Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - honk

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 90  Next >
1
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: May 15, 2025, 03:11:10 AM »
Trump is not going to be storing the plane in a nonexistent structure when he leaves office. He is going to be keeping it, and the cowards whose job it is to hold him to account will once again just mumble about how much they disapprove.

Really? Why would he keep it when it can be a main feature of a major tourist destination dedicated to the Trump Presidency and further immortalize him? The museum would be a grander use for it. It is being given to the federally administered Trump library after his term because it will become a part of the Trump library. It's not too hard to understand.

Again, there is no tourist destination. There is no museum. There is no physical library. There's just a website. It's up to each former president to pay for the design and construction of their presidential center, and while I'm sure that Trump's ego would enjoy having a hagiographic monument to his greatness, he clearly doesn't want to pay for it. If he did, he would have begun four years ago, when he first left office - he had no way of knowing that he'd be elected again four years later, and even if he did, that was no reason to put the whole thing off, especially for a man of Trump's age. If I were to make a reasonable guess as to why he's reluctant to build a presidential center, I'd say that it's because he wouldn't be able to afford it without a dramatic change of lifestyle. Remember that Trump lives very extravagantly, his brand took a major hit when he began running and burned so many bridges, he lost the privilege of ushering foreign and government business his way when he left office - and this was all even as he continued to aggressively solicit donations from his supporters and find other ways to take their money with every passing day, so it's not like he could count on a fresh surge of income from them. Trump is rich, but that doesn't mean that he's made of money.

My musings on Trump's finances aside, the fact remains that there is no real physical presidential center and no plans to build one. There is nowhere "official" to store the plane. So Trump will simply keep it, say something like "I'll hang onto it until the presidential center is built!" and every Trump supporter will continue to parrot this for the rest of his life as Trump continues to jet around in his luxurious airborne throne and every donation meant for the presidential center will be immediately blown on Trump's usual schmoozing.

2
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: May 13, 2025, 07:13:26 PM »
It is beyond pedantic to conflate a website with a physical building that every other president has built, especially when the subject under discussion is an airplane, a physical object that needs a physical structure to be stored in. Trump is not going to be storing the plane in a nonexistent structure when he leaves office. He is going to be keeping it, and the cowards whose job it is to hold him to account will once again just mumble about how much they disapprove.

3
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: May 12, 2025, 09:11:30 PM »
Given how long it takes to upgrade a 747 to Air Force One standards, I seriously doubt that it will ever be legitimately used as Air Force One.  They might just as well hand it over to the Trump library off the bat.

It's far more likely that they won't bother upgrading or modifying it at all, and Trump will just use it as-is. Who's going to stop him?

4
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: May 12, 2025, 06:14:34 PM »
Is the plane a direct gift to the man or the office?

To the man, like I said. Future presidents will not be using this plane. After Trump's term of office, it will be given to Trump's nonexistent "presidential library," which means that it will go straight to Trump himself, like all donations to the supposed library. If you don't have a problem with this, then I question what you would hypothetically have a problem with, because corruption doesn't get much more blatant than this.

5
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: May 12, 2025, 03:19:08 PM »
Quote
The luxury plane, which would be one of the most valuable gifts ever received by the U.S. government, would eventually be donated to Trump's presidential library after he leaves office, the source said.

Like I've said before, there is no Trump presidential library. This plane is a gift to Donald Trump himself, not to the office of the president or the federal government. It's a $400 million bribe in plain (plane?) sight, a luxurious throne for the king to sit on as he condescendingly lectures the people about needing to tighten their belts.

6
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: May 11, 2025, 08:00:26 PM »
You guys, Trump isn't selling his meme coins to anyone; people are buying his meme coins from him. Completely different.

7
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« on: May 11, 2025, 03:42:20 PM »
The Last of Us Part II

(spoiler warning for an infamous early-game twist, along with hopefully-vague spoilers of other story details)

This game is bigger and better than the first one in pretty much every way. The stealth and combat are tighter and more fluid, there are more cool weapons to use, and perhaps most importantly of all, each levels is so wide-open that it feels like there are a dozen different ways to clear them of enemies. Whether you're keeping in stealth, engaged in combat, or attempting to flee combat so that you can slip back into stealth, there are always several different routes you can take. Smash a window and vault into a building. Squeeze through a crack into another building. Go prone and crawl under a vehicle. I also really love the animations for the hand-to-hand combat and how many different variations for finishing off enemies there are, depending on your environment. The attempts at guilting the player by having enemies cry out the names of their dead friends or beg for mercy if they're badly wounded are transparently manipulative, but I still enjoyed them for their added realism. Some of my minor issues with the first game have been addressed, too - shotguns now feel as powerful as they should be, and the hundred or so instances of grab-the-nearby-pallet-so-you-can-climb-the-fence have been pared down to only two or three. I will say that there's a new type of infected that's a bit too much of a bullet sponge for my liking, and there are some brute-type human enemies that can withstand headshots, which doesn't at all make sense, but those are quibbles in comparison to what the game gets right.

