Press J to jump to the feed. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts
Coming soon
11 points · 10 hours ago

Louis CKs bit on pedophilia is hilarious.

see more

Louis CKs bit works because the joke has a purpose. It’s asking the question, “Why would someone do something as terrible as assault children when the ramifications for their actions are so severe?”

These tweets aren’t really doing that.

In general, it’s silly to bring up a comedian like Louis CK in this context since he’s a brilliant satirist.

So he made some bad jokes he found funny but others didnt with no ill intent 9 years ago and now his career is destroyed because of some SJW's?

FFS man we have all done or said stupid shit jokes before and horrible ones aswell.

see more
15 points · 8 hours ago · edited 8 hours ago

I think blaming SJWs is a bit a mischaracterization of what’s happening. Mostly because these tweets were dug up by a right wing fella,

Ultimately, he was terminated by a private organization because he made jokes that they felt poorly reflected on the company’s image.

Load more comments

For a long time I was pretty middle ground on gun control too.

My #1 argument for why you cannot outright ban guns, is that you can't simultaneously point to crime and the black market drug trade due to prohibition, and then advocate for exactly the same policies on guns. Do you want another black market and more powerful cartels? That's how you get them.

But it's become crystal clear to me in recent years that not everybody should have a right to a gun, which is simply to say that guns should no longer be a right. They need to be a privilege. I'm not advocating that we ban them all entirely for the point above (which I still firmly believe), but it's time for the 2nd Amendment - the right to own a gun - to be repealed.


A new amendment is passed that clarifies the ambiguous language of the 2nd Amendment, and does in fact tie to the notion of a "well regulated militia". You are allowed to own a gun if

  1. You belong to a militia.
  2. The militia is a federally recognized, licensed entity that adheres to whatever regulations are in place.
  3. Your gun is kept at the militia unit headquarters you belong to.
  4. Your gun may not be used for anything other than militia purposes.
  5. Militia weapon storage checkin/checkout is tightly regulated and regularly inspected.

The only exception being that a single shot, bolt action rifle may be used for hunting, and kept at home for personal defense. All other guns - shotguns, handguns, and semi-automatic rifles are to be kept at the militia HQ.

see more

Do you want another black market and more powerful cartels? That's how you get them.

On the flipside, one of the reasons why there's such a strong black market for guns in the United States is because gun proliferation. Many of the guns on the black market were, at one point, purchased legally and were either stolen or misplaced by their owners.

More than 30 percent of the guns that ended up at crime scenes had been stolen, according to Fabio's research. But more than 40 percent of those stolen guns weren't reported by the owners as stolen until after police contacted them when the gun was used in a crime.

One of the more concerning findings in the study was that for the majority of guns recovered (62 percent), "the place where the owner lost possession of the firearm was unknown."

"We have a lot of people with a lot of guns," Fabio said, referencing statistics on the large number of guns in circulation. "And some of them aren't keeping track of them for different reasons — maybe because they have a lot of them and they don't use them that often."

A number of factors could lead to legal firearms entering the black market. Owners could misplace them, or they could be stolen — either through carelessness on the owner's part (leaving a gun in an unlocked car, for instance) or determination on the part of thieves.

At the very least, a prohibition on guns would keep new guns from being circulated on the black market.

-4 points · 2 days ago

Treason: "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."

From what I can tell there were no witnesses and no confession. So, you're full of shit, did MSNBC tell he was a traitor so you went ahead to parrot the party line?

see more

Admittedly, putting the words of Putin ahead of your own intelligence community isn't exactly a good look for a the chief executive of the United States.

I understand that the dude's ego is at stake, but ensuring the American people that the electoral process isn't being tampered with is a pretty easy political win that the dude just seems incapable of doing. It's hard to respect the guy when he seems to have zero vested interest in making sure that our elections aren't interfered with.

-4 points · 2 days ago

I don't respect the guy. I think he's full of crap but he's not a traitor, yet, no matter how much certain news channels claim that he is. Calling him a traitor is imo pretty fucked up unless you can prove it because the consequences of being convicted of treason is death.

see more

I don’t watch cable news. I just watched the press conference. This dude clearly isn’t going up to bat for the country. Which is unfortunate since that’s what his job is all about.

I really don't know who to root for in this race. There's many good candidates man. Chris Pappas, Mark MacKenzie, Mindi Messmer, and Maura Sullivan.

see more
3 points · 2 days ago · edited 2 days ago

I’m going with Chris Pappas. Most experience, as he’s been serving on NH’s Executive Council for years. He checks boxes on pretty much all the issues I’m concerned about. Seems to be the favorite in the race, and can see why. He’s extremely inoffensive and seems intent on pushing for progressive policies.

