Lurker > Bandit_Keith

Those horrible unfairly treated January 6th hostages...that are also antifa?

1337toothbrush posted...

Alright, well twitter being stuck with tons of shit debt should make it a candidate for bankruptcy. Is there a possibility musk could lose twitter then?

No.

Edit: More like "highly unlikely" because he's using it exactly how he wants to. The 'free speech' and 'profitability' is all bullshit. He really just wanted to be able to promote the far right wing into more of the mainstream. Platforming Nazis is the most important thing to him and probably most of his backers too.

SydnieStarlight posted...

No, no, only for procedures for certain people.

Now you're getting it.

1337toothbrush posted...

https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/equities/elon-twitter-buyout/

Okay, so if he got margin called and can't come up with anything, what happens?

As you can see from the wording all of that is old information.

He sold stock in Tesla to get funding for Twitter, in addition to getting debt loans from banks. Twitter itself, not even Elon Musk or Tesla, are on the hook for Twitter. Even in the event that he had a terrible loss from Tesla(almost no chance of that happening) he could still pay back what was owed in cash and other options to cover any potential shortfall. It's far more likely that the banks write off a bad loan to Twitter and eat their loses, moreso than Tesla losing that much worth.

buddhamonster posted...

If God wanted her to have better teeth he wouldnt have caused her biking accident in the first place.

It was Gods will that she smash her teeth in an accident. Is Gods plan not good enough for her or something? Plus, you dont have to fly halfway across the country to get your teeth fixed when you have perfectly good boot straps at home.

Complete disgrace, tbqh.

The way people like her would view this is that God wanted her to go to them to get her teeth done.

1337toothbrush posted...

Wasn't the twitter buyout financed with tesla stock as collateral? My hope is that tesla's stock price drops by so much that musk is forced to give up twitter since the collateral is no good anymore.

No to all of this.

UnsteadyOwl posted...

The biggest piece of legislation Trump got passed during his time as president was a huge tax cut for the wealthy. Why would you think he has any intention of raising taxes on the rich now?

TC has his account named appropriately.

FortuneCookie posted...

Alleged. That's the problem. Until we have proof, in text or on audio recording, it's just hearsay. Rumor and innuendo.

I like that they cite "and others." That multiple people close to him have reportedly heard him say similar things is a credible argument. But, without proof, it's all meaningless; the accusations of embittered former employees. His supporters, even those who support the likes of Hitler or Putin, will deny that Trump said any of this as long as we don't have proof of it.

FortuneCookie posted...

I fully believe that he's a bigot. Whether he's a dyed-in-the-wool white supremacist or just allows white supremacists to fawn over him out of sheer ego, I don't know or care. He has to be stopped either way.

But what I'm saying is that this isn't likely to change any votes or inspire undecided voters to rally against him. We must have proof for that.

That's a whole lot of nothing going on in your post. We already have clips of him saying these things about Putin, Kim, Duarte, etc. Him saying it about Hitler as well isn't any sort of stretch. But besides the point, because this isn't about swaying Trump supporters. All the proof in the world, like the actual videos of him already doing this for current dictators, as well as him literally quoting Hitler at his rallies won't make any difference to them.

pinky0926 posted...

And now the situation is even worse. She's in a psych ward, and I still have this thing hanging over my head that I said I wanted to break up and now it feels like I can't do that, because what if she dies?

Damn, I'm going to be callous as hell, but that's not your problem. It's awful if she kills herself. But that's her decision. People can't threaten to end their lives in order to force you to be with them. That's the fucking worst emotional blackmail I can think of.

She needs to remain in the psych ward and get serious help. You need to be able to move on with your life.

darkace77450 posted...

If God wanted her to have a nice smile, He would have given her better teeth. She herself has told us God doesnt make mistakes.

I mean, good burn, except...God did. Her teeth were fine. But then she got into a biking accident when out with her kids.

ReiRei89 posted...

COVID isn't going away no matter how much you want to pretend it doesn't exist. Bitching about it makes you about as bad as a Trumper and antivaxxer.

Responding to posts like this makes you ...

I'm not even going to finish that sentence. But you are so far off base with your mudslinging with that poster that you are on another planet entirely.

Kradek posted...

She's on Judicial Idol and Jack Smith not moving this to DC after she did that ridiculous shit with the special prosecutor that even Republicans on the appellate court belittled her for is by far the most disappointing thing about him.

Like, wtf, dude. I get you want to make it "seem fair", but the law shouldn't care about that and right-wingers most definitely don't care about that, so who are you doing this for?

From what I understand, it was likely to be moved there anyway, even if he got the indictment in DC. It would have been all of the delays you see in his DC case on top of Trump delaying it even more with his attempt to get the case moved to Florida. And all of this would be slower because of the slower DC Circuit of appeals to begin with.

bigblu89 posted...

I can't believe this is something that people still give a shit about, on either side of the argument.

You can't comprehend why someone wouldn't want to be forced into fake patriotism? Especially when doing so isn't part of your job?

So I looked into this, and I don't see him coming under fire from this. Maybe someone else can find this "fire".

I wondered what "top donor" meant. Which apparently doesn't mean shit. $100,000 to fight off the Republican recall, and nearly $65,000 for his reelection. Which is a lot of money, to me. But not to campaigns, it seems. To put it into some perspective, Reed Hastings (Netflix cofounder and CEO) donated $3.1 million to Newsom's recall defense.

If Newsom was actually trying to do what Flynn wanted, his carve out for Fast Casual or not doing this at all would have been the deal.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

That's the one. And he refuses to listen to e everyone in his life and on here that tells him to move on.

Calwings posted...

Imagine not using ImageFAQs for image embedding instead of this site's shitty built-in feature

An extension that doesn't work for many browsers that can break with updates that most people don't even use, or a built-in system that works on literally all web browsers. Hmmm... Which to choose? How could we have gotten through dozens of topics without this?!
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/c/ce7d28c5.jpg
B-but the image quality of fucking memes on gamefaqs!!!!

NatsuSama posted...

Not sure why you called me here. I don't and never have supported sexual assault.

That's his shitty way of necrobumping. You can mark him for this if you want. He'll just block you, which is pretty great. He and his alts bring nothing of value to the boards. This particular necrobumper loves to bump topics about rape, especially child rape. And I'm not joking, you can ask around. He does it a lot.

Zikten posted...

Biden should just give money to Ukraine anyway. He does it for Israel

Serious. He recently bypassed the senate and house and just handed money to Israel with no vote

He did. He bypassed congress by gifting "surplus" supplies to Greece, which is within his rights. Greece will then give their "surplus" weapons and vehicles to Ukraine.

A lot of what Biden has done goes untalked about because people want to complain, and the media is more than happy to stoke the flame of 'unpopular Biden' over and over. But he has been around a very long time, and knows how to game the system legally to get what we need done.

nocturnal_traveler posted...

I feel that enough time stops will eventually rob you of your lifespan and youth.

They don't last long enough for that. A few seconds at a time does add up, but it's not like you will be spending hours with time stopped.

That's a screenshot. You can take a freeze frame of almost anyone and make them look unattractive.

But it's not like Paula Cole has ever been known for her looks. It's her music. She's not ugly. Not in that screencap.

Ricemills posted...

Especially with "what can i see" can be cheated by live video

Safely, it can't.

Welp, that's an excellent way to handle that. Thank you @CSCA33 for getting the ball rolling, and @shockthemonkey for knocking the pins down. Cookies for all. (: :)

And we get a wild Magus sighting to boot!

pinky0926 posted...

That's what I've been looking at. I kept coming back to this 1200 figure.

And then what I did was look up the recommended requirements for all the games I want to play and the budget came out more like 600.

