So look, first off, just because you’re bringing up the details of his social welfare policy doesn't change the fact that someone could have made that exact same comment, just like VSHO reported. If any other candidate had said something like that, they would’ve been branded a racist immediately. My whole point in the post was just whether he actually said it, and if he did, then everything else follows... The user here started trying to DEFEND TT's statement exactly as it was phrased. She even admitted she isn't a fan of political correctness, so I guess she doesn't really see an issue with what was said. Sorry, but if the guy actually said it and I haven't seen or heard any official denial, then I think I'm right—and honestly, the way the media is staying quiet about TT is pretty telling. Plus, I feel like I have every right to call out the hypocrisy of a user defending him like that. But hey, you guys just let this person ramble on, labeling people and trolling... go right ahead. FYI: I'm more than qualified to give people like that a diagnosis.
So, five strikes and then I'm banned after the election, I guess.
I mean, what's the harm in dropping a link from The New York Post, asking if the guy actually made those incriminating comments, and maybe pointing out how the media seems to have such double standards?
As for the other user—who, by the way, hasn't been penalized for trolling despite basically echoing the same thing over and over since this thread started—I might have insulted them, but I doubt it was anything too heavy. They'll probably be just fine.
And honestly, if you guys are going to get this involved in the campaign, you might as well just shut down the local elections thread, declare your favorites the winners, and everyone can just celebrate together.
I'm just asking to have these points removed for "gross insults" and trolling, because I feel like I just asked a normal discussion question, which, I'm surprised—but not really, given the vibe here—hasn't even been brought up before on a forum like this.
Chris Fowler4 said:I'm curious about this too. :-)
I mean, why would anyone even bother unless they were in a massive rush to get some quick cash, right? These guys probably buy up debt at a 20-30% discount, just like they pick up assets from big banks like JPMorgan Chase, and then they just drag out the legal battles—the longer it takes, the better for them, since interest keeps piling up and they'll likely win in court eventually. If that wasn't the plan, I suppose they'd be buying up those converted loans as well.
Charles Chase4 said:By that logic, we could just construct a worst-case scenario where 20,000 people die on American highways in 2021, and then use that specific projection to justify banning motor vehicles entirely.
That scenario is perfectly valid and theoretically possible, and any measures resulting from it would guarantee—and I mean absolutely guarantee—that at least a few lives are saved. No cars on the road means no traffic accidents and no fatalities. It’s a simple matter of cause and effect.
I really don't understand why this is being contested. 🤷
And fine, I know what comes next. You'll argue that the virus was an unknown variable, that it was unpredictable, and that even the most brilliant scientists in the world couldn't have foreseen how this completely novel respiratory virus would behave compared to anything ever recorded in history. Fine. Theoretically, that scenario was just as plausible as my highway example above.
However. If it has since become clear that such a scenario was off by several orders of magnitude, is it actually controversial to point out that we are still implementing policies based on it? Or that after a full year, the perceived danger is still being communicated through the lens of that flawed model? Is there perhaps some merit to questioning that? 🤷
Nothing much. At the end of the day, "lives matter most"
Gerald Gomez2 said:Honestly, I think those janitors would provide much more realistic assessments than these "experts" who seem to specialize in nothing but wasting everyone's time researching ore.
I’ll go ahead and point out one of the supposed masterminds here; perhaps you could enlighten us as to which specific, relevant skills he possesses that justify calling him a scientist within the context of our discussion.
Oh, totally. He spent time in China studying how Westerners perceive things... plus, being a linguist, he definitely knows how to wrap words up so they sound smart and get people to react the way he wants.
But honestly, when it comes to what was actually asked for, I guess he's pretty qualified.
crimsonbadger24 said:Thanks. I mean, that’s basically what I gathered from the news too, but man, it just sounded way too wild to be true... I guess after living in America for this long, you kind of start to think you've seen it all, right? :-)
Just one more thing, does anyone actually know when the deadline is to get these applications in? I’ve been scouring the web like a madman and honestly, I can't find a single thing about it anywhere online... it's like they just don't want us to know, I guess. I think I saw somewhere that you probably shouldn't be going over, like, maybe a certain amount when it comes to costs, but honestly, I don't know, my memory is kind of shot today... $3333 So, wait, if they actually win their day in court, does that mean everything just gets handed back to them, or what? Is that how it works? I guess I'm just trying to wrap my head around the whole thing, maybe I'm overthinking it, but it feels like if the Supreme Court finally rules in their favor, they should be getting those funds back, right? Or am I totally off base here? Look, I know this whole thing is probably going to drag on for years, but honestly, who cares? I’m totally down to kick off the legal process anyway. Even if it takes forever, maybe it’ll finally settle for my kids or even my grandkids down the line—not that I have much faith in our American justice system, knowing how things usually go around here! :-)
When the situation is this straightforward, I'd say there's really no reason for it to take forever.