Of course, the most controversial part of the game is the story. I'm certain that without the infamous leak of the scene of Joel's death (there was more in the leak, but everyone's attention was focused almost entirely on just that scene), there never would have been the ridiculous shitstorm from the capital-G Gamers and the obligatory review bombing once the game came out. Because the reality is that the people angry about the game weren't really angry about the actual story. What they were really angry about were the narratives they formed in their heads after the leak. They imagined that Neil Druckmann and Naughty Dog hated the first game, that they hated the fans of the first game, and that most of all, they hated Joel. They imagined that the story would be all about demonizing Joel and talking at the player about how he was a bad person and deserved what he got. And they imagined that Joel's death would be framed as a triumphant, heroic moment for his killer, a victory of feminism over toxic masculinity. None of this was true, of course, and as far as I can tell, precisely zero of the gamers who bought into these ridiculous conspiracy theories have admitted they were wrong about the conclusions they leaped to. Bear in mind that these are all largely the same people who have regularly insisted for years that gameplay and graphics are the only "objective" measures of a game's quality, and that details like story and theme are of very limited importance.

In the interests of fairness, I will address one argument that's frequently put forward by the they-hate-Joel theorists, which I can respect for at least being an actual argument and not just a gut feeling fueled by reactionary tendencies. It's summarized here - basically, the Fireflies' hospital from the climax of the first game is shown to be more sterile and professional-looking in this game's flashbacks, thus manipulating us into thinking that the Fireflies were the undisputed "good guys" and knew what they were doing. It may be true that the devs tried to make the Fireflies look better in this game and gloss over their deficiencies and moral faults. But as far as Joel's decision to save Ellie goes - it doesn't matter. It never mattered. Joel didn't sit down and calculate the moral weight of saving Ellie's life versus the likelihood of the Fireflies being trustworthy and competent enough to produce a vaccine and factor in elements like the shabbiness of their hospital and their willingness to kill a child without even asking for her consent. Those details might help you feel that Joel's decision was morally justified, but they're not why Joel did what he did. Joel saved Ellie's life because he wasn't willing to let her die. God himself could have come down from heaven and told Joel that the vaccine was a guaranteed success that would save millions of lives, and it wouldn't have changed anything. That's also why Joel doesn't raise any of these arguments when Ellie finally confronts him. They didn't matter to Joel's decision, and both he and Ellie knew that.

That isn't to say that there's no room to criticize the story, of course. Personally, I take issue with the scene of Joel's death. Not because it shouldn't have happened, or because Joel needed to have a "heroic" death, but because it plays out in a very unrealistic way that seems to be entirely for the benefit of the player. The slow, protracted torture of Joel, the lack of an explanation (wouldn't you expect someone seeking revenge to tell their victim why they're killing them?) the grotesque use of a golf club, and the enthusiastic participation of everyone present all point to deeply malicious cruelty rather than righteous anger. The scene is calculated first and foremost to make the player hate Abby and her friends, and this is clearly done so that the transition to playing as Abby is harsher and the player's journey from hating Abby and her friends to eventually liking and sympathizing with them becomes all the more dramatic. But this comes at the cost of having their killing of Joel feel entirely out of character. Based on what we learn about her in her playable sections, I feel like Abby might beat her father's killer to death in a fit of passion, but she wouldn't coldly torture him to death slowly without turning a hair or even telling him why she's doing this. And Abby's friends might very well back her up if she told them she was trying to get revenge on her father's killer, but they wouldn't eagerly participate in such a grotesque scene of torture without anyone voicing a single qualm. The characters you get to know in Abby's playable sections are so unlike the people who killed Joel that they might as well be entirely different characters.

As far as the rest of the story goes, I think it's good, but not great. Killing Joel off is a sensible decision that not only helps pass the torch to Ellie, so to speak, but also helps distinguish the franchise from the many, many other games with a similar "badass loner hero becomes a protector of a special child/young woman" premise. Unfortunately, they replace that premise with one that's no less well-worn - the cycle of revenge. From the start of the game, you can already tell where the story is going to go, at least thematically if not in terms of plot. It's not a spoiler if I tell you that Ellie's quest for revenge costs her many of her friends, she's deeply scarred physically and emotionally by her experiences, and the final scene of the game is a bleak, moody one where the player is primed to think, Wow, I don't think that Ellie is any better off by trying to seek revenge. None of this was worth it. By contrast, there's a reason why games keep revisiting the concept of a tough loner who learns to love again through the influence of a child or young woman - it's very well-suited to video games, and it's an inherently hopeful story that feels good to experience. Still, the gloomy story is executed well for what it is, there are some very stark, powerful moments throughout, and there's something fittingly tragic in how Ellie and Abby never find out about each other's struggle over the past three days and how thoroughly they've ruined each other's lives. I also really like stories where we follow different characters' perspectives over the same period of time, and I think that more video games should do that kind of thing. It's a very interesting storytelling technique.

