War Room Lounge v99: "I used to do drugs. I still do, but I used to too."

[Jack V Savage]

That's your ace? That I defended HockeyBJJ when you called him a moron for saying you supported Clinton in 2016? Yes, I will agree that you got fantastically emotional over that and that it shocked both Hockey and me, but it was nothing compared to the full on whirlwind of irrationality that you then unleashed over the foreign policy optics thing. And just lol @ me being extremely bitchy. I've been kowtowing to your hysterics and trying to disengage from them.

My "ace"? Haha. It's just a fact that your weird hostility and bitchiness started when I pushed back over your misrepresentation of my position in 2016, which is also what led to you being bitchy and trolly in your previous account. And since you're embarrassed about being caught lying there, you're trying to relocate the start of it to a later discussion that isn't as black and white (we agree that the position you called "reasonable" was wrong so the question is just whether it was nonetheless reasonable to believe it--and I'll note that you're extremely inconsistent in the standards you apply in that area).

You realize that I just quoted by discussion of the particulars of the article, right? So everyone can see that you're lying by merely looking at the last post.

As I said at the time:

"This is kiiiind of addressing a point, so OK. You are mischaracterizing it, though. He wasn't saying that Bernie is a right-winger on social issues; just that it's not a focus of his message. And as to the first one, in 2016, Clinton and Trump both knew that Bernie had no chance and thus both to some extent played nice with him. Solidarity has been a theme in 2020, and thus none of the campaigns have gone dirty. Bernie has thus not faced any serious attacks. What would the impact be if he did? Remember that Clinton was by far the most popular politician in the country (approval rating of about two-thirds) before the smear campaign hit."

If that's your idea of "addressing the particulars of the article," I think it's telling. And your characterization of my response is not accurate, is it?

 

[Fawlty]

That's it I'm voting for Gay Johnson

Also somebody itt looks like a handsome version of Benedict Cumberbatch should I tell him he's dreamy?

 

[AgonyandIrony]

@Sketch
@tonni
@AgonyandIrony

The younglings

31 here.

I'm not fond of it at all.

 

[Trotsky]

My "ace"? Haha. It's just a fact that your weird hostility and bitchiness started when I pushed back over your misrepresentation of my position in 2016, which is also what led to you being bitchy and trolly in your previous account. And since you're embarrassed about being caught lying there, you're trying to relocate the start of it to a later discussion that isn't as black and white (we agree that the position you called "reasonable" was wrong so the question is just whether it was nonetheless reasonable to believe it--and I'll note that you're extremely inconsistent in the standards you apply in that area).

It is obvious and verifiable that after I, as usual, let you have the last word on that matter, I was not hostile to you at all.

In fact, when you responded to my completely-benign commentary, which no one else had a problem with, about Trump supporters with "WTF?," I politely responded with the following:

Yeah, I didn't know this was controversial. Lots of people commented on it at the time. Clinton's chest-thumping in re Iran during the debates was shameful. And much more overt than Trump's ambiguous and dodgy answers.

Between that and the fact that Trump made a big deal out of publicly trashing the interventions in Iraq/Libya, both of which Clinton publicly supported, it was completely excusable to think Trump was more doveish on the issue.

To which you responded by calling me detached from reality, a characterization you stood by even after I posted mainstream media discussions on Clinton being "the hawk" and Trump realigning the Republican platform to a more isolationist and doveish position. Because your deep and passionate emotional commitment to Clinton superseded any rational concept of public discourse or opinion during that general election.

It's pretty obvious who was and is weirdly hostile. And, shockingly I know, it's the guy keeps bringing the argument up and lobbing random insults without provocation.

As I said at the time:

"This is kiiiind of addressing a point, so OK. You are mischaracterizing it, though. He wasn't saying that Bernie is a right-winger on social issues; just that it's not a focus of his message. And as to the first one, in 2016, Clinton and Trump both knew that Bernie had no chance and thus both to some extent played nice with him. Solidarity has been a theme in 2020, and thus none of the campaigns have gone dirty. Bernie has thus not faced any serious attacks. What would the impact be if he did? Remember that Clinton was by far the most popular politician in the country (approval rating of about two-thirds) before the smear campaign hit."

If that's your idea of "addressing the particulars of the article," I think it's telling. And your characterization of my response is not accurate, is it?