Least favorite is Sullivan as she’s not really a New Hampshire native and has a lot of outside PAC money flowing into her campaign. Heard her speak and thought she did a terrible job of making a case for her vote. Lot of anti-Trump stuff with no substance.

Mindi is great but think she’d be better suited running for local state legislator.

I also have a soft spot for Soldati. He’s kind of all over the place, but fuck if he isn’t just an adorable dude who has a real passion for more Progressive policies.

Dems seem much better off regardless of who wins though. Not many strong candidates on the GOP side.

Amherst Smokehaus (BBQ) on RTE 101 in Amherst

see more

I’ve been looking for a good BBQ place. I always end up at Kacey’s Ribshack in Manchester, but it’s pretty meh. Thanks for the suggestion.

They could just put a new toll on the border with MA and charge like $8 to get through it. I'd say we're worth the cost of driving across Delaware, just to get in.

see more

I figure that this is intended to be humorous or not, but a toll here would have a much greater impact on those folks who live in Southern NH and commute into the greater Boston area than on tourists.

Can confirm. I was so busy reading, rereading, analyzing and studying assigned texts and I hated it. Didn't read a single book outside of the required ones for my entire undergrad. This year I've actually read 6, not great but better than 0.

see more

I’m in the same boat. Graduated two years ago. I’ve read about eight this year so far compared to two last year.

It feels nice to read again, but I don’t think I’ll ever be able to pick it up again with the same zest I had when I first started my degree.

Yea, me either. I read a lot to my new siblings and my nephew, but I don't like to count there because it's all 5 page story books lol

But I also can't get into reading like I once was. I'm hoping that one day I can pick it up like before and I also use audiobooks to help me, but my mind wanders so much (add) and this has become more bothersome with age. I don't believe I had add systems as a child/teen.

see more

Sites like reddit and YouTube have certainly made it more difficult for me to focus. Books have to be truly gripping to hold my attention nowadays. It’s a shame too since the content on this website and YouTube is genuinely poor. You just consume it and move on without much need to reflect back on it.

I’m literally taking a break from reading now to make this comment, lol.

Load more comments

Guess we know where Mew will be in the game then.

see more

It'd be pretty awesome if they actually included that in this version.

-3 points · 8 days ago

That news station is actually disgusting. They took a 3 second clip from a video that was clearly sarcastic and made it seem like a statement from him. The fact that people actually try to ruin someone's career over something this trivial is fucking pathetic.

see more

Really did not seem like satire or sarcasm when the video was first released. I'm still not certain if I buy the excuse, to be honest.

That might be too distant. Maybe something for each year successfully passed?

Regardless, a financial incentive is enormous for poor families and I definitely think this would be effective. The kid's probably not gonna get any of the money but it will incentivize the parents.

see more

You know how teachers complain about parents who get upset when they discipline or fail their kids? Now imagine a situation where the parent loses out on guaranteed income if their student fails a class. Who are they going to blame?

Don't think this is a great solution.

That's a good point, thanks. Have any suggestions how we could work around that?

On a side note, I could definitely see some violence directed towards kids who fail and deprive their parents of income.

see more
3 points · 10 days ago · edited 10 days ago

I have no idea. I'm not really that vested in this solution so I'm not about to think through solutions to make the idea more palatable.

I get where the idea comes from, and I think that the heart is in the right place. Outside of addressing systemic poverty (not even sure how you go about that), I don't know anyway to get parents more vested in their child's outcome.

Load more comments

I can't wait to see if they ever unban us, I bet they could even make a movie about it!

see more

I hope they just lock the sub once it's all done.

28 points · 13 days ago

For most career paths, degrees are entirely unnecessary.

but at the same time, for almost all career paths with a high salary ceiling a degree is an entry requirement.

I think the biggest issue in society today is that someone graduates high school with a vague idea of what they want to do, and now go off to college for 2 or more years and become trapped on a path they might regret. I honestly think there should be a mandatory age limit to college (21-22) which forces people to experience life as a working adult with no path staked out for them, and then see if college still feels right.

see more

Having been 22 when I started my degree, I wish I had started at 18. I wasted four years farting around doing nothing and didn’t start college until my other high school friends were graduating and moving on to full time work/graduate programs. Things looked pretty bleak for me since I was still working in retail at the time. Wasting those few years didn’t provide me with any more clarity as to what I wanted to do than had I just gone to college at 18/19.

Had I gone to college with the rest of them I would have:

  • Been able to move out of my parents sooner/stayed with them longer to pay down some of my debt
  • Had multiple years of experience in the job market
  • Started saving for my retirement earlier

Honestly, biggest mistake of my life was waiting as long as I did to go to college. I get what you’re coming from since making such a large financial decision at 18 seems predatory, but the trades aren’t suited for everyone. If there was going to be a program like that, I would rather it be mandatory that high school graduates do a year of military/public service after graduation. At least they they’d be gaining more useful experience. With your plan, most people would just end up in minimum wage jobs until they could enroll in a University.

3 points · 13 days ago · edited 12 days ago

Just because he agrees with the "general direction" the party is going doesn't mean he agrees with everything they're pushing. And as for the Democrat leaders, they're only "several degrees better" because they cater their policies to people looking for progressive change just enough to get votes but not enough to actually create major change and improvement.

And just for clarification I'm talking about the rich white Democrat elite like the Clintons or Nancy Pelosi. There's plenty of Democrat politicians who genuinely care about the people, like Sanders

see more

I would argue that Warren is one of those. She’s one of the most progressive Democrats in the Senate.

Bo Burnham has the best take on political correctness on college campuses. If there’s anyone that’s familiar with college aged audiences, it’s him.

MoviePass was destined to be a flash in the pan. This change won't move the needle.

They found an opportunity between a rock and a hard place, with no longevity. Theaters are only playing ball because they didn't see the streaming services coming, and they're desperate for anything that will keep studios from releasing AAA content directly to people in their homes. Theaters don't want MoviePass, the streaming services don't want movie pass, and worse, customers don't even want movie pass.

The only chirp of MoviePass I hear in my everyday life is from the frustrated people who have to plead with their families to utilize their MoviePass subscription. Maybe MoviePass can make a killing off of people who subscribe, never go, and never unsubscribe (thinking of Planet Fitness). But that's their only shot.

see more

customers don't even want movie pass.

I really, really didn't know how much I wanted MoviePass until I started using it. I don't think it's a good business model, but, as a movie guy, it's amazing. I'll probably just stop going to movies after it goes under.

I don't doubt there are people like you who love and utilize MoviePass. My uncle is one of them. It makes simple sense to me, and most people come out ahead if they see at least 2 movies a month.

It's just my opinion that if MoviePass really resonated with enough people to keep the service going, then they would be in the headlines for sparking a new cinema Renaissance. Sure, people tend to be more vocal about things they don't like, but I've encountered so many bitter MoviePass customers to think they will win over anyone but the existing die-hard cinema fans.

see more

I would argue that the people who aren't seeing at least two movies a month are the ones that are keeping the service up and running. I thank them for throwing their money away as it will keep the company alive long enough for me to milk them dry.

My impression is that's how the service is supposed to work. Basically, it's like Planet Fitness. Get people to pay for their subscription, it doesn't matter if they use it or not. Unfortunately, there's folks like me and my SO who will see multiple movies a month since it's basically a cheap (free) date. I paid out $240 for both of us in February. Barring they stay open for the next 7 months, every movie I see for the rest of the year will be free.

4 points · 15 days ago · edited 15 days ago

Probably the worst poll to use. Rasmussen heavily leans R. He's had fairly high approval ratings with that poll compared to other pollsters for much of his Presidency. As others have said, stick with 538 or RCP.

While I don’t support separating families, i also believe the media has massively blown this whole ICE/children situation way out of proportion. Now some democratic leaders are calling for the abolishment of a federal agency. Unbelievable.

see more

Now some democratic leaders are calling for the abolishment of a federal agency. Unbelievable.

While I don't agree with it, it's not really that out there for politicians to support abolishing federal agencies. GOP Presidential candidates have a history of doing it. One such one is currently the head a department he swore to abolish.

It's just unusual to see a Democrat call for it since they're usually for giving more funding to these agencies.

Something like this makes for a great rallying cry at a protest but doesn't work in actual discussions.

ICE isn't a fascist organization and they aren't Gestapo-esque thugs.

Calling for change or more oversight is perfectly reasonable but once you start delving into such hyperbole you start losing the ability to enact change.

see more

Yeah, I don't see why ICE needs to be abolished, just drastically reformed. If the GOP can basically gut the State Department and the EPA, there's no reason why Democrats can't do the same thing with ICE.

Openly admitting that they want to is a huge political problem. Most people do not favor open borders. As Democrats move further into trying to prevent any enforcement it makes it hard to claim it is not what they want.

see more
2 points · 15 days ago · edited 15 days ago

I think jury is still out if as to whether or not that's a bad policy or not. I'm looking for polling data on how popular either thing is, but having a tough time finding polling on reforming ICE. I'd rather look at that than just look at anecdotal data. From what I can gather, abolishing ICE doesn't poll particularly well.