Edward Cooper2 said:Let’s be real here. For most people, this isn't proof that the Republican Party is actually willing to arrest its own. To most, it just proves that plenty of Republicans were caught red-handed. No matter how much people love the idea of Plenković cleaning house, there are only 37 days left until the election...
So what, are we supposed to believe a squeaky-clean, totally honest, super patriotic Republican Party is actually showing up to the polls? I guess we'll just have to wait and see, right?
I was catching Anušić on Budnica earlier. Man, what a dry guy... but I guess he’s "on message." Seriously though, buddy, you're out here swearing by Plenković...
The whole time he's just trashing how Škoro basically handed the keys to the Democratic Party: "We would have supported him as a party," blah blah blah...
Honestly, I wouldn't even be surprised if the Republican Party lost the elections if this guy was running the campaign staff.
nimblemarlin6 said:It's the truth. Reading Kuljiš's pieces would regularly spike your pulse... or your blood pressure, depending on how you look at it. Kuljiš actually knew how to write—he genuinely loved doing it—and every single one of his articles felt like it was beamed in from some parallel universe where journalism was actually a massive deal. Compared to him, nobody else even comes close today.
With Bešker, you can tell he's old school, but he's too much of a polished gentleman—his writing just doesn't turn up the heat.
I mean, Bešker is definitely old school, but maybe that's just how he rolls, which explains why his reporting stays pretty much within certain lines... But I guess he isn't really the main point here
alh84001 said:The whole pathetic mess of this trend basically boils down to this—all those small-minded people trying way too hard to act urban and cool, replacing actual culture with pure primitivism, and just masking total emptiness by pretending they're being profound.
I think you can really see what a total joke of a human and journalist this guy is by looking at this article, which honestly paints a better picture than that interview with
This piece is actually brilliant, I think you're totally right. This kid, who calls himself an "aspirant," has always been trying to sell himself as something much bigger than he actually is, which isn't much at all, I guess. It worked for him once upon a time, but I suppose his time is finally running out... though he did manage to branch out into PR work, where he’s pretty much happy to lie through his teeth during campaigns for those trendy new restaurants that just vanish the second their promotional package expires.... He's got such a provincial mindset, dreaming about living in London when he can barely make it to Newark. But hey, maybe we can just build our own version of "London" by talking trash around Downtown.
electricnomad8 said:...meanwhile, the secretary for elderly affairs just keeps tallying up the dead. Talk about perfect timing.
I mean, maybe it’s just bad luck, but all the shady stuff that local sheriffs and those nursing home owners have been covering up for years is finally coming to light, I suppose. And honestly, if you ask most people, both the Republican Party and the Democratic Party were pretty much in the same boat when it comes to that kind of thing.
So now he’s suddenly some kind of “populist,” but what does that make the guy talking nonsense? I mean, honestly, for someone who claims to be so “principled and moral,” he sure isn't about to sue to grab whatever cash is lying around, even when it's pretty much a closed case... But hey, I guess that makes sense, since he probably doesn't have much left to do in those shady circles anyway.
I guess this mercenary is basically calling for people who lost money on those Swiss Franc Loans to be discriminated against in court, maybe even suggesting lower courts should start questioning why anyone would take them in the first place.
I wonder where all those helpful little banking trolls are hiding, you know, the ones who love telling us how useless the Supreme Court is. They're probably busy explaining why we don't stand a chance against some big bank's legal team in court, or how everything is just going to fall apart once it hits the European Union courts...
Oh, wait, I think I see them now, working their first shift over on The Washington Post's comment section.
Hey, anyone heard anything about that Supreme Court ruling regarding the bank audits? Word on the street is they already made the call, but it’s been three weeks and still nothing in the news...
sophie7 said:Yeah, I mean, I guess it’s still pretty interesting to me though—it’s just not really meant for folks living over in Europe, I suppose.
So, what exactly led you to that conclusion? I guess maybe it's just because the Lipogems website isn't showing up properly or something?
sophie7 I guess it’s like... someone said:I mean, even now, when you head over to PubMed to dig for some studies, it pulls up like 19 different ones... and that place is pretty much the gold standard for tracking down actual scientific research, I guess.
I mean, looking at it now, I guess those studies cover a bunch of different things—like using it for facial bone trauma and even bladder issues... it’s all pretty varied, I suppose. I mean, I totally get the difference between the brand names and the generics, plus how the actual active ingredients work and all that stuff... I guess.
I’m telling you again, maybe just take a look at the papers on their official website and check out how they actually title those stem cell studies. That's kind of why I mentioned that Lipogems doesn't exactly scream from the headlines—unless you're looking specifically at those 19 papers you found on PubMed. You can still find the rest of the stuff from their site on PubMed too, I guess, it's just that Lipogems shows up in the actual text instead of being right there in the title. You might actually get the difference between the two, but I don't think you're really catching my drift regarding why I was worried about that low number of studies...