War Room Lounge v78: Figure someone will make a thread eventually.

[Higus]

disney bought fox films. They'll put those on disney streaming for a while. They are banning those movies from being shown at theaters and other places. Then they will take each movie off one by one about 5 years before they remake Aliens or Die Hard, etc....All hard copies of the movies will be discontinued and phased out. Everyone will be stuck with inferior and woke remakes as they try to erase the originals.

Fun fact: Mickey Mouse should be public domain, but Disney Do. has spent a lot of time and money lobbying changes to copyright law. Their extension is up in 5 years, but its a safe bet they get another if someone other than Bernie is elected.

 

[sickc0d3r]

@Lead , I understand, and thanks for getting back to me- TJ

So are you ripskater or just TJ Swagger-jacking his style? Sorry if this has been answered already.

 

[Fedorable]

Fun fact: Mickey Mouse should be public domain, but Disney Do. has spent a lot of time and money lobbying changes to copyright law. Their extension is up in 5 years, but its a safe bet they get another if someone other than Bernie is elected.

bernie will be dead in 5 years.

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

Like I've said before, hacks like Yoo and Dershowitz are as danger as any of the more dim-witted and obvious hacks.

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/john-yo...ing-i-did-deliberately-misconstrues-my-words/

@PolishHeadlock2 @Quipling

Also, as I feel I must say every time I watch a Laura Ingraham clip, it's truly impressive that someone so obviously flighty and stupid can be successful in the right-wing mediasphere.

We expect dubious legal reasoning from the guy but attacking a combat veteran as a spy.....

That you expect from cast members of The Real World.....

 

[JDragon]

Nope I'm not that old.

First game I really got into on PC was this;

Could play this for days even today. So many people who feel this has never been matched.

 

[Jack V Savage]

The first statement is true. The second statement might be true, depending on what the "nutter Trump fans" assert.

They assert that the video of Trump mocking a disabled reporter for his disability isn't what it is.

It's also true that Trump's mockery of the disabled reporter cannot be connected definitively to the reporter's disability.

But it obviously can. He says, "have you seen this guy?" and then he puts his arm up in an imitation of the guy's disability. You've seen the video, haven't you?

It's a book about a dystopian society in which the central government controls the lives of the citizens, who have almost no privacy.

The bigger control is mental, which is why the last line, the one I quoted, is relevant here. You've reached the stage where you have more confidence in the party's pronouncements than in your own senses, and you get angry when others rely on their senses. We are falling into totalitarianism here.

I do think that your stance here is likely indicative of tribalism rotting your brain.

You're just throwing what I said back at me, but I actually had a point. As I said, you are trusting the party and various representatives over what you can clearly see and hear with your own senses.

 

[waiguoren]

. He says, "have you seen this guy?" and then he puts his arm up in an imitation of the guy's disability. You've seen the video, haven't you?

I have seen the video. There's audio, too. Trump was ridiculing the man for failing to remember something: "Uh...I don't know what I said....uhhhh... I don't remember!" and his body language, mannerisms, and facial expressions were very similar to those that he used to mock a nameless general, Rafael "Ted" Cruz, bank managers, and even himself.

With the slight stiffness of Trump's right arm during the gesticulation (similar to the writer's birth defect , and contrast to left arm), I think you're seeing plausible deniability. My belief is that Trump planned that moment to get the media cycle focused on him again. I also believe this is one of many cases of Trump attempting to manipulate the mainstream media for his own political gain.

you get angry when others rely on their senses.

False. I have no anger.

As I said, you are trusting the party and various representatives over what you can clearly see and hear with your own senses.

The funny thing to me is that I'm fairly sure I've spent more time researching that moment and similar Trump moments than you have. That is, I am more informed than you are on the topic. Your response to information that doesn't suit your narrative is to tell me to trust my gut. Type II thinking is preferable here, as with the Clinton/Gabbard situation.

 

[Limbo Pete]

False. I have no anger.

 

[waiguoren]

Quote an angry post of mine, Mr. historian

 

[Sketch]

So are you ripskater or just TJ Swagger-jacking his style? Sorry if this has been answered already.

He is TJ Swagger.

 

[waiguoren]

He is TJ Swagger.

Obviously. This questioning of the identity of other posters has got me so angry.

 

[LMP]

Obviously. This questioning of the identity of other posters has got me so angry.

Just unleash all the love you have on him. I'm sure he will appreciate that man on man love you are offering up.

 

[Fawlty]

Remember when he challenged Homer to an IRL fight? Although one could almost say that it wasn't about anger, but domination.

 

[waiguoren]

Remember when he challenged Homer to an IRL fight? Although one could almost say that it wasn't about anger, but domination.

I have nothing but love for Mr. @BarryDillon . Certainly no anger here.

By contrast, I do recall that you wished harm and injury upon the fine gentleman @SBJJ. That was the anger of your mother rearing its ugly head. Some of your comments toward the inimitable @Sketch have also been below the belt.

Let's work on this, Mr. Fa.

 

[Limbo Pete]

Quote an angry post of mine, Mr. historian

This post makes me so mad that I might challenge you to an irl fight!
Raaaaah!

 

[waiguoren]

This post makes ne so mad that I might challenge you to an irl fight!
Raaaaah!

I don't think you'll even get your BA in history with this caliber of citation skills, Mr. Pet.

 

[Fawlty]

I have nothing but love for Mr. @BarryDillon . Certainly no anger here.

By contrast, I do recall that you wished harm and injury upon the fine gentleman @SBJJ. That was the anger of your mother rearing its ugly head. Some of your comments toward the inimitable @Sketch have also been below the belt.

Let's work on this, Mr. Fa.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Your response to information that doesn't suit your narrative is to tell me to trust my gut. Type II thinking is preferable here, as with the Clinton/Gabbard situation.

Not your gut; your eyes and ears. This isn't a matter of interpretation; it's you insisting and maybe really believing that something that we both saw happen didn't happen. And I think your choice to lie about Clinton's comment was different.

 

[Limbo Pete]

I don't think you'll even get your BA in history with this caliber of citation skills, Mr. Pet.

 

[Fawlty]

Not your gut; your eyes and ears. This isn't a matter of interpretation; it's you insisting and maybe really believing that something that we both saw happen didn't happen. And I think your choice to lie about Clinton's comment was different.

Notice his Trumpian/Heretician deflection with me just a moment ago.

"It's not me that is mad, despite perfect evidence of my anger; it's the people who notice that I'm mad. Those are the real angry ones, not me."