exactly.
Oh-so-recognizable signature move.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2019 Jan 29, 4:40pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Kakistocracy says
The commenter from Jersey has been acknowledged with yet another alias.
Wrong, and wrong. And, fuck you. Don't freeze your ass on the way home.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2019 Feb 27, 6:58pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Perhaps he said "cougar", and reporters confused it for "mountain lion". An easy mistake to make.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2019 Mar 2, 9:27pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

anonymity says
This article is nothing but pseudo intellectual garbage.

I have an advaneed degree in statistics and can tell you this is just nonsense jibberish intentionally written to confuse and sound 'intelligent'. I can assure you that the concept of probability is far more concrete than what this author believes. Clearly he needs to spend more time learning about probability; the only person confused about this topic is him.
The author is deeply confused about the subject, to the point that (s)he doesn't understand the difference between basic concepts. Such as probability and likelihood.
In nutshell, the difference is this.
Probability: pertinent to coin flip scenario. It can be studied because it deals with events that can be repeatably (and infinitely) reproduced in controlled environment.
Likelihood: in all likelihood, the OP doesn't understand what (s)he is posting. My money would be on it. However, this bet would be unscientific because probability theory wouldn't attempt to quantify this crap.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2019 Mar 3, 2:38pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

marcus says
Is it more likely from SBs pov that it's Monday rather than Tuesday ?
And if so, does that make it less likely to be tails,rather than heads ?
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2019 Nov 9, 11:28am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

BayArea says
Patrick says
Lol, yes, it's true. Someone is ignoring me.

Wonder if it’s the same sociopath who is ignoring me... one of the off-the-rails Liberals was ignoring everyone left and right a while back.

A fake ignore if you will..
I got my first ignore (now apparently lifted) after I posted a thread on taxing propagandists, plus analysis of how to identify propaganda. Someone also "disliked" every single post in that thread. Apparently that thought exercise made someone very unhappy, lol.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2020 Apr 15, 8:24am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

richwicks & Patrick,

Fuck Dems & Reps.
I'm an Independent.
Let's see:
- repetitive mindless bashing of Reps/Cons
- glee for violence
- void of logic or coherency
- occasional bashing of Dems, just as mindless
- antisemitic
- full of vile, heart attack waiting to happen.

Sounds like far left to me.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2020 Jul 1, 11:46am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

marcus says
What's implied actually is that he believes there are some very competant women of color to choose from otherwise he wouldn't have said it. I'll grant you that it's political. And that I don't love it. But I don't know how someone can think it takes competence out of the decision.

Marcus. Every single white male, regardless of qualifications, was excluded from consideration for VP position exclusively because of his race/gender. I don't know how someone can think that this is not bigotry.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2020 Jul 1, 12:20pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

marcus says
So all the years and decades that women were excluded from consideration, was that bigotry ? Or was it just trying to give the voters what they thought would be a winning candidate.
Shifting the blame from politicians to voters doesn't help your case. You are essentially calling current Dem voters bigots.

With which we may agree. Women may have been excluded in the past, but not quite in these clear terms. In the past (few decades), no major party candidate would get away with this. Bigotry was there, but it was never so strong as to allow a candidate say publicly and openly that he's picking a male candidate because of his gender. ANY major party would've been SLAUGHTERER right there one the spot, and likely by their own voters. You'd probably have to go back more than 50 years to find something remotely close to that.

Scroll forward to today. It IS happening, and voters CHEER. Bigotry is making a comeback.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2020 Jul 1, 12:46pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

marcus says
mostly reader says
Bigotry is making a comeback.
RIght. "And all lives matter," amiright ?
LOL. "Not all lives matter", amiright?
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2020 Jul 12, 3:09pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

I watched. Peter Bergen (the interviewee) talks about terrorism, quotes some numbers (nothing that would support the title), states that right-wing terrorism has been more or less constant, and that there is an uptick in anti-Trump and black nationalist terrorism.

There's almost no correlation between the content and the assertion in the title. Which is one of the more obvious tells of propaganda.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2020 Aug 12, 6:39pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

TrumpingTits says
Found the original!
What do you mean, "the original"?!
Oh, the Godzilla! I didn't notice.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2020 Aug 12, 9:55pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

FuckCCP89 says
I'm shocked that cunt is even charged. This being California and all...
There's California and then there's California. You can see "Trump 2020" signs on restaurant walls in San Luis Obispo county.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2020 Aug 23, 9:09pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

That was reparations? Fine. If that's what it was then that's what it was. The topic of reparations may now be closed forever.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2020 Aug 28, 9:03am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

TrumpingTits says
I mean, by that logic he shouldn't have been charged in the first place. Neither should have the Mccloskys.
Seeing how the population is being squeezed on both ends, rioters on one and prosecution on the other, I keep coming back to the "who sponsors this shit?" question.
He needs the best lawyer he can get, and the case needs all the publicity it can get.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2020 Aug 28, 9:57pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Patrick says
Anti-racists spew hateful vitriol
Seems accurate. Although I'd say that the term "anti-racists" is misused and misapplied.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2020 Aug 30, 8:32am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

I'm waiting for the Kenosha deceased to be painted as right wing agitators. They have all the necessary characteristics for that: white, with criminal records, one was recorded shouting "shoot me ni*****a" multiple times.
The only mismatch is that Kyle is also white. Plus, MSM is now too invested in original narrative.

They may still turn around. It would start with "Our investigative analysis shows that..." prefix.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2020 Sep 17, 6:32pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Somehow I just new what was going to happen. It's like you already saw a movie, and your brain pre-produces every moment before it plays out.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2020 Oct 6, 5:10pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

richwicks says
The bikes are over-priced yuppie/hipster bikes. They are steel frame - something I'd expect to get in the 1980's - maybe even in the 1970s.

There's steel and then there's steel. Good modern stainless steel frame may be superior to titanium (in some regards) and to carbon fiber (in some other regards). Lightweight, reliable, nimble, and highly reparable. Don't know about those guys though, overpriced + catering to to yuppie/hipster crowd is not a good sign for a bike shop. This may be Walmart quality with hipster angle.

I personally don't see a problem. Just being consistent: businesses should be able to discriminate at will, and at the end of the day money talks. If someone likes being generous - let them. As long as they are upfront about it with their non-black customers who get to subsidize the program.

However, US doesn't live by my preferred standard (think "baking cake for gay wedding" case) Which is why this also sounds highly illegal.
  mostly reader   ignore (0)   2020 Nov 5, 10:22pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

> Patrick

Indeed, "verifiable" and "anonymous" are conflicting requirements.

It's somewhat clear how to build in "I want to make sure that my vote was properly recorded" feature, using one-way cryptography.

It's less clear how to make sure that there's no injection of bogus ballots (dead people and whatnot)
about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions