elbucho @ elbucho @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

377

Joined

2 yr. ago

And nothing of value was lost.

Aww - poor little baby didn't get to play Speaker, so now he's taking his ball and going home. Sad.

I think that if McCarthy really does follow through on rage quitting, it might actually be the first time in his life he's kept a promise.

Of all of the Democrats who voted, only 4 of them voted against expelling this sack of shit:

• Al Green, from Texas, voted "Present".
• Jonathan Jackson, from Illinois, voted "Present".
• Bobby Scott, from Virginia, voted "Nay".
• Nikema Williams, from Georgia, voted "Nay".

If you're in any of these people's districts, I'd recommend seriously reconsidering voting for any of them ever again. Or, at the very least, reaching out to them to find out why they didn't vote for expulsion.

Why wait until November 2024? With him expelled, Governor Hochul will have to call a special election for NY's 3rd district, which should take place in around 90 days.

Huh, well TIL!

Who could have possibly seen that shit coming?

That's the funny thing; he wasn't forced into it. He could have just paid $1bn for his idiotic 420 joke (or probably much less if he'd settled out of court) and gotten away without any further damage. But instead, he took out a $13 billion loan and spent another $21bn of his own money for it. So instead of setting $1bn or less on fire, he set $34 billion on fire. Plus the additional money that his idiotic compatriots put up. This truly is the dumbest timeline.

Edit: He also ended up selling a shit load of his TSLA stock to make one of his payments to the bank, which caused tesla to tank in the market costing him untold billions as well. He is not a smart man.

"X" isn't publicly traded. When he bought it, he took it private, so you can't short it. The ticker symbol X is for the United States Steel Corporation. You could definitely short that, though; it's entirely possible that it'll tank just the same because people confuse it with Xitter. Like when that Chinese company that had the ticker symbol ZOOM shot to the moon at the start of the pandemic because people thought it was the video conferencing app (whose symbol was ZM).

Well, as dumb as this was (and it was very, very dumb), I found myself distracted by just how... weird he looked. Not just his face, which reminded me of Lady Cassandra from Dr Who ("Moisturize me, moisturize me!"), but his weird, jerky movements, and just his general vibe. He's like the personification of the uncanny valley. Eggar-from-MiB "get me sugar water" lookin' ass. If someone were to come out with a tell-all saying that Musk had been secretly replaced by aliens, I wouldn't even be terribly surprised at this point.

I wish him good fortune in all of his future endeavors.

I definitely gave a sensible chuckle to it.

I suppose I was being a bit obtuse there. To be clear, I don't believe that conservatives are wholly incapable of change. Just, you know, mostly incapable of it. Some people will surprise you here and there, for sure. In the main, though, they are small-minded, angry, mean-spirited people prone to homophobia, sexism, racism, xenophobia, and classism. Basically, every possible shit thing that a person can be is represented in their outlook on life. It's the kind of outlook that requires you to be a shithead to hold it. Hence, conservatives are cunts.

but asking “why are they being cunts?” is not going too far.

I don't agree with you on this. The phrase "being a cunt" implies that you have some choice in the matter; you normally are not a cunt, but you choose to be one for some reason. I don't think that applies for conservatives. They aren't choosing to be cunts any more than a dog chooses to be a dog. They are cunts. Therefore, they gravitate towards conservatism. Conservatism is the ideology of cunts.

why do conservatives want x?

Because they're cunts. That is the answer. It doesn't matter what the question is, the answer is that conservatives are cunts. It explains the entirety of their behavior.

Hey - the US election system is trash. I completely agree. But, like, you're not going to fix the trash system in the general election. The best you can hope for with your disruptive vote is that you vote in an actual traitor who will swap the trash system we currently have out for a dictatorship. So, just suck it up and vote for the senile guy who tells problematic stories about the time he was a pool lifeguard and fought a black guy named Corn Pop. The alternative is worse.

I suppose that depends on who you ask. If you ask the judge in CO, she'd say no. If you asked literally anybody else, other than that moron I spent way too long arguing with the other day, they'd say "duh".