Yes, that response also reflected accurately on your honesty. You immediately started out with a straw man of "he wasn't saying that Bernie is a right-winger on social issues," despite my having never said anything even remotely like that. And you then responded to my having mentioned that Daou expressly stated that he was a part of the Clinton team that was charged with digging up dirt on Sanders and vetting him for weaknesses with....just repeating your bunk conclusion (that Sanders wasn't thoroughly vetted by an adversarial opponent) again.

 

[Prokofievian]

 

[AnGrYcRoW]

 

[AnGrYcRoW]

I rarely get over 40 when peeps guess my age. Usually get mid to late 30s, I’ll take it.

When I was 40 everyone thought I was younger , now I'm 50 and I look 50 ...at least

 

[HockeyBjj]

Just say no to drugs kids. This guy played Goldberg in the mighty ducks. He's only 41.

Arrested for burglary trying to get money for meth.

 

[Jack V Savage]

It is obvious and verifiable that after I, as usual, let you have the last word on that matter, I was not hostile to you at all.

To which you responded by calling me detached from reality, a characterization you stood by even after I posted mainstream media discussions on Clinton being "the hawk" and Trump realigning the Republican platform to a more isolationist and doveish position. Because your deep and passionate emotional commitment to Clinton superseded any rational concept of public discourse or opinion during that general election.

Yes, you are detached from reality. I can cite mainstream media discussions on Bernie's lack of vetting and electability problems, but you don't grant those to be reasonable positions, do you? I think 100% of us would acknowledge that unreasonable claims sometimes make it into MSM opinion pieces. And you're again trolling, saying something you know isn't true because you think it'll annoy me. However, at this point, you're just making yourself look ridiculous.

It's pretty obvious who was and is weirdly hostile. And, shockingly I know, it's the guy keeps bringing the argument up and lobbing random insults without provocation.

Indeed.

Yes, that response also reflected accurately on your honesty. You immediately started out with a straw man of "he wasn't saying that Bernie is a right-winger on social issues," despite my having never said anything even remotely like that.

I'm so dishonest that I ... "immediately started out" with a point that you acknowledge to be true. And as far as it being a "strawman" do you admit saying "even though his stance on social issues is to the far left of the field and has been to the far left of his contemporaries since he's been in office."? If so, can you see why "he wasn't saying Bernie is a right-winger on social issues" might be a relevant response?

And you then responded to my having mentioned that Daou expressly stated that he was a part of the Clinton team that was charged with digging up dirt on Sanders and vetting him for weaknesses with....just repeating your bunk conclusion (that Sanders wasn't thoroughly vetted by an adversarial opponent) again.

Do you think that they deployed all the oppo they uncovered? Remember that Bernie was never a serious threat in the primary, and Clinton's team knew from the start that they'd have to get Bernie's supporters to come over. Likewise, Trump never thought that Bernie had a chance and his team knew that dividing supporters of the two candidates was key to their success.

 

[Lord Coke]

Facebook shares plummet after news of $550M settlement over Illinois privacy law

https://abc11.com/facebook-shares-p...settlement-over-illinois-privacy-law/5891597/

Facebook shares fell as trading opened Thursday, on the heels of the company's fourth-quarter earnings call, which showed growth but revealed high expenses -- including a $550 million tentative settlement in Illinois.

Facebook stock plummeted approximately 7% on Thursday morning, wiping out millions in market value.


The decline comes after an earnings call Wednesday, when executives announced fourth-quarter revenue of $21.08 billion -- up 25% from last year -- as well as an increase in both daily and monthly active users. The figures were just slightly above what analysts forecast for the company.

Investors seem worried, however, about the high expenses revealed by the company.

The company's chief financial officer David Wehner disclosed that expenses soared over the past year during an earnings call, saying they were "largely driven by higher legal fees and settlements."

"This includes charges related to a $550M settlement in principle we reached this month in connection with the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act litigation," he added.

The tentative $550 million settlement marks the largest cash settlement ever for a privacy-related lawsuit, according to a statement from the law firms Edelson, Robbins Geller and Labaton Sucharow, which represented the plaintiffs.


Illinois' Biometric Information Privacy Act says companies that collect biometric information must inform users that their data is being stored, why and for how long. The class-action suit argues Facebook's tag suggestion feature for photos of people's faces was a violation of the Illinois privacy laws. Facebook has denied any wrongdoing.

