Jump to content

The Battle of Lake Travis - Hope our Texas Board Members are Safe


Recommended Posts

I agree with Joe and think redirecting money away from law enforcement to other public institutions could help, but also agree with the MAGA folk that fully defunding the police is the wrong way to go about it. (I think Joe agrees with that, too)

Just now, Deranged Rhino said:

:lol: This is my favorite meltdown spiral ever. Not one trolls but two falling into the eddy of despair. 

 

The only thing that makes it better is the commentary from the wannabe mod who promised his sheep that he would ignore "the trolls".

Edited by wAcKy ZeBrA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

“ And I would’ve got away with it too, if it wasn’t for you darn polls!!!!”

 

 

If Joe would have just come out with an honest intent on his running platform of, “I’m not sure what I’m for or against yet, until the polls tell me what to be for or against”, we could all have so much more harmony amongst us!

 

Boaters gonna boat, though!

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dubs said:

What a stupid thread topic. Pure secondhand embarrassment for the OP. 

 

Even worse when you consider he made it just hours after declaring he was leaving the board :lol: The best part though was the feeding frenzy of the EXACT posters you'd expect that swarmed to this thread when it was pointed out. 

 

When your only allies are the bottom of the barrel trolls, there's a chance you're PPP'ing incorrectly. 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, wAcKy ZeBrA said:

I agree with Joe and think redirecting money away from law enforcement to other public institutions could help, but also agree with the MAGA folk that fully defunding the police is the wrong way to go about it. (I think Joe agrees with that, too)

 

The only thing that makes it better is the commentary from the wannabe mod who promised his sheep that he would ignore "the trolls".

 

Same here.  What it means to “defund” is key.  Are we talking about diverting some monies now dedicated to policing costs to proactive, proven, community outreach measures?  If so, and if the extent of the diversion is reasonable, sign me up.  Makes perfect sense.  If we’re talking about stripping police of all funding and abolishing police forces, I’m out.  And I don’t know anyone who is “in” on the latter topic.  

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DFT said:

“ And I would’ve got away with it too, if it wasn’t for you darn polls!!!!”

 

 

If Joe would have just come out with an honest intent on his running platform of, “I’m not sure what I’m for or against yet, until the polls tell me what to be for or against”, we could all have so much more harmony amongst us!

 

Boaters gonna boat, though!

 

Still waiting for your Rule #2 response, sir. Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SectionC3 said:

 

Same here.  What it means to “defund” is key.  Are we talking about diverting some monies now dedicated to policing costs to proactive, proven, community outreach measures?  If so, and if the extent of the diversion is reasonable, sign me up.  Makes perfect sense.  If we’re talking about stripping police of all funding and abolishing police forces, I’m out.  And I don’t know anyone who is “in” on the latter topic.  

 

There was a PPP topic on this same idea that came to diverting some monies as the consensus for what "defund the police" means, yet when "defund" is now mentioned, those same posters claim it means the entire police budget.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Even worse when you consider he made it just hours after declaring he was leaving the board :lol: The best part though was the feeding frenzy of the EXACT posters you'd expect that swarmed to this thread when it was pointed out. 

 

When your only allies are the bottom of the barrel trolls, there's a chance you're PPP'ing incorrectly. 


I've been extremely busy and been largely off the board for the last couple weeks and this was the first thread I saw when I came back. Just an all around embarrassment. 
 

it’s clear the intention is to clutter the board with nonsense to the point where it’s so frustrating people disengage on the board. 

Edited by dubs
  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dubs said:


I've Extremely busy and been largely off the board for the last couple weeks and this was the first thread I saw when I came back. Just an all around embarrassment. 
 

it’s clear the intention is to clutter the board with nonsense to the point where it’s so frustrating people disengage on the board. 

 

Hoax.  Boat safety is important.  Particularly to Coast Guard and local water rescue teams.  I support this thread, and I see it as an important reminder not to have a parade of boats in crowded, choppy waters. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dubs said:


I've been extremely busy and been largely off the board for the last couple weeks and this was the first thread I saw when I came back. Just an all around embarrassment. 
 

it’s clear the intention is to clutter the board with nonsense to the point where it’s so frustrating people disengage on the board. 

 

The intention is to discuss Trump boat parades, specifically the Battle of Lake Travis. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BeerLeagueHockey said:

I see this thread, and I see an opportunity.  Lake Travis is mostly ~60' deep.  I think you could raise that boat with two larger boats, winches, and a hired diver.  Would it be worth $4,000 it to save a $30,000 boat?  I think so.

