Page 109 of 110

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 03 Sep 2019, 08:00
by Dangerman
Better banned than v&.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 03 Sep 2019, 10:52
by Warren
Dangerman wrote:
03 Sep 2019, 08:00
Better banned than v&.
???

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 03 Sep 2019, 11:34
by lunchstealer
Warren wrote:
Dangerman wrote:
03 Sep 2019, 08:00
Better banned than v&.
???
Better banned than vampersand!

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 03 Sep 2019, 11:58
by Pham Nuwen
Better banned than vitameatavegamin! Though I disagree a bit.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 03 Sep 2019, 12:07
by Dangerman
Getting vanned is what happens when the FBI pulls a van up to your house.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 03 Sep 2019, 12:54
by Pham Nuwen
Dangerman wrote:
03 Sep 2019, 12:07
Getting vanned is what happens when the FBI pulls a van up to your house.
Down by the river?

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 06 Sep 2019, 00:56
by lunchstealer
Ouch.


@CaseyMattox_
Sohrab says civility is a secondary value.

French:: “what does this mean? What did you do in the great culture war of 2019? Well, I was an asshole on twitter.”
From a thread on a debate between David French and Sohrab Ahmari.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 10 Sep 2019, 13:42
by Mo
Oh you totally owned her, he said God not Jesus. A Christian totally believes they’re different things.


Re: Twitter!

Posted: 10 Sep 2019, 14:11
by Kolohe


My fault for not knowing the audience, but still, how is one able to be an Air Force intel officer who was born in the 60s or 70s and not get a tribble reference?

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 10 Sep 2019, 20:40
by Warren
Kolohe wrote:
10 Sep 2019, 14:11


My fault for not knowing the audience, but still, how is one able to be an Air Force intel officer who was born in the 60s or 70s and not get a tribble reference?
Gender norming

Twitter!

Posted: 13 Sep 2019, 18:51
by Mo
What person in an $800k house in DC has a chef? Stephen Miller?


Re: Twitter!

Posted: 13 Sep 2019, 20:33
by Eric the .5b
I just retweeted Kim Kardashian. I feel weird.

But then, this block of tweets, amongst all the yammering about her product lines, is weird in a way I approve of:

Image

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 13 Sep 2019, 21:26
by lunchstealer
Mo wrote:
13 Sep 2019, 18:51
What person in an $800k house in DC has a chef? Stephen Miller?

Somebody's reply was "Man, Stephen Miller is angry."

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 13 Sep 2019, 21:58
by Aresen
Kolohe wrote:
10 Sep 2019, 14:11


My fault for not knowing the audience, but still, how is one able to be an Air Force intel officer who was born in the 60s or 70s and not get a tribble reference?
I am disappointed that you explained it to her.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 14 Sep 2019, 17:44
by Jennifer
Eric the .5b wrote:
13 Sep 2019, 20:33
I just retweeted Kim Kardashian. I feel weird.

But then, this block of tweets, amongst all the yammering about her product lines, is weird in a way I approve of:

Image
FWIW, there have been a few times before when she said or did something I approve of, and even times when I'd sympathize with her over her critics. One thing I recall (vaguely, and don't feel like looking it up) -- she married Kanye West so, while Kardashian and her sisters are considered "white" by American racist standards, her kids most certainly are NOT. And sometime after she had her first baby she started saying things to the effect of "I'm learning that black Americans even today face all sorts of discrimination which whites do not" ... and people criticized her for not knowing this already. (Seems like a counterproductive way to run an outreach program, if your standard welcome greeting is "You should've known this already!")

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 14 Sep 2019, 18:10
by Eric the .5b
Jennifer wrote:
14 Sep 2019, 17:44
Eric the .5b wrote:
13 Sep 2019, 20:33
I just retweeted Kim Kardashian. I feel weird.

But then, this block of tweets, amongst all the yammering about her product lines, is weird in a way I approve of:

Image
FWIW, there have been a few times before when she said or did something I approve of, and even times when I'd sympathize with her over her critics. One thing I recall (vaguely, and don't feel like looking it up) -- she married Kanye West so, while Kardashian and her sisters are considered "white" by American racist standards, her kids most certainly are NOT. And sometime after she had her first baby she started saying things to the effect of "I'm learning that black Americans even today face all sorts of discrimination which whites do not" ... and people criticized her for not knowing this already. (Seems like a counterproductive way to run an outreach program, if your standard welcome greeting is "You should've known this already!")
Yep. "Fuck you for trying to learn and come up with more informed positions."