What tier on Logical Increments are you looking at? Because the "Good" tier is definitely around 600.

pinky0926 posted...

It sort of makes me think that actually the whole idea of building an expensive "rig" is just entirely a hobbbyist thing. Which is fine.

Because it is.

Logical Increments. Still the best starting point.

There are still plenty here. And happen to usually be the better posters. Gladius is one of the best posters on CE. A very good person. Understanding, and listens, even when she completely disagrees with you.

NoMeLx22x posted...

That's fine and fair, but what's the point in posting "Because not a single American president is about to change it."?

Because they aren't. It will take years to work on this from the ground up. Like Talib has been doing. Unfortunately because she's a Muslim woman of color, it carries less weight for certain people. But more and more, the sentiments are changing. It won't be an overnight thing. As I said it my first post in the topic, "Muslims here in Michigan want to be heard. I see no problem with that." This is a good way to organize a protest in a way that will be heard, but won't hurt themselves or the rest of us. It will still take time. No serious candidate in 2024 has a better policy in for the Middle East than Biden. As bad as that sounds, it's the truth.

Iodine posted...

quote

You can still edit your post if you want to. There's still time.

NoMeLx22x posted...

So we should do nothing and definitely not push for change even if it is pointless.

Or we could just be anti-genocide.

You won't find a single post of me suggesting that anywhere, but most certainly not in this topic. So don't jump to illogical conclusions for no reason.

Iodine posted...

America's Israel policy is bad tho.

Fixed that for you. Because not a single American president is about to change it. Certainly not anyone that has any realistic chance of winning in 2024.

DragulaRULEZ posted...

So one company was about to liquidate and the other is Truth Social? How...how the fuck are they making money?

They aren't.

If this is just a protest thing for the primaries, and they are voting for him in the election, how does this help Trump? Muslims in here Michigan want to be heard. I see no problem with that.

He probably got drunk. He is a mean drunk. That's when he goes off on people, it seems. That's an outsiders opinion, anyway. I read people saying it was okay for him to get drunk, and I really wanted to push back. That's a bad move for an alcoholic. No matter the situation, he shouldn't be drinking anymore. It has effected his health quite negatively, he has posted.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

I was being attacked in the first place by that condescending tone. If you spoke to someone in real life like that, I sincerely doubt they would take it well. But again, agree to disagree.

It happens all the time. Both in regular conversation, and in debate shows for news, politics, sports, etc. I see it every day. I can't say I've ever seen anyone take it as a personal attack until today with you. Truly. Condescension, sardonic, sarcastic, flippant, etc. A single point or line delivered in such a way is not a typical derailer. Because it's not as if you responded with condescension from condescension. That likely would not have resulted in anything else happening.

For you, it was a personal attack that required you to personally attack someone else. For everyone else, you seemingly personally attacked someone else first.

It seems we just ultimately see things quite differently.

CreekCo posted...

AP TC is just sharing information.

Damn, I forgot to look at who I was responding to.

Anyway, TC. The article literally just puts for explanations. For someone who doesn't know, it's a good thing. Nothing about it goes to bat for Theocracy at all.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

Ignoring my points is also a thing I guess.

I didn't ignore a single point.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

My point was the slippery slope euthanasia could run on. I agree with that post. The discourse was around where the gray area should be, and what kind of pain someone goes through. So basically it was all on personal opinion.

You've missed the point. It wasn't just about "the law" but where each of us placed the line in the gray area. Should it be expanded, or restricted? Thus, slippery slope.

Your argument had never once come close to suggesting that this isn't about the law that I read. But I could have missed something. Even still, your line and the law are at the same place, so my point stands on face value.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

Okay, then by that logic I can reply a certain way too, correct?

Yes. My point is the hypocrisy of your view. Like I stated, you seem to believe "they could have responded like this, but since they didn't I will attack them instead of their argument."

SpiritSephiroth posted...

Where they condescending or not?