Load more comments

Exactly. The 2020 campaign was handed to them in a bread basket but they took the bread and threw it in a kiln. So by their standards Trump is a very far-right. The sensible thing would be to stay neutral and get the moderate voters. But no, they went super far-left and fucked themselves with the moderates.

see more

Jury is kind of out on what 2020 will look like since no one but fringe candidates are currently running. There's a few names out there that get tossed around like Bernie, Biden, Gillibrand, Booker, Bullock, and Harris, but who knows what the race will actually look like. The two big curve balls for 2020 is California being bumped up in the primaries which shifts the overton window pretty far left for these candidates. Also, whether or not Biden and Bernie both run (since, really, they have the biggest head start).

In general, I would argue that the Democrats are pretty much in the same position that the Republicans were in in 2008 only it's much worse. In 2008 the Republicans had lost all three branches of government, and it was looking like they'd never take back the Presidency or any branch of government.

Their strategy was to dig down and go harder right with the Tea Party movement. They managed to sweep the Dems on both the state and federal level in the following election.

Now, it's a lot different for Democrats. The Republicans have pretty much gerrymandered the House to the point that Democrats need to win by anywhere to 6% to 8% on the general congressional ballot in order to take back the house with a slim majority, better yet a strong majority.

I will say though, that I don't think going hard left will necessarily hurt the Democrats. They need to turn out their voters, and one way to do that is to keep their primary constituency fired up. Also, outside of more fringe left wing candidates like Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (who couldn't be running in a more Blue district so her nomination does make sense), a lot of their candidates for state and local levels are well tailored to fit the districts they're running in.

I agree with a lot of you points. But the one you do have wrong is the left "going hard" so to speak. The left going hard on "gun control" will not work well with moderates. The left going soft on the border will not work well with moderates. Like I've said before, the left doesn't have a platform. Because they are still figuring out how these issues treat the moderates. The hard line stance will not work for them. Honestly that's why I think they're only putting out weak candidates in 2020. They don't have a chance.

see more

The big difference between the left and the right is that the left doesn’t have a unified banner to unite under like the right does Trump. That’s the problem with not winning a Presidential election. So most of these issues are on a district to district basis. One candidate may go hard on guns and one may not.

It’s also way to early to judge 2020. We have an idea who will run, but we don’t know how the race will shake out. Right now it’s looking like Biden, Bernie, or Harris but who knows.

On a different note, I agree with you on guns, but disagree on border control. Guns have broad appeal, but I think you’re overestimating the border argument. I actually think pushing for criminally prosecuting all illegals and repealing DACA will actually hurt Trump in 2020 not help him.

Hard right immigration policy only really appeals to the hard right. Most candidates will most likely take “returning to the status quo” and “granting citizenship to DACA kids” as their platform. Both of those platforms poll well. Despite Trump’s whining, Obama was actually pretty hard on immigration.

Load more comments

What was the point of the trials if God knew what Job was going to do anyway?

see more

One up Satan.

....that was kinda my point.

Amy Schumer put herself out there as the woman who will say whatever, she doesn't care and look how edgy she is. When in reality her routine is pretty confined to talking about her own vagina and how many times she has gotten a UTI.

Michelle Wolf also makes jokes about dating, and vaginas but she also jokes about other things.

see more

I don't really know if it's worth while to compare the two of them. Outside of being female comedians, or, more particularly, feminist comedians (I think Schumer is a feminist comedian), they don't have very much in common.

Amy Schumer's humor is very much in the same vein as someone like Dane Cook. Her humor is big, brash, and rude, but there's not a ton of substance there in terms of social satire.

Michelle Wolf is an entirely different kind of comedian. She's extremely biting and is excellent at both political and social satire. I don't really have an immediate comparison for her since she's not that similar to anyone. Maybe like a John Stewart?

31 points · 19 days ago

Care to explain more?

see more

Going to over simplify things here, but Reagan is a former US President who helped popularize the idea of trickle down economics. Essentially, the idea is that if you cut taxes and give tax breaks for people at the top then it will trickle down to those at the bottom. In reality, it doesn’t actually work that way.

452 points · 21 days ago

He exemplifies strength in every sense of the word.

see more

The more I hear from Terry Crews, the more I admire him. Hearing him talk about toxic masculinity is also amazing. The man is an inspiration.

Kind of a shitty thing for an intern of a sitting Senator to do as she's representing Maggie's office. But, I admit, I would probably do the same thing if given the opportunity.

Cake day
November 10, 2010
Moderator of these communities

44,939 subscribers


1,086 subscribers


325 subscribers

Trophy Case (6)
Seven-Year Club


Alpha Tester

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.