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 16 Sep 2019, 10:17
by JD
I appreciate the more enlightened Kim K., and I don't want to come down on her too hard because I think her heart is in the right place. But the "did you know we don't let people on parole vote" thing is...kind of silly. I mean, parole is part of your sentence. People who are on parole aren't just randomly being fucked with; they're still working off their sentences, and they could often just as legitimately still be in prison. (That said, the larger issue of "why don't we let felons vote anyway" is worth discussing.)

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 16 Sep 2019, 10:49
by Warren
JD wrote:
16 Sep 2019, 10:17
I appreciate the more enlightened Kim K., and I don't want to come down on her too hard because I think her heart is in the right place. But the "did you know we don't let people on parole vote" thing is...kind of silly. I mean, parole is part of your sentence. People who are on parole aren't just randomly being fucked with; they're still working off their sentences, and they could often just as legitimately still be in prison. (That said, the larger issue of "why don't we let felons vote anyway" is worth discussing.)
I think you need to grade KK on a different scale. She's not so much making a point, and tending her brand.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 16 Sep 2019, 13:17
by dbcooper
The only really good thing on twitter (occasional Nick Mullen gems aside) is a quick interaction with Jesse Walker on country/roots rock.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 16 Sep 2019, 18:19
by Jennifer
Warren wrote:
16 Sep 2019, 10:49
JD wrote:
16 Sep 2019, 10:17
I appreciate the more enlightened Kim K., and I don't want to come down on her too hard because I think her heart is in the right place. But the "did you know we don't let people on parole vote" thing is...kind of silly. I mean, parole is part of your sentence. People who are on parole aren't just randomly being fucked with; they're still working off their sentences, and they could often just as legitimately still be in prison. (That said, the larger issue of "why don't we let felons vote anyway" is worth discussing.)
I think you need to grade KK on a different scale. She's not so much making a point, and tending her brand.
Eh, from what I've seen I'm inclined to believe she is sincerely trying to make the world a better place. After all, her "brand" as I understand it was/is about clothes and fashion and jewelry and hanging out with celebrities and otherwise living a luxe lifestyle, all of which have exactly fuck-all to do with trying to improve things for the worst-off members of society. It's not as though Kardashian's newfound "wokeness" consists merely of things like "Here's a photo of me looking hot at some $5,000-per-plate Poverty Awareness fundraiser ball."

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 16 Sep 2019, 18:43
by Eric the .5b
JD wrote:
16 Sep 2019, 10:17
I appreciate the more enlightened Kim K., and I don't want to come down on her too hard because I think her heart is in the right place. But the "did you know we don't let people on parole vote" thing is...kind of silly. I mean, parole is part of your sentence. People who are on parole aren't just randomly being fucked with; they're still working off their sentences, and they could often just as legitimately still be in prison. (That said, the larger issue of "why don't we let felons vote anyway" is worth discussing.)
Yeah, and? It's a perfectly reasonable thing to argue that disenfranchisement shouldn't be part of that punishment in California. There's every combination of "no disenfranchisement at any point" to "you better get a pardon if you ever want to vote again" in various states. All of four states, including California, specifically ban parolees from voting.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 17 Sep 2019, 06:38
by dhex


Oh OK

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 17 Sep 2019, 07:19
by Highway
dhex wrote:
17 Sep 2019, 06:38


Oh OK
Yeah, like shitheads like that would not start complaining after day 1 on the railroad, or humping trees up a mountainside. Although if you got any useful work out of those clowns at 18 dollars an hour for doing trades work, you'd be way ahead.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 17 Sep 2019, 10:06
by JD
Eric the .5b wrote:
16 Sep 2019, 18:43
JD wrote:
16 Sep 2019, 10:17
I appreciate the more enlightened Kim K., and I don't want to come down on her too hard because I think her heart is in the right place. But the "did you know we don't let people on parole vote" thing is...kind of silly. I mean, parole is part of your sentence. People who are on parole aren't just randomly being fucked with; they're still working off their sentences, and they could often just as legitimately still be in prison. (That said, the larger issue of "why don't we let felons vote anyway" is worth discussing.)
Yeah, and? It's a perfectly reasonable thing to argue that disenfranchisement shouldn't be part of that punishment in California.
Sure, and that's not what she was arguing.

Re: Twitter!

Posted: 17 Sep 2019, 10:06
by nicole
The best part is "the twerking video" is...of an exercise class