I would have called it dismissive at worst, personally. But that is ultimately semantics. It still doesn't amount to a personal attack. If you fel part of a response had a condescending tone, that's fair. That still doesn't excuse going into a personal attack.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

There were no facts in the article in the first place, which the discussion was based upon. Only after did more facts come into the topic. And again, the discussion was the slippery slope and gray area of suicide, which some users were disagreeing with my opinions on it.

Regardless of what was in the base article, you still came in without the facts to claim you were 100% against it. Again, this isn't disputable. Most everyone came in without the facts. You've already acknowledged that "100%" line was an exaggeration, so we don't need to rehash that. I accept that response, and understand it. You wanted to steer the discussion into a slippery slope argument, and again, that's fine. If you'd like to continue talking about slippery slopes, that's fine too.

And I say all this not as some grand arbiter. Just another person voicing their opinions. Which is all good.

Guide posted...

The summary you post, and what I'm reading so far, isn't saying anything in defense or support of a theocracy or white nationalism.

thronedfire2 posted...

uh, that just sounds like they're explaining it, not supporting it

These.

CreekCo posted...

Mainly stirring the pot for clicks kinda sad and pathetic.

I hope you are talking about TC and not the AP.

UnholyMudcrab posted...

I have no earthly idea why this guy hasn't been suspended yet

I don't see anything I would suspend someone over in here except for that mask off poster that already got hit.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

If you can't see condescending statements within the English language, I simply don't know what to tell you.

This is condescending. I can indeed see it. You again missed the point entirely.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

I'm so sorry for not replying to every single post in this topic, whilst also replying to five people at once on inane accusations. But do go on.

Ignoring your condescending tone, that wasn't my point. It wasn't that you had to respond to them. It was that it was already pointed out in post #26 that people aren't just getting euthanized without any real reasoning. So every post of your after this one that essentially sidestepped that post was pointless. If you'd like me to quote each one I'm talking about, I'll do so.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

Because for every action, there is a reaction.

But you are not an immutable force. You can control what you do. To imply that they should have responded one way, but that you don't have to is just not right.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

And I think its extremely disingenious of you to come out and say there was no condescending tone or nature in their posts, only just to pile on me like the other users. As if they can do not wrong.

Every bit of what you said here is false.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

Nope, actually agreed with some users here. Just been replying to the other more "irrational" people here accusing me of 5 different things lol

You did come in here without the facts. That is not disputable. If you are claiming "nope" to being offended, then I guess you can dispute that. But...I have far too many posts of yours I could quote that would suggest otherwise.

shockthemonkey posted...

Gotta say, its weird that you know Asherlee is a woman and you still insist on using the wrong pronouns for her.

Don't do this. They and them is perfectly fine, and you know it. Especially when you are being general about a poster, regardless of their gender, and not purposely misgendering someone.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

Again, being emotional based on personal opinions and views is fine. That's a human reaction. But you start lashing out at other users personally, then of course I'm gonna say they can't control their emotions.

If you can control yourself in a discussion and begin to attack people personally, you have no business having a discussion.

If stating your opinion back to you is a personal attack in your mind, then you may need some help.

It might be because, as you stated, you are emotional about this. From your very first post until now, you've not made any insightful or well thought out posts. You even ignored someone pointing out in post #26 very early on that you can't just get euthanized for no reason. It almost should have been the end of it right then. If you had done a quick Google search, you seem as though you probably wouldn't be "against this 100%" would you?

SpiritSephiroth posted...

If you don't see the condescending tone in their posts, then I don't know what to tell you.

But your argument was not "that was condescending". You accused them of being emotional. Why do you believe that they should have reacted one way, but you can react a different way?

I think the problem you have here is that you came in without the facts and then got offended when someone called you out on it.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

Yes, which they were.

I don't know if you are being serious here, or if you truly are this lacking in self awareness. So let me explain it clearly. If you yourself claim you are making an emotional argument and someone responds back to you that your argument on the subject is just to make you feel better, how is that being bashed?

