Replies: 38
| visibility 3358
|
TigerNet Elite [70357]
TigerPulse: 100%
61
Posts: 25162
Joined: 2017
|
Democrats, have fun
3
Mar 4, 2025, 6:21 AM
|
|
You all are so delusional and so sick in the head.
Every single democrat voted to keep men in women’s sports.
POS to the max.
|
|
|
 |
Clemson Icon [24656]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 16611
Joined: 2024
|
Re: Democrats, have fun
Mar 4, 2025, 7:04 AM
|
|
You completely described yourself. That was cool.
|
|
|
|
 |
Ultimate Tiger [37731]
TigerPulse: 100%
56
Posts: 43573
Joined: 2001
|
Grate cumback, troll***
1
2
Mar 4, 2025, 7:33 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Clemson Icon [24656]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 16611
Joined: 2024
|
Re: Grate cumback, troll***
Mar 4, 2025, 7:54 AM
|
|
It was factual. It was an observation, an accurate on at that. It would actually work well for you as well though.
|
|
|
|
 |
National Champion [7622]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
Re: Democrats, have fun
5
5
Mar 4, 2025, 7:21 AM
|
|
People on here keep pretending this is a non issue because it never happens and even when it does happen it's just a few weirdo dems in that locale who support it. Then some actual fed legislation to make it illegal comes along and literally every Dem in the country, who showed up to vote, votes against it. So now there's no doubt that men kicking the #### out of women in women's sports is a universally accepted plank in the Democrat parties platform. Own it lefties and quit telling us it's all in our imagination.
|
|
|
|
 |
Ultimate Tiger [37731]
TigerPulse: 100%
56
Posts: 43573
Joined: 2001
|
They can't help themselves, they fall for it every time***
2
Mar 4, 2025, 7:33 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
TigerNet Icon [151975]
TigerPulse: 100%
68
Posts: 67976
Joined: 2000
|
Who voted for that?
3
Mar 4, 2025, 7:37 AM
|
|
Look at you, King of Strawmen.
|
|
|
|
 |
Clemson Icon [24656]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 16611
Joined: 2024
|
Re: Who voted for that?
Mar 4, 2025, 7:55 AM
|
|
They don't know. It's just another idiotic comment by manac.
|
|
|
|
 |
Paw Master [16161]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
|
Re: Democrats, have fun
3
Mar 4, 2025, 7:54 AM
|
|
I generally vote Republican. In fairness, a recent NYT poll showed 94% of Republicans were against biological males participating in women's sports.
67% of Democrats likewise were against this as well.
45/47 Dem Senators refused to allow the bill to come to a vote using the threat of a filibuster to stop this legislation. 2 Dems missed the vote as did 2 GOP Senators.
If I were the Pubs, I would force the Dems to actually filibuster the bill.
Most rank and file Dems do not support the insanity of men participating in women's sports, but when you have elected officials who can't define what a woman is or are good with the statement that men can become pregnant, then it's not surprising that these same politicians would virtue signal their support of this nonsense.
|
|
|
|
 |
Ultimate Clemson Legend [108064]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 70153
Joined: 2002
|
We are fully post political now, and so few see it.
1
Mar 4, 2025, 9:39 AM
|
|
TLDNR - Trump is compromised. Has been for decades now. Is what it is. It's a worldwide, communist-backed, anticapitalism movement, fueled by populism stoked by the failures inherent in unchecked capitalism. We enabled this through our own greed. There is no political solution to a systemic/functional problem.
***********************************
It is a major, worldwide movement, that's not even American in nature. It's run by Russia, ultimately. But it is impacting Germany, US, UK, Argentina, Brazil, Hungary, most of eastern Europe, Italy, and elsewhere (Even Canada, Netherlands, etc). It is a response to the worldwide globalist order that is unraveling. You know, the Bilderberg folks. The free trade, capitalist, globalist, folks. It's a system, not without irony, with its birth among Republicans in the US. And its death will be marked by Republicans, in the US. Hastened and facilitated by Communists in Russia, and elsewhere.
Russia has been heavily investing in our President for decades now. Numerous Russian oligarchs have anonymously funded Trump real estate ventures, to the point of saving him from more bankruptcies than you could probably count. Hundreds of millions have been spent (billions probably), wisely, by the Kremlin and Russia (laundered through companies, oligarchs, and ultimately LLC's) on US real estate, and our President has likely been the largest beneficiary of those shady deals. Trump has properties with hundreds of tenants keeping it afloat, where 77% of the units are owned by anonymous shell LLC's.
