Jump to content


I Hate Republicans


  • Please log in to reply
418 replies to this topic

#21 timwakefield

timwakefield

    I haven't got the time time

  • Members
  • 14,413 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boston
  • Favorite Poker Game:Boxmaha

Posted 11 April 2010 - 03:55 PM

View PostLongLiveYorke, on Sunday, April 11th, 2010, 6:42 PM, said:

It's not like you're going to have to surf the internet with a nuclear missile.
You would literally be the craziest bastard on the entire internet if you did though.
Karl: She was a bit -- what's the word that you can use, cuz I don't wanna offend anyone?
Steve: Was she a homeless person?
Karl: Yeah but sort of mental homeless.

#22 hblask

hblask

    Perpetual slow learner

  • Members
  • 9,860 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Minnesota
  • Interests:Just deal the cards already

Posted 11 April 2010 - 05:30 PM

View Poststrategy, on Sunday, April 11th, 2010, 3:58 PM, said:

I've heard NASA space shuttles run on just a few megabytes of RAM. Generally anything less than 2GB (2048MB) of RAM in a desktop computer is scoff-worthy. The reason they're in no hurry to upgrade is because the software they run is rigorously tested and elegant in its simplicity. Supposedly one issue with running a more complex set of processes (for NASA) is keeping things simple enough to be able to deal with radiation damage. H probably has more to say here.
Back when I worked on defense, all mission critical software ran on custom hardware with custom software -- nothing off the shelf, like Windows or Unix. And it's for that very reason you point out -- how can you do thorough testing of a product that is not under your control. About the time I left defense work, they were much more accepting of off-the-shelf software, but I doubt they will ever reach the point where missiles are running on Windows.As to the nuke question, I think tying our reductions to other countries' reductions is probably a mistake. I think our nuclear stock should be no more and no less than it takes to defend our country. With technological advancements, that's probably a lot less than we have now. If we can use the fact that we plan to reduce our inventory as a negotiating ploy to get other countries to reduce theirs, all the better.
"Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?" -- J. Coulton


#23 vbnautilus

vbnautilus

    psychonaut

  • Members
  • 10,326 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:venice beach, ca

Posted 11 April 2010 - 09:25 PM

View Posthblask, on Sunday, April 11th, 2010, 6:30 PM, said:

As to the nuke question, I think tying our reductions to other countries' reductions is probably a mistake. I think our nuclear stock should be no more and no less than it takes to defend our country.
Doesn't that amount depend on what other countries have? I thought the idea was that we can both have less if the other side has less, so we cooperate to reduce the amount we each have.

#24 nutzbuster

nutzbuster

    Point taken....

  • Members
  • 11,378 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Phoenix / Motor City

Posted 11 April 2010 - 09:40 PM

well, lol at this nuke topic really.On one hand it does seem foolish to do this but Im sure there are reasons none of us will ever know.On the other hand the US and russia still have like 99% of the nukes on the planet and just 100 bombs each would lay waste to the entire globe. Me thinks several thousand is enough still (although Im gonna guess both sides have and additional 10 times more hidden somewhere)But yeah...I hate Republicans too. And Democrats. And pickled Herring. And ass rashes.



F Cancer

#25 strategy

strategy

    Internet expert

  • Members
  • 15,932 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:strategy
  • Favorite Poker Game:strategy

Posted 11 April 2010 - 10:10 PM

View Postnutzbuster, on Monday, April 12th, 2010, 12:40 AM, said:

well, lol at this nuke topic really.On one hand it does seem foolish to do this but Im sure there are reasons none of us will ever know.On the other hand the US and russia still have like 99% of the nukes on the planet and just 100 bombs each would lay waste to the entire globe. Me thinks several thousand is enough still (although Im gonna guess both sides have and additional 10 times more hidden somewhere)But yeah...I hate Republicans too. And Democrats. And pickled Herring. And ass rashes.
the actual figure is estimated at 96%. really.carl sagan made a pretty hilarious/sad observation in cosmos re: nukes. we devoted at least a generation's worth of scientific research to weapons for the cold war, then signed a treaty to prevent the one potentially legitimate use for massive nuclear explosions: propulsion in space. If American hegemony persists for another few centuries, maybe we might someday inhabit other stars. Seems like nuclear weapons are the one big threat to that hope.
QUOTE (ShakeZuma @ Wednesday, November 2nd, 2011, 4:25 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
seriously though, with that grammar it's really like, I mean it doesn't bother me as much that she gets beat, you know?


#26 El Guapo

El Guapo

    Like A Boss!

  • Members
  • 16,439 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Carmen's Flower

Posted 11 April 2010 - 10:41 PM

View Poststrategy, on Sunday, April 11th, 2010, 11:10 PM, said:

If American hegemony persists for another few centuries, maybe we might someday inhabit other stars.
Pretty sure this is impossible.

#27 brvheart

brvheart

    I'm the best.

  • Members
  • 25,272 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toyko, Japan
  • Interests:Playing in nuclear fallout.
  • Favorite Poker Game:I play 100/200 live with my best friend Jason.

