Lorewarn

1 minute ago, ActualCornHusker said:

 

HAHA! So not only is that certifiably false, it also creates a false equivalency between the standards you're setting for Dems vs the ones you're critiquing Trump for... 

Let's take it step by step then. Show me a half dozen examples of Democrats, you can even use random citizens doesn't have to be party leaders, claiming that Hillary Clinton was secretly the President from 2016-2020 and predictions that they would soon inaugurate her.

The distinction is in the details.

Well if it isn't a talking point being systematically stripped down as bulls#!t.

13 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

 

Regarding "democracy" - Please tell me about the 2016 election.... I recall bascially the entire democratic party and their media allies talking non-stop for about 3 years about how the only way that Trump won the election is because Putin helped him.

The distinction between this and 2020 would be that Putin did help Trump, that's actually factually true, and the Democrats (with very few exceptions) still admitted that Trump won.

4 hours ago, nic said:

I would prefer the kids learn about the constitution and branches of government... But if they are fair there must be questions like "a professor from Cornell recently wrote a thesis on how sheet music is racist. Which political party would mostly agree with this premise?" 

I'd be 100% in favor of education curriculum that teaches and quizzes kids on identifying tropes and accurate or perceived stereotypes of people in political parties and ideologies.

Which major political party is a person flying a Nazi flag likelier to belong to?

Which major political party is a person who wants universal access to healthcare likelier to belong to? 

Stuff like that would be fun and able to help kids have better street smarts as they grow into real world

2 hours ago, admo said:

Very likely, this a political plot coming from the left. 

 

Liberal motivation and corruption only needs a hateful visual and some words, to make people anti-Disantis / conservative / republican. 

 

People usually believe everything they see and hear.  And this is corrupt politics from the left.  As if they've never been dirty before.  

Even if your anti occam's razor speculation is true, why would left-wing folks stage this and why would it work? What climate do we live in where it's entirely and easily believable that MAGA Republicans are larping as neo-nazis?

5 hours ago, DevoHusker said:

 

 

Many Americans haven't viewed covid as a serious threat for over a year now. And I'm not talking about a fringe of conspiracy right-wingers, I'm talking about all of us.

Even if we believe in our heads, we've mostly all been over it in how we live out our personal lives for a while now. Sure we'll wear masks or get tested when required, but unless you've got a unique scenario we're moving on as fast as we can.

22 minutes ago, Scarlet said:

I'm old enough to remember when those that said Putin wasn't going to invade Ukraine, that there was no way Covid would kill over a million Americans, that the likes of Matt Gaetz, MTG, and other Trumpists weren't the future of the Republican Party, and that voting rights weren't being systematically suppressed labeled those that pointed out these eventualities as "alarmists".   

Also old enough to remember when even most eventual Trump voters didn't even like Trump and thought there's zero chance he gets the nomination.

58 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

The best part of this whole outrage is that it has made democrats once again discover the gender binary. Glorious.

There's a binary of 'able to birth children or not', which progressive folks do not associate with gender, so not sure what you're talking about exactly.

On 3/23/2022 at 12:12 PM, hskrfan4life said:

I just want to go back in time and not cancel the Akron game. What does that do to his tenure?

I legit think Frost would be at least .500 if the Akron game didn't get canceled. That set up a massive voodoo curse (or massive psychological hump) that we're still trying to shake.

I think with how well we played in the Colorado game, it's very safe to assume we would have beat Akron, and then beat Colorado the next week. Presumably Troy as well. With good momentum and confidence we easily could've flipped at least one of the NW/OSU/Iowa one possession games, which would've put us at 8-5 in year one. The rest could easily take care of itself.

Are they still planning on the elevator/upgrade to north stadium?

Trump running is the only way I'll vote for Biden again.

Without Trump as an opponent, I'm abstaining entirely.

2 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Maybe the Primary should be Mitt, Sasse, Trump, and DeSantis.  That should give every R a candidate of their liking to vote for and then we can see what shakes out.  

As long as we have a drill sergeant with a mute button as the moderator.

7 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

No one is in danger of not being treated for those conditions in the near future or later.  That’s pure hyperbole.

For the last 50 years nobody has been in danger of not having a constitutionally protected right to get an abortion. Until, presumably, not long from now.

It's not hyperbole to guess at how things might change based upon the news that...things are changing.

33 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

 

Just getting on the board for the day, but it's quite obvious that Make America Great Again means "over the last several decades due mostly to massive government creeping overreach and outsourcing of our manufacturing, America's position in the world has slipped and at a fragile position as the world's super power, and we should implement mostly economic policies that enhance American exceptionalism and improve the lives of the average American."