The FBI was way off investigating "Russian collusion" with Trump regarding an election. Nope. This is far worse. They were either being nice to not scare Americans, or being naive, to characterize it that way. It goes back decades before the 2016 election. Communists, and Russians, are famous for playing longball. It is actually a flaw in our laws (guised as a benefit), protecting and hiding real estate ownership, that cracked the door for the Russian snakes to enter. If you create a Trust, then in that trust place 50 LLC's, then have a random lawyer be the registered agent for the LLC's to tell anyone snooping around to pound sand, it is nearly impossible, even for the FBI, to determine property ownership. This was one of the reasons for the new law requiring LLC's to prove ownership to the IRS. And of course Trump has nixed that. While this protects rich Americans from lawsuits, and other problems, it is also an enabler of money laundering, and other financial crimes in the real estate market to happen, unnoticed. And Russia has probably taken advantage of this as much or more than anyone, but in a very targeted way.
Unfortunately, we don't know how beholden Trump actually is to Russians, and their oligarchs and shell companies, because we can't know, thanks to our own greed. Or who may be in China's pocket. Or anyone, really.
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/real-estate/russian-money-flows-us-real-estate-rcna17723
https://www.palmbeachpost.com/story/business/real-estate/2019/02/17/trump-in-palm-beach-did-russian-mansion-buyer-make-money/5934528007/
https://secure.avaaz.org/campaign/en/shocking_truth_about_trump/?webhylb
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/trumps-businesses-are-full-of-dirty-russian-money-the-scandal-is-thats-legal/2019/03/29/11b812da-5171-11e9-88a1-ed346f0ec94f_story.html
https://www.newsweek.com/trump-sold-40-million-estate-russian-oligarch-100-million-and-democratic-802613
https://ips-dc.org/trumps-dirty-money/
But I can assure you, Trump is bought and paid for by Putin and Russia. And has been for DECADES. Again, thanks to our laws and greed. Our capitalism, ironically, opened a door for them to enter, and destroy us. And I feel that is likely Trump's ultimate intent, or certainly the intent to those whom he is beholden to. People who buy his BS are dangerously naive, and quite by design. Most international lenders, many years ago, cut off Trump because his businesses failed. That drove Trump into seeking some shady sources for financing an otherwise improbable recovery in wealth. Trump has, himself, been financially leveraged and compromised in the same way he is treating other nations. Trump's financers expect results on their investment, and Trump will dutifully deliver. Likewise, Trump will use the same tactics to force loyalty to him, only now using the world's richest tax base. Only now, Trump is using the Treasury and currency of the most wealthy nation on Earth. This is by design. But I promise, IF Trump becomes king, as he desires, he will turn around, not needing Russian oligarchs or having any beneficial use for Putin, and Trump will turn around and bite the hands that fed him.
This isn't Russian collusion to sway some election, this is Russian blackmail, and a complete compromise of the candidate, LONG before any election or him even entering politics. And completely untraceable, thanks to our greed and wealth. Even with Trump's tax returns, no one could ever determine what exactly he owned. It was largely held by shell companies.
* - Fun fact - When the financial crisis of 2008/9 hit...lemme back up. When Enron stock was the darling of Wall Street and investors, back in the 1990's, Ken Lay, with the assistance of shady accountants, created numerous anonymous shell companies. Then they would farm off ownership of unprofitable divisions in Enron to these companies, to keep the losses these unprofitable divisions racked up, OFF the financial disclosures of Enron. This made Enron look profitable, while actually hiding massive losses at the company. Lay and his accountant were arrested for this. It was discovered, and was illegal by SEC rules (Trump wants to dismantle the SEC btw, go figure).