Posted 12 April 2010 - 05:03 AM

View PostEl Guapo, on Monday, April 12th, 2010, 1:41 AM, said:

Pretty sure this is impossible.
You need to think OUTSIDE the box, even if it's 10,000 degrees out there.

View PostiZuma, on 20 August 2012 - 11:32 AM, said:

napa I was jesus christing suited, you guys just slipped in before me.

View PostEssay21, on 25 February 2013 - 08:32 PM, said:

.

#28 strategy

strategy

    Internet expert

  • Members
  • 15,932 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:strategy
  • Favorite Poker Game:strategy

Posted 12 April 2010 - 06:19 AM

View PostEl Guapo, on Monday, April 12th, 2010, 1:41 AM, said:

Pretty sure this is impossible.
we'll evolve some kind of cooling mechanism to make it possible I'm sure
QUOTE (ShakeZuma @ Wednesday, November 2nd, 2011, 4:25 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
seriously though, with that grammar it's really like, I mean it doesn't bother me as much that she gets beat, you know?


#29 hblask

hblask

    Perpetual slow learner

  • Members
  • 9,860 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Minnesota
  • Interests:Just deal the cards already

Posted 12 April 2010 - 01:34 PM

View Postvbnautilus, on Sunday, April 11th, 2010, 11:25 PM, said:

Doesn't that amount depend on what other countries have? I thought the idea was that we can both have less if the other side has less, so we cooperate to reduce the amount we each have.
I would think it would be some combination of what other countries have and quick-strike capability. If we can torch anywhere in the world in 30 mins or less, any more than that is silly. Even if everyone else gets rid of theirs, I think we may want to keep some of that capability anyway.
"Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?" -- J. Coulton


#30 Southern Buddhist

Southern Buddhist

    I take easygoing to the extreme

  • Members
  • 1,783 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Virginia
  • Interests:Buddhism, NASCAR, Shakespeare, _Futurama_, and poker. No kidding. Someday I plan to corner the market on freaky unrelated interests, and then I'll take over the world.

Posted 12 April 2010 - 01:53 PM

Because, as in the case of the treaty, they don't care about having correct facts, and by the time leftists have looked up the correct facts and attempted to get them out into the debate, Republicans have repeated the lie thousands of times to a lazy, gullible public willing to believe whatever has the fewest, shortest words and least nuance.Because their platform is built on a solid foundation of cynical greed, furnished with lies, and decorated with thinly-veiled bigotry.Because look at my awesome new sig pic!!!! It's going to be either that one or this:Posted Image

#31 Naked_Cowboy

Naked_Cowboy

    the dynamo of volition

  • Members
  • 4,479 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dallas, TX
  • Interests:playing all your best games

Posted 12 April 2010 - 01:58 PM

View PostSouthern Buddhist, on Monday, April 12th, 2010, 4:53 PM, said:

Because, as in the case of the treaty, they don't care about having correct facts, and by the time leftists have looked up the correct facts and attempted to get them out into the debate, Republicans have repeated the lie thousands of times to a lazy, gullible public willing to believe whatever has the fewest, shortest words and least nuance.Because their platform is built on a solid foundation of cynical greed, furnished with lies, and decorated with thinly-veiled bigotry.
So it's like the healthcare debate with the roles reversed?
~certified bumhunter~

#32 JoeyJoJo

JoeyJoJo

    On the road to 8,143 (approximately)

  • Members
  • 8,141 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Springfield

Posted 12 April 2010 - 02:03 PM

Remember when strategy said he didn't think SB was partisan?
Homer: Moe, I need your advice.
Moe: Yeah?
Homer: See, I got this friend named... Joey Jo Jo... Junior... Shabadoo.
Moe: That's the worst name I ever heard.

#33 Zealous Donkey

Zealous Donkey

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,219 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Missouri, USA
  • Interests:Poker, Reading, Sports
  • Favorite Poker Game:NL Holdem

Posted 12 April 2010 - 02:17 PM

View PostSouthern Buddhist, on Monday, April 12th, 2010, 4:53 PM, said:

Because, as in the case of the treaty, they don't care about having correct facts, and by the time leftists have looked up the correct facts and attempted to get them out into the debate, Republicans have repeated the lie thousands of times to a lazy, gullible public willing to believe whatever has the fewest, shortest words and least nuance.Because their platform is built on a solid foundation of cynical greed, furnished with lies, and decorated with thinly-veiled bigotry.Because look at my awesome new sig pic!!!! It's going to be either that one or this:Posted Image
Always so quick to call others racist but uses the most bigoted rhetoric of any non troll that I have seen that posts regularly in these forums.
"Never play pool with a guy that brings his own stick. And Never, Ever play pool with a guy that brings his own table." ~Hoyt Axton

#34 Southern Buddhist

Southern Buddhist

    I take easygoing to the extreme

  • Members
  • 1,783 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Virginia
  • Interests:Buddhism, NASCAR, Shakespeare, _Futurama_, and poker. No kidding. Someday I plan to corner the market on freaky unrelated interests, and then I'll take over the world.

