epbart

quote:

---

GOPe #nevertrump fig cuck checking in.

---

Thank you for self-identifying.

quote:

---

But I actually never cease to be amazed at how the party has changed.

---

Both parties have changed over time on some issues while remaining consistent on others.

quote:

---

J.D. Vance Hates Milton Friedman Socialism is ascendant within both political parties.
-----
Unfortunately, President Donald Trump continues to espouse an economic policy that itself contains far too many concessions to socialism. Even worse, the most likely inheritor of Trump's throne is someone who is, if anything, considerably to the president's left on economics.

---

The title of the article stretches facts so far it becomes essentially a lie.

Nothing in this article or video supports the sensationalist claim that Vance hates Friedman. What JD actually says is that the Trump admin policies favor Alexander Hamilton's vision moreso than Friedman's. JD says Friedman's laissez-faire ideology made more sense in the 1980's when there were still Christian guardrails to rein in decision making that might harm American communities. That's it. If this guy conflates this with hating Friedman he's either not intelligent or he has an agenda. The implication is simple: freedom (laissez-faire) requires moral actors to work well and not frick over their communities for short-term profits. It's dishonest to take JD's statement further than that.

Also, if this journalist thinks favoring Hamiltonian policy (to strengthen industries and communities at home... aka "the American System" as those lovely ladies at Promethean Action call it in their videos that get shared here) over Friedman inspired policy (NOTHING matters except squeezing out more profit) makes one a socialist, then he's drawing an impossible line in the sand, and he's making the correct use of socialism meaningless.... In a way, what he's really doing is intellectually propping up Friedman the way Muslims prop up Mohammed. If you criticize Friedman you are an economic infidel and a socialist! I don't see how abdicating reason in this manner is not retarded.

As Mike Tyson said more or less: "Everyone's got a plan until they get punched in the mouth." Anyone that's ever been in a meaningful leadership role knows this and has at some point probably had to make decisions they didn’t like, maybe compromising on their vision or making concessions / working with people they would rather not work with. That's the way of the world. And with an entity as large and diverse as the USA, it is unavoidable that every president has had to make some decisions that have a tinge of socialism to them. I do not, however, see Trump's admin making a strong move in that direction. If he succeeds in his Hamiltonian efforts and strengthens industry at home, I think it will go a long way towards preventing the population from moving towards socialism... this remains to be seen, of course.

The GOPe talked a good game, but pissed away every chance to improve anything and were generally feckless in attempting to correct anything Clinton or Obama did. GOPe sorts are actually shockingly similar to Democrat women who clutch their pearls as if they are morally better to Trump in some way, then vote with their feelings. I'm regrettably not joking, and if you're capable of honest self-reflection, you'll recognize the shallowness of thinking the party used to be better.

quote:

---

They were walking right in Midnight Express...

---

I've heard of that movie many tines, but still haven't seen it. In any case, that looks like a ritual of sorts.

In ritual use (not just the occult, but also in some religions contexts), deosil (clockwise) aligns with the apparent motion of the sun in the northern hemisphere and is used to attract, build, or invite positive energy, while widdershins (counterclockwise) is moving against the sun and is used for banishing, breaking spells, or removing negative influences.

The OP speaks to something else... likely the 2 reasons he cites at the end (dominance of one foot, or maybe brain / eye asymmetry). I'd be curious if the numbers track with right-handed vs left-handed people (like 90%of people are right-handed and tend to veer left and the 10% or so of lefties tend to veer right). Also, like Catfish John a couple of posts up, I'd be curious to know if there's any analysis of the direction of wandering: north, south, east, west. I think it's well known some animals have a highly developed ability to perceive the Earth's magnetic field, and use it for migration. And I think I've read that humans may still possess remnants of this.

quote:

---

People will say most anything to try and get out of jail
Yawn

---

Kind of dumb of you to think her saying, "I struggle to believe [Walz and Ellison didn't know]" to a reporter would have any impact on her staying out of jail.

If that was truly her goal, she and her attorneys would've been meeting with prosecutors in private with any evidence she had against Walz and Ellison. Talking to Fox News is irrelevant.

quote:

---

I don't want to hear another damn word about nibbling on toes being weird.

---

I guess if you just do it in the heat of the moment while exploring and experimenting, play on... no judgments. But if you fetishize feet and get excited by them, that's kinda weird.

Wanting to get hit in the balls is a rather degrading fetish. It is a perverse desire to sexualize pain, and from reading the article, many of these guys are into submission, which isn't surprising.

Edit to add: I highly doubt it's exploding in popularity outside the BDSM community they mention in the article. I mean, I know men today have lower T than previous generations, but I doubt low T makes a guy want to get hit in the balls unless he's already a bit off in the head.

quote:

---

I would bet money that James Talarico has no idea Texas Tech even has a football team.

