Jump to content

SectionC3

Community Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    7,501

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by SectionC3

    Israel and Iran

    in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

    Posted

    55 minutes ago, Roundybout said:

    Bibi doesn’t want peace. He wants endless conflict in the Middle East. It’s pretty obvious that he will continue nuking Gaza until there is nothing left. 

    Interesting that this happens after Trump says a shot fired by the Houthis is a shot fired by Iran.  Of course the Houthis will respond to what happened in MAGAZA.  So then the question becomes whether Trump escalates and retaliates against the Houthis and Iran.  If he doesn't hit Iran in that context, then it seems that his talk about linking the Houthis and Iran was cheap and empty.  (Which, of course, most of his talk is.)  What Bibi really wants is for us to get sucked into a war with Iran and to do his wet work for him.  Which Trump just might do.  

    On 1/16/2025 at 12:02 PM, B-Man said:

     

     

     

     

     

    Now do Ukraine. 

    On 1/15/2025 at 5:24 PM, B-Man said:

     

     

    #100% Trump

     

     

    So the refusal to release the remaining roughly five dozen hostages also falls on Trump, right?  And, by the way, where is this "all hell" he promised?

    Constitution Fails to Mention Autopen, Sharpies (we really needed a third thread on this)

    in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

    Posted

    5 hours ago, Westside said:

    Your opinion change’s depending on if there is a R or D in front of it. 

    How do you feel about the validity of the J6 pardons?  

     

    Also, it's changes, not change's.  And the textual reading of the constitution has nothing to do with politics.  FYI.  Nowhere is it mentioned that a pardon must be signed, or signed in a certain way, or even written. 

    J.D. Vance - Character and Policies

    in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

    Posted

    On 3/10/2025 at 5:50 PM, Doc said:

     

    Not as side-splittingly hilarious as the "Vance had sex with a couch (and here's why that's funny)" lie...

    I believe it was dry humping the couch.  Or I hope it was at least.  It's so sick and perverted.  It's uncertain whether JD was wearing eyeliner and/or looking at a picture of a dolphin at the time. 

    Diggs' Drama

    in The Stadium Wall

    Posted

    10 minutes ago, Logic said:

    Putting aside the baggage, the emotional intangibles, how much happier Josh and the whole team seemed last year without him here, etc...

    Looking PURELY at the football aspect of things...

    Stefon Diggs was basically a non-factor on the Bills offense under Joe Brady when he was here. Since then, he's gotten a year older and torn an ACL. So PURELY from a football standpoint...what makes anyone think he would be particularly helpful?

    This is coming from a guy who direly wants more WR help for this team. I want NO part of Stefon Diggs, from an on-field, off-field, or any other standpoint. It's a hard pass for me at any cap number.

    It’s hard to be involved when you’re refusing to take the field for an entire drive to open a half, or getting chased by police on your way to work and having that chase resolve at your place of employment.  He’s a mercurial jerk. More than “this close” (like after his drop of the dime that took the whole game to set up against KC) to addition by subtraction.   

    Diggs' Drama

    in The Stadium Wall

    Posted

    Just now, BuffaloBillyG said:

    Maybe he can come back as a "Bills Legend" and "Lead the Charge" if no one signs him. 

    Eff that.  He’s a headache.  He was right that Josh needed to buckle down.  But then he acted like a punk for a year.  There’s story after story about this guy.  He can hit the road. 

    Diggs' Drama

    in The Stadium Wall

    Posted

    8 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

    I don’t think so either. There is a number however, where I would welcome it. I have no emotional reaction to his “nonsense” and assume that the Bills feel the same way. If he’s really cheap, it’s worth the gamble. If he’s not, hard pass. 

    I would be very surprised if this is true.  Never say never, but it would have to be low money, no guarantee, Josh approval, and a sit down with McD.  I just don’t see it.  I know very well that they were sick of his BS at the end.  