Posted 12 April 2010 - 02:17 PM

View PostJoeyJoJo, on Monday, April 12th, 2010, 6:03 PM, said:

Remember when strategy said he didn't think SB was partisan?
Was that on April 1st?As I've said before, I've got Republicans I like and I've got some libertarian leanings (though coupled with socialist leanings as well). It's just theocrats I can't stand, and that's what's taken over the party in the last twenty years. I still like Ike.

#35 Southern Buddhist

Southern Buddhist

    I take easygoing to the extreme

  • Members
  • 1,783 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Virginia
  • Interests:Buddhism, NASCAR, Shakespeare, _Futurama_, and poker. No kidding. Someday I plan to corner the market on freaky unrelated interests, and then I'll take over the world.

Posted 12 April 2010 - 02:20 PM

View PostZealous Donkey, on Monday, April 12th, 2010, 6:17 PM, said:

Always so quick to call others racist but uses the most bigoted rhetoric of any non troll that I have seen that posts regularly in these forums.
I think you're thinking of Palin's rallies. [And the more heated the argument over my positions gets, the more you get to see the sig picture! Fun!]

#36 JubilantLankyLad

JubilantLankyLad

    you can't see me!

  • Members
  • 9,397 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:in hiding
  • Favorite Poker Game:PANDA

Posted 12 April 2010 - 02:26 PM

View PostNaked_Cowboy, on Monday, April 12th, 2010, 1:58 PM, said:

So it's like the healthcare debate with the roles reversed?
it's like all political "debates"
there were no special effects, no special effects.

#37 JoeyJoJo

JoeyJoJo

    On the road to 8,143 (approximately)

  • Members
  • 8,141 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Springfield

Posted 12 April 2010 - 02:27 PM

View PostSouthern Buddhist, on Monday, April 12th, 2010, 3:20 PM, said:

I think you're thinking of Palin's rallies. [And the more heated the argument over my positions gets, the more you get to see the sig picture! Fun!]
Unless you have signatures turned off because of the obnoxiously oversized ones.
Homer: Moe, I need your advice.
Moe: Yeah?
Homer: See, I got this friend named... Joey Jo Jo... Junior... Shabadoo.
Moe: That's the worst name I ever heard.

#38 Zealous Donkey

Zealous Donkey

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 1,219 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Missouri, USA
  • Interests:Poker, Reading, Sports
  • Favorite Poker Game:NL Holdem

Posted 12 April 2010 - 02:30 PM

View PostSouthern Buddhist, on Monday, April 12th, 2010, 5:20 PM, said:

I think you're thinking of Palin's rallies. [And the more heated the argument over my positions gets, the more you get to see the sig picture! Fun!]
Hey, B. Obama is a good looking man. :club: I don't mind looking at him. :ts
"Never play pool with a guy that brings his own stick. And Never, Ever play pool with a guy that brings his own table." ~Hoyt Axton

#39 strategy

strategy

    Internet expert

  • Members
  • 15,932 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:strategy
  • Favorite Poker Game:strategy

Posted 12 April 2010 - 03:16 PM

View PostJoeyJoJo, on Monday, April 12th, 2010, 5:03 PM, said:

Remember when strategy said he didn't think SB was partisan?
still waiting on evidence to the contrary

View PostJoeyJoJo, on Monday, April 12th, 2010, 5:27 PM, said:

Unless you have signatures turned off because of the obnoxiously oversized ones.
I'd actually be happy if FCP went minimalist and just had usernames.
QUOTE (ShakeZuma @ Wednesday, November 2nd, 2011, 4:25 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
seriously though, with that grammar it's really like, I mean it doesn't bother me as much that she gets beat, you know?


#40 Balloon guy

Balloon guy

    Deplorable Lives Matter

  • Members
  • 24,375 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:So Cal
  • Interests:Cigars, Flying, Golf, Bible
  • Favorite Poker Game:Golf

Posted 12 April 2010 - 03:16 PM

I guess I never understood the real Reagan...

Quote

MOSCOW The new U.S.-Russian arms control treaty is a much better deal for Russia than its predecessor, but Moscow reserves the right to withdraw from it if a planned U.S. missile defense system grows into a threat, Russia's foreign minister said Tuesday.Sergey Lavrov said Russia will issue a statement outlining the terms for such a withdrawal after President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev sign the treaty Thursday in Prague. The new accord replaces the 1991 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or START I, which expired in December.Lavrov has said before that Russia could withdraw from the treaty. But his comments at a briefing Tuesday were his most specific yet on how and why a withdrawal could occur."Russia will have the right to opt out of the treaty if ... the U.S. strategic missile defense begins to significantly affect the efficiency of Russian strategic nuclear forces," he said.
What a dumb treaty that means nothing because the other side can dump it for any reason it wants as long as it can blame our attempts at defending ourselves.Of course what does this say about Obama that he would take Reagan's plan and not dump the most obviously stupid part????
I use my cigar smoke as idiot repellent

The government was set to protect man from criminals - and the Constitution was written to protect man from the government. - Ayn Rand




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users