Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Posturedoc

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Team
  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Skulking in Slapdad's shadow and stealing his beer.

Recent Profile Visitors

11,907 profile views
  1. I haven’t watched it yet—just not fortified with enough sleep last night or enough coffee this morning to submit myself to his kind of crazy stupidity. I have, however, read a couple of articles about the interview and came across perhaps the single best sentence I’ve seen a journalist pen in the past year. From an article on the website Mashable, of all places: News site Axios' weekly HBO show aired an interview with the president on Monday night that made the Chris Wallace shitshow look like a successfully muffled fart. @NVGiant How would you have handled this editorially?
  2. Before this became a discussion of the pros and cons of real estate ownership and taxes, it was a discussion revolving, in part, around Stephen Miller’s impact on the Trump Administration’s immigration policies. At least one poster was unaware of who Miller was, and another (Stunner, and probably others, but I’m not going to reread the entire thread for the purpose of calling them out) attempted to minimize Miller’s policy influence within the admin. This is an inaccurate portrayal. This Politico article is adapted from a forthcoming book on Miller and is worth a read in order to better understand exactly influence of white nationalist movement and white supremacists, and specifically conservative activist, David Horowitz, had and still have on Miller, and through him the Trump Administration, US immigration policy and conservative attitudes toward brown people in general. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/08/01/stephen-miller-david-horowitz-mentor-389933 I found the following sections particularly revelatory as they relate to the posting tactics of a now permanent-banned former member of this forum. Seems Miller isn’t the only Horowitz acolyte we’re (now)) familiar with here. Horowitz, who is Jewish like Miller, argues that Protestant Christian doctrines are fundamental to America and are under direct assault by Muslims, progressives and anyone who argues with his ideology. Having leaped from left-wing radicalism to right-wing radicalism, he uses the language of the civil rights movement to attack it, painting conservative white men as victims of discrimination and defending hate speech with appeals to “intellectual diversity.” “Academic freedom is most likely to thrive in an environment of intellectual diversity that protects and fosters independence of thought and speech,” reads the “Academic Bill of Rights” he created for his youth group, “Students for Academic Freedom.” Meanwhile, his acolytes learn to invert and deflect criticism. Liberals and people of color are “bigots,” “racists,” and “oppressors,” Horowitz has said multiple times. “The racists here are blacks who have been brainwashed into thinking all cops are white and oppressing them,” Horowitz has tweeted. ....................... In January 2016, he was officially brought on to shape Trump’s speeches and immigration policy; it’s easy to hear similarities to Horowitz’s arguments, as well as his advice on style, in Trump’s speeches today. That might be because almost from the beginning of Miller’s new role, he went to his old mentor for speech ideas and policy advice, according to correspondence Horowitz shared with me. On May 9, 2016, Miller emailed him. “What are some ways the government and the oligarchs who rely on the government have ‘rigged’ the system against poor young blacks and hispanics?” In his strategy paper about appealing to fear, Horowitz had urged Republicans in their war on Democrats to “put their victims—women, minorities, the poor and working Americans—in front of every argument.” Accordingly, he responded to Miller with what he called a “soundbite”: “Everything that is wrong with the inner city, everything that stifles the aspirations of minorities and the poor and blocks their advancement, that policy can effect, Democrats are 100% responsible for.”
  3. Those are “big boy“ thoughts. Any real man knows this.
  4. Lol. Do you get paid for being a clown on this forum (@mugtang)? I’m not surprised that you’re claiming “always” = “recent times” (followed by a nonsensical comparison in an attempt to prove your point) and that your audience should be able to read your mind, understand this, and add a new definition to the word always rather than admitting that you should have done a better job defining the parameters of your argument in the first place. This is what poor debaters do. Q. How many times have you followed up a dumb argument you’ve made by doubling down on dumb? A. Every time. Never change.
  5. It’s once again clear that you either do not read about most of the topics you wade in on, or you are incapable of accurately interpreting the information that passes before your eyes. Your take has almost nothing to do with the origins of the Fairness Doctrine. Read some history with clear eyes and an operating brain rather than filtering it through the hyper partisan lens you always use for those organs.
  6. Thank you for making the detailed argument—and a far better one at that—that I was too busy (gardening—Ha!) and lazy to mount. Still, compared to your endless screed, my argument should punch at the same weight in your editorial eye given its pithy brevity. I’m declaring victory here given the far greater cost in time your response required.
  7. That’s a pretty cynical way to look at government and it’s abilities. It’s not at all true.
  8. Do conservative (or any) white folks have a history in this country of being enslaved for hundreds of years, Jim Crowed, displaced, redlined, and suffered all the other racist policies, written or otherwise, that blacks have in America starting long before the US existed as such? When that happens, you’ll be making an equivalent argument. Until then and as usual, you are either being obtuse or are simply incapable of assimilating information that does not correlate with your warped worldview.
  9. Your ratio of projection and unintentional irony per post are increasing. Unbelievable, I know, but true all the same. Let’s consider the projection. All these names and profanities you lob at posters who disagree with you? Pure projection. You seem damn unhappy with yourself these days, Convert. Regarding unintentional irony (and more projection!), read the section of your above post in bold. All these things you accuse Kaep of being, highlighted by “he’s an extremist, a racist, a bigot and a hateful divider...”, and “he’s addicted to the attention and power” are things you endlessly defend another individual who ceaselessly displays these faults and many, many more. Can you even see how you undercut almost every one of your endless grievance filled arguments? If you can, it’ll be the first time that light bulb has gone on in a very long time.
  10. I can. The serially obtuse regularly ask ridiculous questions or take issue with topics that have obvious answers like this one has.
  11. Posturedoc


    That’s the word from Master Tang. I wasn’t around when it happened, so I don’t know the context, as I’m pretty sure whatever he wrote that triggered it was erased from history.
  12. Posturedoc


    Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha! He’d last less time than the any of the umpteen iterations of that ^^^ guy lasted before being perma banned.
  13. Seems you blew right past my final paragraph. Lol. Keep on keeping on, Contard.
  14. You’re right (a rarity!), I have become occasionally repetitive in posts directed at you. It is, after all, very difficult to insult those incapable of examining their internal mental machinations by pointing out they lack self-awareness. They (you) have no point of reference. I need to accept that you are incapable of understanding, much less accepting, the criticism and should move on to picking at one or more of your many other warts. The problem with that evolution is that it would require me repressing one of my personal triggers: pointing out to noisy village idiots who suffer from delusions of critical thinking and omniscience that they are, in fact, not very bright. Folks who fall to the dense side of the IQ median aren’t an issue for me but, to repeat myself, dense people who believe they’re always the smartest person in a crowded room, have all the answers, and are uninhibited in sharing their thoughtless wisdom, well, I take pleasure in plucking their peacock feathers. It’s why we’ve clashed repeatedly for as long as you’ve been posting on Nevada-related forums. This is a personal failing of mine (take note: self-awareness in action here). I will try to be better. I’m asking you for a favor, though. Can you please try to be less stupid? This would be a gigantic help to not only me, but to 90% of the board.