USPOL Oct: So this is how the thread dies: with a Star Wars derail

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USPOL Oct: So this is how the thread dies: with a Star Wars derail

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

RaySmuckles posted:

So you posted a misleading graph. Why don't you edit your post and delete it?

edit: look i'm editing mine to remind everyone that this guy either didn't do good research or cherry picked a misleading graph.

edit 2: and even though its super easy to change it and remove it, he refuses because he's inherently dishonest!

Shut up.

# ¿ Oct 1, 2015 16:31

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 12, 2024 07:43

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

RaySmuckles posted:

Debate and Discussion indeed, gentlemen.

Being an aggressively whiny gently caress is neither debate nor discussion.

# ¿ Oct 1, 2015 16:35

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

Kro-Bar posted:

Barnacle Jim???

# ¿ Oct 1, 2015 22:49

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

Tatum Girlparts posted:

Also not naming these people leads to witch hunts and won't actually stop people from finding out with the tools we have these days. Voldemorting them is called that because the entire point of that bit in the books was not saying his name did literally nothing to stop him because that was never a factor in his deal.

Except it totes was because he NSAed anyone who said his name.
:goonsay:

# ¿ Oct 2, 2015 18:59

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

Rhesus Pieces posted:

That's literally what her campaign higher-ups believe.

Is there some loophole for campaign staff that makes this not-highly-illegal?

# ¿ Oct 5, 2015 17:56

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

Zeroisanumber posted:

Tha gently caress?

It makes sense if you're deeply stupid.

# ¿ Oct 6, 2015 04:37

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

Tesseraction posted:

I'm pretty sure euph's suggestion is that the Pentagon are making poo poo up to try and cover up their massive gently caress-up.

No, he just doesn't realize that there 'intentional' can mean multiple things.

# ¿ Oct 6, 2015 17:12

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

euphronius posted:

What definition of intentional should I be using.

It is correct to say 'the US destroyed a hospital'.
It is correct to say 'the US intentionally destroyed a building'.
It is correct to say 'the US intentionally destroyed a building, and it was a hospital'.
It is not correct to say 'the US intentionally destroyed a hospital'. (Contingent on further information)

The difference lies in the the US's knowledge of the hospital at the time of the strike.

# ¿ Oct 6, 2015 17:20

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

Elephant Ambush posted:

The guy who has been convicted of raping and kiling dozens of children in the past might not have been guilty of raping and killing a child this time around. I think we should be perfectly neutral on this and give him the benefit of the doubt. Wouldn't want to jump to any completely unreasonable conclusions.

This but unironically.

# ¿ Oct 6, 2015 17:25

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

mr. mephistopheles posted:

Literally nobody believes the US bombed a hospital to be evil dicks

Actually I think euphronius does.

# ¿ Oct 6, 2015 20:24

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

euphronius posted:

My position is that U.S. knowledge that the hospital is a hospital is a reasonable inference from evidence.

Please post this evidence.

mr. mephistopheles posted:

It's very obvious that someone somewhere involved in military operations there knew this. Whether the people involved in approving the bombing run knew or even made an effort to cross-check is unknowable, but if they didn't then something about protocol needs to be changed.

This is what you're trying to say euphronius, yeah?

No, he's saying that US bombed the hospital to appease the demon that lives in every soldier's heart, I think.

# ¿ Oct 6, 2015 21:34

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

I mean, I have no doubt that the US blew up a hospital, and that they did so because of catastrophic and criminal fuckups. I'm just severely skeptical of the idea that they did so with malice aforethought, like euphronius apparently believes.

# ¿ Oct 6, 2015 21:38

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

Select Commission on Beanghazi doing some serious damage to the party goddamn.

# ¿ Oct 8, 2015 19:07

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

various cheeses posted:

People would be a lot more accepting of reasonable reform of gun control laws if "reasonable reform" didn't mean "how much poo poo can we ban while giving up nothing in return".

It only means this in the minds of mentally damaged lunatics hth.

# ¿ Oct 12, 2015 17:06

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

theblackw0lf posted:

Anyone ever think one of the first things Obama should have done when he became President, and still had a supermajority in the Senate, was push for a bill creating Election Day as a federal holiday? There's a really good chance it would have passed, as Democrats know that if election day was a holiday it would benefit them more than Republicans. And it might have even caused Democrats to lose fewer seats during the past few years.