That's pretty much my take. Better game, weaker story, and the chuds who flipped their shit over this are morons. I can now get back to watching the show, which I had been putting off. I already have some very strong opinions about it.

8
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: May 08, 2025, 11:02:16 PM »
No politician should

Again, this is the issue. He's not a traditional politician, so he doesn't play by those rules. He is a television star and world famous comedic personality whose running theme is that he runs businesses and makes money, so he can get rich off of his crypto business and meme coins if he wants to.

You may as well argue that if Elvis were elected President that he shouldn't continue to sing in concerts, but those arguments will obviously not go far in the realm of public opinion if President Elvis Presley wanted to lead in a concert. Your social expectations of a traditional president would mean nothing, and they mean nothing here with Trump.

It's an ethical expectation, not a social one. The president's first priority should be making decisions that are in their country's best interests. A businessman's first priority is making decisions that are in their own best interests, financially speaking. Those are two entirely different goals. Two entirely different masters to serve, so to speak. As citizens, I think we deserve a president whose undivided loyalty is to the country and not their wallet. A businessman who's elected president ethically should put their business career on hold while they're in office. I also don't think that your Elvis analogy changes anything. If a famous singer were elected president, then they too ethically should put their singing career on hold while in office, regardless of how popular they are as a singer.

9
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: May 08, 2025, 02:56:18 AM »
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-crypto-dinner-ethics-b2745231.html

The president should not be in business for themselves while in office. No politician should, really, but especially not the president. This should not be a controversial opinion.

10
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: May 03, 2025, 06:42:39 PM »
In these times of austere cost-cutting and a rapidly plummeting economy, it's nice to know that Trump is revisiting his plans for an extravagant military parade to shore up his manhood:

https://washingtoncitypaper.com/article/761814/trump-parade-military-dc/

https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/07/politics/trump-plans-military-parade-washington/index.html

We now have confirmation:

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/7000-troops-tanks-parachute-jumps-military-parade-coinciding/story?id=121410722

However expensive you think this will be - it will be more expensive. City streets aren't built to endure tanks. They're going to cause lots and lots of damage that taxpayers will have to pay to repair. And this is all for the sake of Trump's ego and insecurity. This is not about celebrating the Army on its anniversary. This nation does not have a history of throwing huge parades to celebrate branches of the military on key anniversaries. This is about making Trump feel like a big strong man. You do not benefit from that. Only Trump himself benefits from that in a very narrow, superficial way. This is not in your interests.

11
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: April 28, 2025, 05:47:00 PM »
Due process rights need to be protected for everyone. Once you start making exceptions, you're essentially conceding to current and future governments the freedom to decide who does or doesn't deserve these rights, which is a catastrophically bad idea on the face of it. You can't just say "Well, I want them to be able to make an exception in this case, but not for any other cases." Either the government has the power to trample our rights at its pleasure - in which case, it will do it, and keep on doing it, and you won't be able to stop them - or it doesn't.

12
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: April 23, 2025, 09:29:12 PM »
While we're on the subject of criticizing avatars, I was deeply hurt to discover that Tom's avatar was not, in fact, a picture of himself, but of a dentist whose name is not Tom Bishop. We trusted you, and you let us down.

13
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: April 21, 2025, 11:41:03 PM »
(responding to Tom)

Hegseth is known to be an alcoholic based on numerous reports from numerous witnesses, not just one allegation. He also didn't deny that he drank too much at his confirmation hearing, instead only saying that he'd stop drinking if he were confirmed. A weirdly conditional promise like that already raises some major red flags - surely an alcoholic who recognizes their problem and is ready to get better would want to quit drinking regardless of whether or not they were confirmed - but in any case, I don't believe that any alcoholic is going to stop drinking immediately after beginning an extremely stressful new job with an enormous amount of responsibility. So, yeah, I'm confident that Hegseth is still drinking, although of course I can't prove it.

I'm not responsible for any dumb or incorrect thing some guy on Twitter said, and I don't need to defend him or otherwise answer for him. You keep trying to push this weird idea that everyone who criticizes Trump is on the same "team," and shares the responsibility whenever one of them makes a mistake. That's obviously not how this works, and it's an especially dubious strategy given the caliber of many vocal Trump supporters. I don't expect you to answer for Ben Shapiro's idiocy, Matt Walsh's creepiness, or Kanye West's insanity (to give just three examples) simply because they too are Trump supporters and you're therefore responsible for them.