SpiritSephiroth posted...

And if you had read through the topic, you'd know I have no idea who this individual is. I don't care if they're a woman or not?

I read through the topic. You completely missed the point of this line. Which is that you accused her of doing something that someone else did. She and others just happen to agree with it. In addition to the fact that you don't seem to understand that self serving statements carry very little weight.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

I only replied back like that when I was being attacked.

Again, someone repeating your argument back to you is not an attack.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

Edit: also didn't you see what I had replied to initially? They said "So my feelings can be spared", so in actual fact they too was playing the whole emotional route themselves. It wasn't just me. But everyone seems to ignore that.

Because you stated it was your emotional reaction to this. Again, you started off explaining how you are emotional about this, then when someone responds to you, you call them emotional. You also seemed to feel as if your description of others is "Just saying it like it is." but anyone else describing the situation differently than you see it is inaccurate.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

Being emotionally charged regarding an opinion and outright lashing out at other users is different.

I already said me and that other user had a difference of opinion, and they ended up disliking me based on my opinion. That's fine by me.

But then it started rolling downhill from there, accusing me of being a misogynist, then gaslighting me into pretending I said things I didn't and then finally accusing me of having a meltdown.

You accused her of being emotional fairly early on. You were accused BY SOMEONE ELSE of looking misogynist for calling a woman emotional(something you had to that point seemed to lob at her and no one else) just for having a discussion. You also seem to not understand that you attacked her(I'll just say that poster, because it doesn't matter for this portion of the argument) and claimed you weren't deflecting by attacking and calling the poster emotional.

Do you see how your opinions on another poster being emotional would be a personal attack during a discussion?

SpiritSephiroth posted...

Coming from you? You're pretty much one of the most emotional users I've encountered on this site.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

And your inability to keep your emotions in check clouds your way of thinking, since everything I say in this topic is somehow twisted into another statement I have never said before. It gets tiring with you honestly, you were like this in several other topics too.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

Oh be quiet. Everyone has a right to think what they want, and voice that opinion.

SpiritSephiroth posted...

Of course it doesn't matter. Still discussing a topic at hand, which obviously half of CE can't do without having a conniption lol.

What makes you believe you are the only rational one and everyone else must be on tilt and emotional, despite the fact that you started off your explanation stating that you are against this for personal experience reasons. Which are emotional reasons, by the way.

CRON posted...

His career in comedy and acting peaked in the early 2010s and when it started to fail he shifted to being an alt-right grifter. He was always an asshole but clearly he saw an opportunity due to the lowest common denominator giving so many of these grifters a platform, and went with it.

Again, having almost nothing to do with the Internets affordability being a mistake, as people like you imply. Idiots with dangerous views were given platforms long before this. People like him on his level suck majorly, but they aren't doing nearly as much damage COMBINED as folks like Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck, etc did.

CRON posted...

This is the kind of shit that happens thanks to the internet being too affordable and accessible. Idiots like this with dangerous viewpoints are given platforms thanks to the lowest common denominator suddenly gaining unrestricted access to the internet while having no media literacy.

This has almost nothing to do with that. He is a standup comic and an actor. Without the Internet he still would have been a standup comic and an actor. He's not a random person that would have no exposure otherwise. He'd always have a platform somewhere, Internet or not.

This attempted assault on the accessibility of the Internet by some folks is so irrational to me.

Scintillant posted...

i'll have to give those a try, TC, I'm a fan of the just bare brand myself so it's interesting that you say these are better

Pity bump. That's sad, man. Even for you.

There is a very good chance that he is outright lying about any of this happening. Which is kind of nuts to think about. He's trying to make himself look good to his cult by telling them how he may have violated his oath of office. Either he did this, and he's a moronic monster, or he's lying about doing it, and he's a moronic monster because he somehow thinks it's a good thing.