Maybe it's just the fact that you used quotation marks that has me laughing, but in no way is your definition of that "quite obvious"

12 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:

Well you loaded that one up with some assumptions.  50% to 90% chance of going to hell? Where/How did you come to that number?

As I've seen it, there's a correlation between how zealous a Christian someone is and how much focus/obsession they have on the afterlife, which lends to narrower and narrower beliefs in who makes it.

Similar psychological trait as the most die-hard fans of a sports team being the ones who care and get in a stink about bandwagon fans.

5 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:

I guess that’s what annoys me about the really militant pro choicers, my body my choice types. At the very least it is definitely ending a potential life. It gets a little more involved for religious folks when they believe that fetus already has a soul. So yeah, everybody should get that it’s at least a little murdery.

The religious folks (and by that I think we both mean specifically the right-wing Christian folks) always confused me on this one though. If you're very serious about your Christianity, and really care about abortion, there's a good chance that you believe the following:

1. Some version of the concept of original sin with a loose exception for children being blameless

2. Some version of fetuses having a soul

3. Some version of the 'narrow path' where most people who live are going to hell

And if you believe those three things, idk why you wouldn't be happy that all of these babies are aborted - those souls now have a 100% chance of going to heaven instead of a ~50-90% chance of going to hell if they would have lived and grown up and not been saved.

1 hour ago, knapplc said:

 

Is it safe to assume that you don't view the fetus as a person? Because the above is problematic for those who do. 

 

If it's a person from conception, then ending the pregnancy is murder. Murder, of course, is a societal issue and must be dealt with via societal laws, which encompass all genders. 

 

There's just no way to eliminate males from the conversation. 

 

I think Louie CK pretty much hits the nail on the head, essentially hinting that we all kind of deep down know or believe that it's at least.... kinda murdering a baby, but plenty of us think women should have the right to do that.

4 hours ago, ActualCornHusker said:

Bottom line for me, it's not the woman's body that is being harmed here - it's her baby's.

Carrying a pregnancy to term is 100% a case of a woman's body being harmed. Usually the harm is considered a worthy price to pay but not always and that's up for individuals to decide. Nonetheless, that does not exempt it from being harm. That's a flimsy bottom line.

Laughing about how we apparently can't have certain rights because... our country has a history of not granting certain rights  

3 hours ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

Politics is now about identity - what candidates say or do does not matter, especially for Republicans. 

Weird bc I thought they hated identity politics. 

Wait a second. They used to rant and sow anger/fear about identity politics, but they also used to do the same about things like sharia law. If the roe v wade leak is any indication, maybe these things they make big stinks about are... just because they're jealous and want those things for themselves? 

26 minutes ago, admo said:

I used to study this daily, and stopped some time around 2014. It was too heavy, way out of control, but glad the numbers have gone down a bit since 2017.

The numbers have been steadily going down for well on 50 years

In case people don't know, it needs to be made clear that the right to be able to have an abortion has been the historical norm in America - the banning of it is the outlier in terms of our country's history.

7 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

You obvioiusly haven't paid attention then because Biden checks off every one of those boxes

I'm glad to check out some substantiated sources on Biden checking all those boxes.

1 hour ago, DevoHusker said:

I have said in the past that there needs to be a common sense compromise on Roe and also on 2A. It seems no one can do anything unless it's all or nothing, and it sux.

I'm confused here and not sure if I'm missing something - isn't the current status of Roe the common sense compromise? 

It federally protects the right to an abortion but it gives states the freedom to impose certain legal restrictions. 43 of the 50 states have a prohibition on abortion after a certain point in the pregnancy - that doesn't sound like all or nothing.

2 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

 

I'd contend that based on the confirmed evidence we have on both, Biden is the far more sketchy individual, both personally and politically. But he's a part of the "in group" so he gets covered for

You can speculate and imagine implications about the 'sketchy' nature of a career politician until you're blue in the face (we all understand that Biden, and politicians in general, are not and can not be squeaky clean), but when it comes down to the preponderance of direct evidence, there's no argument for what you're saying.

One of the two has had dozens of sexual assault allegations, the other hasn't.

One has professionally and politically surrounded themselves with criminals (some of them proven to be actual traitors, and some of them in prison), the other hasn't.

One has a consistent history of defrauding employees, contractors, partners, construction crews, "students" and so on out of millions of dollars, the other hasn't.

One has bragged about either committing or the idea of sexual assault and also admitted to watching minors change in dressing rooms of their pageant, the other hasn't.

One has been found by the DOJ of engaging in racist housing policies twice, the other hasn't.

One has more than a few times followed/liked/retweeted s#!t from alt-right and neo-nazi twitter accounts, the other hasn't.

One has openly asked our biggest geopolitical enemy to spy on their political opponent, the other hasn't.

That's only the easiest, smallest low hanging fruit start of the list.