Probably depends on the insurance situation.  But on balance it’s probably a reasonable theory. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BeerLeagueHockey said:

I see this thread, and I see an opportunity.  Lake Travis is mostly ~60' deep.  I think you could raise that boat with two larger boats, winches, and a hired diver.  Would it be worth $4,000 it to save a $30,000 boat?  I think so.

 

How much is that $30K boat worth, though, after being underwater for a couple weeks? Maybe $10-15K after spending hours of labor to repair. 

 

Also, if someone else's boat sinks, it doesn't automatically become the property of whoever raises it. There would have to be a barter to begin with to exchange the title. 

Edited by wAcKy ZeBrA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Deranged Rhino said:

 

And instead it turned into a thread showing your own dishonesty and inability to stay on the very topic you created. Funny how that worked out :lol: 

 

So let’s get things flowing in the right direction again.  Bottom line here is that previously calm waters rose up and defeated Trumpers.  How do we prevent this from happening in the future?  And how do we thank the first responders who were needlessly imperiled by this stupidity? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SectionC3 said:

Probably depends on the insurance situation.  But on balance it’s probably a reasonable theory. 

Tricky part is once you get it close to the surface you'd have to figure out a way to pump out the water.  May have to raise my estiamte by $1,000 or so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, wAcKy ZeBrA said:

 

How much is that $30K boat worth, though, after being underwater for a couple weeks? Maybe $10-15K after spending hours of labor to repair. 

 

Also, if someone else's boat sinks, it doesn't automatically become the property of whoever raises it. There would have to be a barter to begin with to exchange the title. 

 

Probably in it's perm resting place.  Final Destination 2020.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, dubs said:

it’s clear the intention is to clutter the board with nonsense to the point where it’s so frustrating people disengage on the board. 

 

This is standard fare posting for leftists right now. They know Biden is a spoonful of tapioca away from dementia, and they know Kamala Harris makes the Sarah Palin pick look genius.

 

So all they do is mock Trump supporters, share anonymous stories that are easily debunked and, amazingly, still push the Russia hoax. Some will say some unbelievably disgusting things about your wife.

 

They're a schittshow right now, and the only real problem is when you put someone on ignore, it doesn't hide the threads they start.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, IDBillzFan said:

 

This is standard fare posting for leftists right now. They know Biden is a spoonful of tapioca away from dementia, and they know Kamala Harris makes the Sarah Palin pick look genius.

 

So all they do is mock Trump supporters, share anonymous stories that are easily debunked and, amazingly, still push the Russia hoax. Some will say some unbelievably disgusting things about your wife.

 

They're a schittshow right now, and the only real problem is when you put someone on ignore, it doesn't hide the threads they start.

 

 

 

I’m going to Rule #2 this.  Show your work.  Thank you. 

10 minutes ago, Unforgiven said:

Just more stupidity.

Bye Bye you jackass.

 

You've chosen to ignore content by wAcKy ZeBrA.

 

That is a Rule #1 violation.  But I forgive you.  Which means that you may now have to change your name. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, wAcKy ZeBrA said:

Please follow rule #2 and engage in an actual discussion of the topic.

 

These boaters for Trump are morons and put a lot of people in a dangerous situation.

 

 

 

Didn't they put themselves in a dangerous situation?  

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IDBillzFan said:

 

Once again...we see the choice clearly.

 

Like the police? Vote for Trump.

 

Hate the police? Vote for Harris-Biden.

 

It's just that simple.

If I hate police I vote for the cop and the guy that supports strong police? The math doesn't check out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

If I hate police I vote for the cop and the guy that supports strong police? The math doesn't check out.


In her 2009 book, “Smart on Crime,” she wrote that “if we take a show of hands of those who would like to see more police officers on the street, mine would shoot up,” adding that “virtually all law-abiding citizens feel safer when they see officers walking a beat.”

 

Earlier this summer, in the wake of the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, she told The New York Times that “it is status-quo thinking to believe that putting more police on the streets creates more safety. That’s wrong. It’s just wrong.”

 

 

guess you forgot to carry the “1”...

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DFT said:


In her 2009 book, “Smart on Crime,” she wrote that “if we take a show of hands of those who would like to see more police officers on the street, mine would shoot up,” adding that “virtually all law-abiding citizens feel safer when they see officers walking a beat.”

 

Earlier this summer, in the wake of the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, she told The New York Times that “it is status-quo thinking to believe that putting more police on the streets creates more safety. That’s wrong. It’s just wrong.”

 

 

guess you forgot to carry the “1”...

Actions speak louder than words, mate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...