---

Talarico thinks football is soccer.

quote:

---

OT ballers only drink Kopi Luwak

---

One of my daughters did a teen tour in Asia a decade or so ago, and brought back a bag of the fermented civet shite bean coffee.

iirc, my wife found the idea a little too gross and might've had a sip, but otherwise left the bag for me. My memory is faded, but I think I remember it being a bit more subtle than regular coffee in some ways... not as acidic as light roasts or as bitter as dark roasts, and softened by the fermenting, which gave it a hard to describe earthy, gamey funk. More subtle than overwhelming and not bad, but I wouldn't go out of my way to get it again either.

quote:

---

He never once said he wouldn’t use the military. He actually boats about how he’s rebuilt the military to use it.

---

Correct.

It's not unreasonable to have a full, nuanced position which in conversation gets boiled down to an oversimplistic slogan-- "No New Wars" being the simple slogan that represents Trump's desire for a strong military and a willingness to use it to win, but without getting caught up in long lasting conflicts that achieve nothing over time.

I think the following quote attributed to Trump (pulled out of a convo I had with Grok about No New Wars a few months ago) is a more accurate summary of his position:

quote:

---

"I will not hesitate to deploy military force when there is no alternative. But if America fights, it must fight to win. I will never send our finest into battle unless necessary—and will only do so if we have a plan for victory. Our goal is peace and prosperity, not war and destruction."

---

The "No New Wars" claim by Trump during the 2024 election was a bit more of a retrospective claim about how he succeeded in his first term and was proud about it. While it was also a pledge of continuity of his philosophy from his first term, it was never an explicit statement that he would NOT use the military in his second term... anyone claiming this is being intentionally irrational and looking for an excuse to attack the man.

It is, of course, fair to question how well Trump is succeeding. I would call Venezuela and the previous strikes on Iranian nuke facilities as Trump's actions being consistent with his words. There is some risk that the current Iranian operation gets away from him.

If one is being truly fair, though-- people like the OP, Bunk, & many of the libs on here are not fair minded-- then it is important to realize Trump is fighting more than Iran. The media at home, every Democrat leader and some Republicans in Congress would rather see the US fail than win against Iran-- solely for the purpose of denying Trump a win... to hurt Trump and protect their own fiefdoms lobbyists help them build. They hamstring him at every turn and work to undermine him instead of supporting him... and America. If he only had a little more support from his own party, I think he might've advanced his agenda a lot more than he has already, and the bitchier sorts who like to harp on this topic might be less eager to carp as they do. Oh, well...

quote:

---

What's the story with him watching some video of a firefight in Afghanistan or something and pulling for the US soldier to get killed?

---

A Marine in Afghanistan exposed himself to enemy fire and got shot 4x. I haven't watched the video or looked into the details beyond the below article, but allegedly he did so intentionally to draw fire away from his fellow Marines/soldiers.

Platner crassly insulted the Marine, called him stupid, and said he didn't deserve to live.

fox article

Just another anecodate that suggests he's of low character-- trashing his fellow servicemen, who, if he was drawing fire in a different direction, was trying to do something honorable/courageous.

Interesting that the NYT is running this.

I freely admit that I consider Trump's personal indiscretions secondary to his vision and agenda. I'd certainly prefer a man of high integrity in office, but there aren't many, if any, who are both moral and have the force of will to get anything done. So, I'm content to vote for a man (Trump) who has some force of will to try and change things (understanding the other branches are working against him, and thus limiting him). In the same way, I'd rather choose a surgeon or attorney who is a flawed, sinful man over a less talented but moral man... if the sinful man is more competent and capable ensuring a positive outcome.

My point here is to say I'm not going to explicity shite on Platner for being a slimy piece of shite to his wife. I think Platner sucks in far more meaningful ways than just being sleazy. I'm more curious that the Left is going to turn a blind eye to his being an immoral a-hole when it tried to hammer Trump for it.

Again, interesting the NYT ran with this. I know they like to change the headlines / focus every 5 days or so. So maybe by reporting this early, they can say they reported it and ignore it down the home stretch when the potential to influence voters matters more. It would perhaps be more damaging to report it in October. Also gives Platner a chance to say he's worked through his issues (which will be bullshite).

quote:

---

I've always wondered if it was a large scale money laundering operation.

---

This has never crossed my mind, but it strikes me as potentially ingenious. An enterprising sort might establish a stable of accounts... short and long term for different agendas to clean and obscure money trails.

Of course, I think there are a number of legit onlyfans accounts... stories have trickled out here and there about a teacher, a policewoman, a housewife / mother to young kids, a quirky exhibitionist couple, etc who've capitalized on the platform. And there is the trailing bottom 10% or 20% of men who have disposable income or an inability to avoid racking up debt, and a difficulty with making connections IRL... or a misguided sense of wanting to be seen by the people they pay. Onlyfans is possibly a good proxy (outlet) for the sort of lonely guy too shy to make a move face to face, and too risk averse or proud to put himself on the line with a stripper, hooker, etc. It isn't real engagement, but the mirage of engagement might be better than nothing for some.