nocoolnamejim's forum posts

#1 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -
I thought bandodgers didnt get these threads. Or was that suiciders?Capitan_Kid
That policy is intended to prevent multiple "(Fill in the blank) has been banned" threads for the same person. As in, someone gets banned, gets their ban thread, and then comes back and establishes a new identity before being discovered and banned again. To my knowledge, this is the first time Jedi has been banned and, thus, he's allowed a ban thread.
#2 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="horgen123"]Ban-dodging isn't allowed yet. horgen123
TBH....I'm surprised there are any standards left here. Why disallow ban dodging when most ban dodgers were reinstated?

So we could ban them again? Honestly no idea.

Bah. Where's your sense of fun? Not having troublemakers around would be like being a superhero without any villains to use your super powers on. Imagine if Superman never had Lex Luther. He'd basically just have to sit around in the Fortress of Solitude and masturbate all day or work at his sh1t job. Or, on more serious note, different bosses at the top have different ideas on what the acceptable standards for the community should be. Granted, it has made us look vaguely bipolar in recent years but it is what it is.
#3 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -

I am truly sorry for not accepting your trade request in our fantasy football league. I pray that no more accounts are sacrificed. [spoiler] Seriously, though. I really like having Doug Martin on my team. [/spoiler]

HE'S MINE THOUGH! You STOLE him from me. He is from Boise State and was meant to be on my team. He's MINE I say. MY. PRECIOUS.
#4 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -

[QUOTE="PirateHanSolo"]yep, he is gone. he had a C.M. Punk avi and a Los Angeles Clippers sig. will he be missed? seems he sent a death threat to someone though i heard his account got hacked. he was a pretty nice guy though his temper did get the est of him.UltraZero

wonder what his account password was

Probably not the wisest thing to be joking about at the present time Ultra.
#5 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -


You can't be nice and have a temper.


I don't think those two things are necessarily mutually exclusive.

You know a lot of nice people with tempers that are prominent enough in their behavior that you have to mention it?

Just me baby. Just me.
#6 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -

[QUOTE="PirateHanSolo"]yep, he is gone. he had a C.M. Punk avi and a Los Angeles Clippers sig. will he be missed? seems he sent a death threat to someone though i heard his account got hacked. he was a pretty nice guy though his temper did get the est of him.GummiRaccoon

You can't be nice and have a temper.

I don't think those two things are necessarily mutually exclusive.
#7 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -
#8 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -
jim, uniform liability is my goal, and when you do harm to an area in perpetuity forever, you are liable. sadly some, maybe you, idunno, would call for you and i to pay for the political decisions of those elected. i wish for those elected to be held accountable for their actions be it at home of in foreign lands. i see the lack of liability as the ultimate cause of all of the ills of the world on any meaningful scale. what i mean is that politicians have zero liability for their actions. you cant know the harm until action and at that point people tend to blame the next guy or something else. surrealnumber5
An issue we won't resolve tonight and one that likely needs the following things to happen: 1. Elimination of gerrymandered safe districts that create disincentives for compromise or effective governing 2. Elimination or severe reduction of the amount of money in politics through effective campaign finance reform that the Supreme Court doesn't toss out etc. Anyway, I got to run. Packing for a trip tomorrow. Nice talking with you again.
#9 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -


Real people dieing in benghazi= fake scandal lmao


You do yourself and your cause absolutely no favors, you are one of the reasons why many of the people here are liberals.

On topic: After reading the politico article it sounds like you have no fvcking clue what you are talking about. 

Me right. Its all my fault. Tell me how real people dieing was a fake scandal? I dont even consider it THAT big a deal, but what bothered me was the completely obvious lieing the week after that it was "spontaneous" demonstrations or whatever. Why couldnt they just admit it was a terror attack sooner? Or not admit ANYTHING, till they had all the facts, but they were telling everyone the next day it wasnt a terror attack the next day

It's a dangerous world. People die. Basically, **** happens. For this to be a scandal you need to show some form of negligence and/or coverup.

Something like getting a memo entitled "Bin Laden determined to attack in the United States" from one of your intelligence directors and telling him that "you've covered your ass" and dismissing him only to have the worst terror attack in U.S. history happen a month later. What you have here is a flare up in an unstable part of the world where the facts on the ground were a little murky and...that's it.

Did you know that US consulates were attacked thirteen times during the Bush years? Never heard of it? Maybe because Democrats didn't try and turn a tragedy into a scandal when there wasn't one.
#10 Posted by nocoolnamejim (15136 posts) -
[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"][QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] numero zwei would be the use of "depleted" uranium that shit poisons land longer than our earth will be around. that is a crime against life especially when Iridium is better for war in every metric other than transport of nuclear waste.

I'm not up to speed on that one, but that sounds like far more of a moral issue than a legal one. Presumably the armed forces use what they buy with the budget that they are given and therefore that wouldn't exactly be something that could be pinned on Obama either. But your general point remains solid: there are other, better things to be giving attention to. What has just had me rolling my eyes for years now is one idiotic nothingburger of a scandal after another that the rightwing media chooses to obsess over when there are REAL, LEGIT issues that they could be reporting and driving tough conversations on. Things like Benghazi, Black Panthers, "Obamaphones", Acorn, IRS targeting etc. One after another they turn out to be massive cases of nothing, but there's no retraction, no mea culpa or accountability. This country is suffering far more from the lack of an effective and LOYAL opposition than anything else. We've basically become a one-party Democracy because only one party is even close to functional or sane. I want Republicans and their media allies asking tough questions on actually pertinent subjects. Drive conversations on the proper use of drone strikes or how far the presidency's powers extend towards the use of force. Raise issues on whether the gathering of personal data has gone too far. These are reasonable things to try and hold the Obama Administration's feet to the fire on and try and get answers. Conversely, how about a little more attention to voter suppression issues that the GOP is blatantly pushing for brazenly partisan reasons? But instead we get cries for impeachment over the sort of idiotic non-issue crap that TC posted above or some of the other examples of "scandals" I listed above.

commander and chief brah, what the military does under him is on his head, same with any other. the only reason to use depleted uranium is because it turns a toxic waste product that costs godly amounts to dispose of, into a commodity that will be purchased for a hefty premium. i believe benghazi has issues same with the IRS, and wire taps, i dont know of any fake scandals right now. the IRS broke the law big time by discriminating vie creed/speech, and every one involved should be tried. sadly i cant speak for republicans, i only held that title for three months till they did as i expected to ronny.

Not to derail the conversation too much, but you may want to look into that IRS "scandal" a bit more. It came out that the IRS targeted both conservative AND liberal groups. Link and that the watchdog who initially claimed it was targeting only conservatives has now backtracked and said that a Bush era holdover withheld the evidence that they were singling out certain liberal groups for increased scrutiny as well. Second Link A few employees at the IRS started flagging some partisan non profits for extra review in their filings to make sure the were valid, and none of them lost their non profit status (and perhaps they were the right decision and perhaps that was the wrong decision). And then their supervising official told them to stop doing these reviews. Like most of the scandals out there, GOP leadership has quietly dropped this one after making the accusation and then evidence coming to light that basically exonerates the agency and Obama. As for your depleted uranium thing, that's why I said moral and not legal issue. I'm assuming that the use of those depleted uranium weapons is legal and that there's no US law banning their use. This might be a gap and maybe there SHOULD be a law against their use, but, again, there's no LEGAL culpability for Obama.