Ok, hey - this has been fun and all. But um... we're running into a bit of a brick wall here. See, you think you've demonstrated something that you haven't. You think that two completely separate points I've made are the same thing. You think you're actually making cogent, non-insane points. Etc.

Basically, you're just a frustrating pile of wrong. And not, like, little wrong things, either. Huge, flashing, fuck-off wrong things. And as much as I've enjoyed repeatedly replying to you and saying essentially the same thing over and over, I am aware that that falls under that apocryphal definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

So yeah. I'm going to just stop responding to you now, and probably take a couple of headache pills. I'm sure you've got plenty of people in your life you can frustrate instead.

you’re effectively admitting that the POTUS is not included.

No. Incorrect. Not at all what I'm saying. The POTUS was very much included in the language here:

or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States

I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but the presidency is a civil office in the United States. So yeah. They specifically included the president. They just didn't enumerate that office because the president at the time was not a traitor.

It's like... say your little brother (let's call him Andrew) steals your money. Say you're pretty pissed off about this, and you say something to the effect of "God damn it, Andrew! You are not allowed to take my money! I will not tolerate thievery!"

You're effectively saying that by uttering that phrase, you'd be 100% ok with your little sister Sally stealing the money instead because you didn't specifically list her by name. Sure, she was covered under the whole "I will not tolerate thievery" bit, but your dumbass argument says that since you didn't call out Sally by name, she can totally steal your shit. Do you see how imbecilic that is?

You accused me of holding a position because I refuse to admit I am wrong.

Again, incorrect. I listed that as one of the two possibilities. The other possibility, of course, is that you're dumb. Because really, the position you're arguing is so mind-numbingly stupid that there are really only two possibilities here: you're dumb enough to actually believe it, or you're too stubborn to admit you're wrong. So, you know... arguing that you are anything but stubborn really pushes this towards just the one remaining possibility... The good news, though is that you probably have a promising career as a district court judge in Colorado ahead of you.

you abandoned debating positions in favor of insulting

Buddy, this isn't a debate. This is someone explaining to a small child that you shouldn't stick a fork in a light socket. I'm not debating the merits of not getting shocked with the kid; I'm telling him that sticking the fork in the light socket is a really stupid idea. Sorry if I get frustrated when you keep trying to jam the fork in there anyway.

Some positions were important enough to call out explicitly, but the POTUS is not.

I'd like for you to take a moment and truly take in just how insane this idea is. To set the scene, it's 1868, 3 years after the civil war ended. Among the traitors who attacked the nation are a number of people who held public office. The writers of this amendment wanted to make sure that those traitors never had a chance to hold public office again, and so wrote an amendment to specifically bar them. The reason they called out senators and congresspeople in the opening of the 3rd clause is because senators and congressional representatives were among the traitors. Your idea that they thought that it was important to bar traitors from those positions, but were like: "Well, but a traitor for a president is ok" is... well, I've already said insane. Is there a word that's more derogatory than insane? Use that.

The reason that they didn't list "the president" at the beginning of that clause is because the president was the guy who fought the traitors that they were trying to bar. The amendment was both punitive and preventative; they wanted to punish the traitors among them who fought against the US and prevent them from holding office again.

Now, I know that in the light of several years of living in the Post-Trump era, the idea of a president being a traitor has become all too normal, but put yourself back in the late 1860s, and think of how batshit insane that would be to them. They didn't mention the president because under no circumstance did they consider that the president could be a traitor.

The funny thing is that in this thread, I’ve already admitted to being wrong.

Yes, but just because you admitted to being wrong doesn't mean that you've stopped being wrong. You're still wrong. Stupidly, laughably wrong.

you’ve implied my position is “really fucking stupid”

Right, because it is. Sorry that I'm not coddling your feelings, but that's the bare truth. If someone is arguing with you that the earth is flat, do you keep showing them pictures from space even after they tell you that NASA faked them? Or do you just call them an idiot and go on with your day? Maybe you're a much more patient person than I am, but I 100% choose the latter.

As is so often the case here, an accusation is an admission.

I'm not sure what you're implying that I'm admitting to. That you're an idiot? Yes. I admit it. You've got me.