14
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: April 21, 2025, 04:41:11 PM »
Yes, it's actually a good thing that an unqualified drunk is in charge of the military and regularly shares classified information on unsecured platforms with people who have no security clearance.

16
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: April 19, 2025, 11:49:11 PM »
Just stop. It's easy to find pictures of varying heights, in various conditions.

Again, because Trump often wears shoe lifts. If there's any doubt as to which picture represents his true height, it's only logical to conclude it's the one in which he's shorter. You can wear something that increases your height; you can't wear something that decreases your height. The only possible other explanation for Rodriguez, in a very plain, simple picture in which we can see that they're both standing next to each other with no tricks of perspective, being visibly taller than Trump without him being actually taller is that Rodriguez is the one who wears shoe lifts, which is farcical on the face of it.

And no, I won't stop. Trump is a fat, vain, campy man who doesn't have a shred of the masculinity his followers project onto him, and both he and his followers deserve to be mocked for it.

Or, you know, slight angle discrepancies causing height effects.



It's funny how this is obviously at least part of what's going on in the pictures you've posted of Trump with Ali and Vance. Trump is very clearly in the foreground for some of those pictures. Of course, Trump is still wearing his lifts in those pictures, so it doesn't matter, but it wasn't a great choice of pictures on your part.

17
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: April 19, 2025, 06:02:31 PM »
Trump is the one who "started" this, so to speak, by lying about his height and weight. If you tell an obvious lie and people call it out, you can't suddenly backtrack by saying it's not important and nobody cares. If it's important enough to lie about, then it's important enough to debunk the lies. I'll agree with Tom that the pictures of Trump with Vance are inconclusive, but the post I made from a few years ago that I just linked to, and I'll quote now for the benefit of anyone who didn't bother clicking the link, leaves no doubt:

I completely missed this, but it looks like Trump's annual physical was finally released a week ago:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/03/politics/donald-trump-annual-physical/index.html

Supposedly Trump is 6'3 and weighs 244 lbs, just one pound up from last year. I feel bad for Sean Conley, and can only assume that Trump has either implicitly or explicitly threatened to fire him and ensure his career is ended in disgrace if he doesn't say what Trump wants him to, but he is clearly lying. I know I've been talking about this a lot lately, but it deserves emphasis because of how obvious the dishonesty is. Here's Trump next to 6'3 Alex Rodriguez:



Your eyes are not lying to you. Rodriguez is clearly a couple of inches taller than Trump. And here's Trump next to 6'2 Mark Sanchez:



Again, Sanchez is taller. Finally, we have Trump next to 6'1 Obama:



About the same. So Trump is not 6'3, and he's not even 6'2 like he put down on his driver's license. He's (at most) 6'1. The President and his doctor are lying to us about his medical details. Can you imagine the absolute shitstorm that Republicans would have kicked up - and rightfully so - if Obama had done anything like this?

It's impossible to refute the first picture. They're standing right next to each other, and even though he's slightly bent, Rodriguez is towering over Trump. Unlike politicians, professional athletes actually have their heights measured by neutral organizations who don't just take their word for it, so there's no question of it possibly being Rodriguez who's lying. Trump appearing to be taller in other pictures can easily be explained by the shoe lifts he frequently wears.

18
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: April 18, 2025, 06:11:47 AM »
The same article says that that's not true:

Quote
The claim that the NYPD publicly revealed Trump's height and weight is false. Neither the NYPD nor the New York State Police has made any announcement about Trump’s height or weight, nor have they publicly released any booking details following his indictment. HindustanTimes.com didn't find anything on either the NYPD or State Police's websites, Instagram, X, Facebook, or YouTube handles during their verification.

19
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: April 18, 2025, 04:05:56 AM »
This is relatively minor news given the abducting and exiling of American citizens without due process and the dismantling of both the federal government and the economy, but it's worth noting that Trump is once again lying on his annual physical:

https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/13/politics/trumps-health-report/index.html

No doctor wrote this. Bragging about Trump's golf victories is a clear indication that this was written by one of Trump's stooges and simply signed off on by a doctor, while the details themselves were obviously simply provided by Trump and not the result of any kind of examination. I've proved before that Trump's claim of being 6'3 is a blatant lie. Weight isn't as easily proved by just looking, but I'm still certain that Trump, with his visible obesity, weighs well over 224 lbs.

20
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: April 15, 2025, 06:52:12 PM »
Browsing through people's posts that they made fourteen years ago and on a different website so that you can argue that they...said something different fourteen years ago is one of the more bizarre debating strategies I've seen on this website.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 90  Next >