• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

12 Whiner

About cmilliken

  • Rank
  • Birthday 08/19/1965

Recent Profile Visitors

4,558 profile views
  1. Next up, Bill Clinton!

    This is the problem with Bill Clinton. It's not about diddling a willing and idealistic young lady in the oval office with a cigar. That's deflection. I voted for the guy in his re-election. But Bill was not a good man, or a good husband. Yes he was persecuted for political reasons. But there was also some nasty shit down under that pile of political witch-hunting. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/13/opinion/juanita-broaddrick-bill-clinton.html "She claimed they had plans to meet in a hotel coffee shop, but at the last minute he asked to come up to her hotel room instead, where he raped her. Five witnesses said she confided in them about the assault right after it happened. It’s true that she denied the rape in an affidavit to Paula Jones’s lawyers, before changing her story when talking to federal investigators. But her explanation, that she didn’t want to go public but couldn’t lie to the F.B.I., makes sense. Put simply, I believe her."
  2. Trump: I Should Have Left UCLA Players in Jail.

    Nice summary of his life and literature. He was deeply traumatized by a authoritarian father. What makes Kafka different than, say , Orwell is that in Kafka, most of the torment - the actual angst of the situation - is ultimately 'self-induced' or at least 'self-participating' whereas Orwell puts the blame more externally.
  3. Tax “Reform”

    Both versions are terrible. The status quo wins again.
  4. Kelo v. City of New London,

    If he had insurance - which he seems to have had - and they pay his deductible, then the insurance should cover put the house back the way it was. That's how the insurance claims work. I'm not entirely sure what he's suing them for. He should be suing the insurance company if he doesn't like their settlement offer - which is what I suspect actually happened. If anything, they - the state - should probably be codifying a rider that says if a home is damaged due to police activity, that can't be used to assess future insurance claims or premiums. At the end of the day, the article is right - the expansion of police militarization has expanded their damage footprint and needs to be addressed.
  5. Trump: I Should Have Left UCLA Players in Jail.

    Trump and LaVar Ball were separated at birth, I swear. That being said, doesn't a president have something better to do that pick fights with a basketball promoter? I know Don King is still around. Maybe he can take another run at a 'thrilla with manila' - folders that is - and get the Whitehouse Press Office to go old school and fax a bunch of harshly worded memos to the Staples Center (pun intended).
  6. Next up, Bill Clinton!

    Personally, I just hope he loses to the democrat in THIS life. He didn't deserve to be a Senator BEFORE all this shit came out and he CERTAINLY doesn't deserve it now. I'll leave it to God to decide what happens to him for eternity.
  7. Next up! Al Franken

    From the 'right' perspective, abortion is murder. Are people on the left who support choice immoral or do they have a different point of view. From 'the right', stopping free speech at campuses in the name or tolerance is 'evil'. Are the people on the left evil? From the right, the best way to improve income inequality is by increasing opportunity. Is wanting people to improve their lot through their own efforts 'immoral'? You can argue that you don't agree with their approach but that's different than saying they're evil. Sugar coating things like 'oh, you don't care about the poor' is just a back door way of saying they're evil. It is. The difference between a partisan hack and a moral argument is that partisans are never wrong. They just backfill what they need to justify their position. That's a really easy test. If you're never wrong, then you're far more likely a partisan than actually arguing from any real moral position. Morality can take you places you don't necessarily want to go and usually does. Happens all the time. it's why groups like the ACLU end up defending the KKK. But ideology never has that conflict because it's inherently self serving and narcissistic. Trump is an absolute stunning example of a partisan of his own ideology. When has he EVER admitted he was wrong? FWIW, PA is a 'partisan cage match' IHMO - not a moral proving ground. Virtually all the arguments here are just ideological shit storms that ebb and flow.
  8. Next up! Al Franken

    Just because a stunt man allows an actor to shoot him during a scene, it's NOT PERMISSION TO ACTUALLY SHOOT HIM later on. It's REALLY not that complicated to separate the two. It's REALLY not.
  9. Next up! Al Franken

    Maybe I should just say the load stone of politics seems to be able to easily overwhelm the compass of morality. And i mean this whole collection of this type of thread, including those on free speech, statues, affirmative action, etc. There truly appears to be no moral foundation to any of this - just pick a team and go for the talking points.
  10. Next up! Al Franken

    One thing these threads have proven - hypocrisy knows no more ideological boundary than sexism, racism, or any of the other isms.
  11. The big swinging dick problem

    OMG. You weren't trolling? You were ACTUALLY going for the 'he deserved it by how he was dressed' argument with a straight face? Safe sailing.
  12. The big swinging dick problem

    FWIW, I figured BJ was just trolling so I returned a easy volley
  13. The big swinging dick problem

    So he deserved harassment because of how he dressed? That's a pretty quick slippery slope.
  14. Family Farm$

    BTW: Thanks for the insights!