"Biometrics is one of the two primary battlegrounds, along with geolocation, that will define our privacy rights for the next generation," attorney Jay Edelson of Edelson PC said in a statement. "We hope and expect that other companies will follow Facebook's lead and pay significant attention to the importance of our biometric information."

Meanwhile, CEO Mark Zuckerberg said Wednesday that Facebook is preparing for "an intense year with the elections," after the company faced widespread criticism for its role in the spread of misinformation during the 2016 presidential election.

"My goal for this next decade isn't to be liked, but to be understood," Zuckerberg said

 

[sickc0d3r]

Surprised there's not full blown support for Bernie then. Human right to dentures, hearing aids, and reading glasses



Or do people just relate to Biden because they also feel the cold creep of dementia beginning?

I don't think Biden would touch SS, but in any case, he's not very popular here in the WR.

 

[Jesus H. Sherdog]

How many of those were disqualified because they were pulling a tootsie vs legit trannies ?




DRI, circle jerks, C of Conformity, and some typical Brit shit like GBH, of course basics like Black flag need mention.

I course that’s before I went all hippy punk and started listening to crass/conflict type stuff.

Lycanthropy by GBH is one of my favorite songs when I’m lifting. That song is like a shot of adrenaline to me.

 

[tonni]

That's it I'm voting for Gay Johnson

Also somebody itt looks like a handsome version of Benedict Cumberbatch should I tell him he's dreamy?

There is no handsome version of Cumberbatch. He's completely defined by his ugliness, which apparently makes him sexy to some very confused people.

 

[Jesus H. Sherdog]

Just say no to drugs kids. This guy played Goldberg in the mighty ducks. He's only 41.

Arrested for burglary trying to get money for meth.

Lmao just last week a guy who looked similar to that came in and was cursing me out with, “fuckin young ass cops don’t know shit, blah blah blah.” I looked him up after and saw that I was five years older than the guy but look ten years younger at least.

 

[tonni]

Hillary makes it very easy for people to believe she's some kind of lizard witch

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

There is no handsome version of Cumberbatch. He's completely defined by his ugliness, which apparently makes him sexy to some very confused people.

He looks like the Sloth in Ice Age

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

Just say no to drugs kids. This guy played Goldberg in the mighty ducks. He's only 41.

Arrested for burglary trying to get money for meth.

At least Jussie Smollette had a better year than this guy.

I guess he took the "cake eater" comments to heart

 

[Trotsky]

Yes, you are detached from reality. I can cite mainstream media discussions on Bernie's lack of vetting and electability problems, but you don't grant those to be reasonable positions, do you?

For casual voters? Yes, I absolutely do. Before, I even went further and said it would be reasonable for such voters to think Sanders is less fiscally prudent than Donald Trump. And that, if Sanders spent the general opining about the dangers of Saudi Arabia while Trump spent it decrying interventions, those same people would be justified in getting the wrong impression that Sanders is more hawkish than Trump.

Pretty remarkable that we have to go over this again: that there are different standards of conduct for different levels of attention, information, and acumen.

I'm so dishonest that I ... "immediately started out" with a point that you acknowledge to be true. And as far as it being a "strawman" do you admit saying "even though his stance on social issues is to the far left of the field and has been to the far left of his contemporaries since he's been in office."? If so, can you see why "he wasn't saying Bernie is a right-winger on social issues" might be a relevant response?

I'm not going to discuss the difference between "right-winger" and not being to the left of every other candidate...since, ya know, nobody believes that the difference is lost on you. You're just being dishonest.

Do you think that they deployed all the oppo they uncovered? Remember that Bernie was never a serious threat in the primary, and Clinton's team knew from the start that they'd have to get Bernie's supporters to come over. Likewise, Trump never thought that Bernie had a chance and his team knew that dividing supporters of the two candidates was key to their success.

I think someone specifically involved in the opposition research knows more than you or I.

 

[Trotsky]

Just say no to drugs kids. This guy played Goldberg in the mighty ducks. He's only 41.

Arrested for burglary trying to get money for meth.

Wow, that hits right in the childhood.

 

[Clippy]

Wow, that hits right in the childhood.

Is it me or does old Goldberg look like future Conor McGreggor?