    • Agree 1

    Diggs' Drama

    in The Stadium Wall

    Posted

    5 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

    Probably right at this point. If he signed like a 1 year, $5M deal though, I’d probably change my mind.

    Read my post upthread.  This guy and his nonsense aren’t coming back here.  

    Where’s the beef?

    in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

    Posted

    15 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

    We bought some chickens and a coop along with a friend. F’in nightmare. The chickens killed each other. Several weak ones were gone in the first couple weeks. Critters and snakes try to get in the coop. It needs regular cleaning. The feed ain’t cheap. We ended up giving them away. 

    It is a huge headache.  I used to see some running around in OP here and there.  Not anymore.  Not worth the work.  This is a serious point though: if things keep on going south in the economy, it sadly might be for a lot of people.  

    • Like (+1) 1

    Where’s the beef?

    in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

    Posted

    35 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

    Backyard chickens! 

    I know people who have them. Annoying as hell. They do produce eggs in addition to noise. They also attract animals that think chickens are tasty.

    Solid points as always and a potentially excellent alternative to the consumption of roadkill.

     

    I do question whether MAGA will be able to feed the chickens to make this enterprise work.  I guess they could share Cheetos and meth with the chickens, but I’m not sure that’s a healthy diet for poultry.  The better play would be to buy less processed food and use the savings to  offset the cost of chicken feed.  But that requires a discipline generally lacking in the MAGA movement. 

    Just now, Wacka said:

    She died many years ago.

    Probably ate too much beef.  She might not have that problem next year in America. 

    • Haha (+1) 1

    Trump​ ❤️ Tariffs

    in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

    Posted

    21 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

    Well, yes, but only because one man has thought this through from an economics perspective and the other man is parroting political talking points.

     

    Do you really think corporations will invest heavily in US manufacturing based on Trump's tariffs? If you were the CEO of a major manufacturer would you trust that those tariffs will remain in place for the foreseeable future? It would be a gamble that Trumpism is the new Forever Politics of the United States. There is no reason to expect that. The next President - even a JD Vance - may very well revert to traditional Republicanism, or maybe a Democrat will win. So at best there is little assurance that today's policy will be next year's policy. Not the kind of assurance I'd want to invest billions in US manufacturing.

     

     

     

    Winner winner chicken dinner.  Look at the market today.  Tech is sold.  Profits are taken.   Some of that cycling is hitting the S&P.  But money is also fleeing to cash/foreign markets.  Where people can trust the consistency of economic policy.  

    October 2024: Musk, MAGA - yea the economy is going to be bad - short term

    in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

    Posted

    1 hour ago, IrishLass said:

     

    Enjoy the next 3+ years complaining about it.

     

    Oh, and get a better candidate next time.

     

    Or, run Kamalalala again. Doesn't matter to me. So much winning!

     

    9nobkv.gif

     

     

    I’m glad you revel in what will be the hardships of others.  

    2 hours ago, Kelly to Allen said:

     

    That's the fault of neo- liberal globalization. 

     

    If industry never left, (which rebuilt an adversary in China) , there wouldn't be a need for extensive tariffs. 

     

     

    There isn’t a need for extensive tariffs.  
     

    Long term it’s better that our disposable crap is made somewhere else by people working for terrible wages.  Horrible, but true.  Our population should be focused on creating and producing new technology and innovation -  green energy, chips, AI, etc.  Obviously tho administration and its use of early 20th century economic theory feel differently. 

    • Like (+1) 1

    October 2024: Musk, MAGA - yea the economy is going to be bad - short term

    in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

    Posted

    18 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

    bs...have you looked at the people that were at his rallies?  Not the sharpest tools in the shed. plus his approval for economic policy is underwater.  you're just making shyte up now.

    Seriously. My guess is that most trump voters know that he’s a moral disaster but voted their wallets.  Or what they thought would help their wallets.  He’s golfing instead of trying to help them.  And actually making things worse with his idiotic tariffs. 

    • Agree 1
×
×
  • Create New...