Lots of poor people work during holidays. Mandating easy absentee/mail in voting would be a better solution.

# ¿ Oct 13, 2015 01:11

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

Mr Interweb posted:

I unironically really like Donald Trump

and will until such a time as he becomes an actual white house threat.

# ¿ Oct 17, 2015 04:49

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

Mr Hootington posted:

It sure is heart warming when they cut that $10000 check to ~~feel good about themselves~~ charity.

Are you really making this retarded Philo101 argument, or is it just pride talking?

# ¿ Oct 19, 2015 03:09

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

TheQat posted:

http://www.motherjones.com/mixed-media/2015/10/martin-shkreli-broken-wrist-bernie-sanders the shkreli thing just keeps getting better, now he appears to have posted a stock photo of a wrist fracture after claiming he was so mad about the sanders thing that he broke his wrist punching a wall

So is this guy legitimately mentally ill, or just really retarded?

# ¿ Oct 19, 2015 16:29

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

Hollismason posted:

My point still stands that this is crazy town.

We're living in a post sanity world.

# ¿ Oct 19, 2015 22:29

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

Gravel Gravy posted:

Everybody does parade formations. It's spiffy.

Everyone knows real leftists revolutionaries throw dance parties instead.

e:
https://youtu.be/26ro4zarX5s?t=1m18s

fool of sound fucked around with this message at 18:05 on Oct 20, 2015

# ¿ Oct 20, 2015 18:02

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

MariusLecter posted:

Man Kills Himself Because Star Wars� Main Character is Black

Good.

# ¿ Oct 20, 2015 18:47

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

A Winner is Jew posted:

Plus Bernie speaks only in absolutes - "If it's too big to fail, it's too big to exist" - uses death star on BofA

Kelly squirms in pain, his upcoming cartoon ruined.

# ¿ Oct 21, 2015 01:01

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

Fried Chicken posted:

Not lying as the center clause tells me that he is lying about floorshitting.

# ¿ Oct 21, 2015 14:31

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

Gravel Gravy posted:

He's just saying that he hasn't lied or been caught lying before.

If he were to directly lie after that he would still be telling the truth. Except for the lying about not making GBS threads on a floor.

Yes that was my point.

# ¿ Oct 21, 2015 14:42

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

Joementum posted:

You are not right.

# ¿ Oct 22, 2015 04:06

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

A presidency could be a lot worse than HRC spending 8 years trying to destroy the Republican party.

# ¿ Oct 23, 2015 02:17

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

Rhesus Pieces posted:

I don't think Jeb!'s heart is in it, guys.

From an appearance in SC today:

Hate to tell ya Jeb, but that's what being president is all about now. Maybe you should cut bait and do something cool then.

Jeb Bush is going to murder/suicide the Donald.

# ¿ Oct 24, 2015 19:23

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

Hodgepodge posted:

I'm going to give BLM some credit here and assume the public stance is meant to push minority and related economic issues onto the agenda in the other debates, and perhaps to push for an additional debate on those topics. More debates and debates on those topics are that things that a Sanders supporter would like to see, remember?

I swear the conversation is so poisoned right now that even the left is programmed to think in bullshit like "a debate about black people is automatically a debate that does not reflect my interests if I am not black." Even when that is literally the opposite of the opinion one consciously holds

Like all decentralized protest movements, the actual goal is to relieve pent up discontent by shouting loudly about injustices. Ostensibly, this promotes awareness of the issues and forces changes in the conversation. At the end of the day though, it won't actually affect any real change, because actually managing to a become a political force requires both organization and compromise, which won't happen because A) it requires concentrated, sustained time and effort, and B) it's anathema to a movement based on anger. The fact that the Tea Party managed to do so says more about it's astroturf nature than it does about it's member's actual conviction.

This isn't to say that the injustices that minorities suffer and the anger they feel aren't absolutely legitimate, but that BLM isn't going to accomplish anything until or unless they can work with the machine; something that at least several of its prominent activists are loathe to do, for the reasons above.

# ¿ Oct 27, 2015 03:48

fool of sound: Oct 10, 2012

paranoid randroid posted:

attempting to get the democratic candidates engaged in a debate on minority issues sounds like working with the machine to me

The democrats agreed to to engage them at a town hall meeting, to mixed reception from BLM activists, which highlights the obstacles inherent to anger based grassroot movements.

# ¿ Oct 27, 2015 03:56