ANYWAY, when the financial crisis hit in 2008, the financial disclosures of lenders durned DARK RED as subprime mortgages ruined the perceived value in MBS securities. This went into the trillions. Under emergency powers, the Federal Reserve created 3 anonymous shell companies, Maiden Lane 1, 2, and 3. They then transferred the toxic/subprime mortgage debt into these shell companies, held by the Federal Reserve, removing the toxic mortgage debt from the books of the world's biggest lenders. This kept them solvent, the debt disappeared, and poof fixed. Now the Federal reserve had a problem, they were now sitting on trillions in toxic debt and bad MBS, and not the lenders. They started a program for repayment, and in just two years they simply deemed themselves repaid. There was NEVER any evidence these repayments from the lenders occurred, other than Fed accounting sheets saying they did. And had Congress not passed the Dodd/Frank Act, we would never even know this had been done. But here's a clue. To this day, who is the single largest holder of mortgage backed securities in the US? Yep, the Federal Reserve...around $2 trillion worth. It's STILL there.
There are currently around 2 MILLION vacant homes in just the state of Florida. No one living in them. Just tossing that seemingly random fact out there.
Anyway.......my TLDNR post of the day. Just ironic as we sit here thinking dem and pubs, finger pointing and whatever, we're trying to play chess on a backgammon board. Girls in guys sports, DEI, whatever else, all this meaningless crap, while the country is actually collapsing. Russians are far smarter than we are, at least the leadership is. They also fund dems, and dem causes, through similar shady deals, only to stoke outrage to be ostensibly cured by a populist who they have total control over. They have played us well. I will give them that. They have added logs to the fires of both dems and pubs, always keeping the balance equal, the outrage growing, and the stakes higher. Biden was compromised by Ukraine and Russian oligarchs too, go figure.
We are hapless pawns, in a broken system. But hey, at least we're as rich as 4 foot up a bull's ###.
|
|
|
|
 |
Clemson Icon [27791]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 48294
Joined: 2010
|
Russians...? Really? It's not a nationalism situation. It's an ethnic one.***
Mar 4, 2025, 10:16 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Ultimate Tiger [38855]
TigerPulse: 100%
56
Posts: 12844
Joined: 2015
|
Re: Democrats, have fun
8
8
Mar 4, 2025, 8:14 AM
|
|
Imagine waking up at 530 am and immediately needing to post about how mad you are about trannies
|
|
|
|
 |
TigerNet Icon [151975]
TigerPulse: 100%
68
Posts: 67976
Joined: 2000
|
"Good morning, manac, can I make you some breakfast?"
5
5
Mar 4, 2025, 8:19 AM
|
|
"Not hungry. Trannies."
|
|
|
|
 |
TigerNet Elite [70357]
TigerPulse: 100%
61
Posts: 25162
Joined: 2017
|
I go to the gym at 430 and read the news while on treadmill
2
Mar 4, 2025, 8:50 AM
[ in reply to Re: Democrats, have fun ] |
|
then come here and ruffle your feathers
|
|
|
|
 |
Clemson Icon [24656]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 16611
Joined: 2024
|
Re: I go to the gym at 430 and read the news while on treadmill
Mar 4, 2025, 9:15 AM
|
|
You were all bent out of the shape after the gym and thinking about trannies. Odd dude. You are probably the only person on here thinking about trannies starting your day or at all for that matter.
|
|
|
|
 |
All-Time Great [88584]
TigerPulse: 100%
63
Posts: 48314
Joined: 2007
|
|
|
|
 |
Ultimate Tiger [37731]
TigerPulse: 100%
56
Posts: 43573
Joined: 2001
|
|
|
|
 |
National Champion [7622]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
Re: Democrats, have fun
1
Mar 4, 2025, 8:55 AM
|
|
Nothing culty about that AT ALL.
|
|
|
|
 |
Paw Warrior [4720]
TigerPulse: 100%
37
|
Random rant, but sure...good morning to you too, manac.
1
Mar 4, 2025, 8:58 AM
|
|
By the way, I believe I've seen more non-Trump voters here agree that transgender women shouldn't be allowed to compete in women's sports. But you do you, bud. If you got hate in your heart, let it out! That's the MAGA way!
|
|
|
|
 |
Clemson Icon [27791]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 48294
Joined: 2010
|
COMMON SENSE =/= HATE, but ramble on with your personal attack. Ironic.***
1
Mar 4, 2025, 11:10 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
All-Time Great [88584]
TigerPulse: 100%
63
Posts: 48314
Joined: 2007
|
Did you read the OP? "You all are so delusional and so sick in the head."***
Mar 4, 2025, 1:35 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
All-Time Great [90433]
TigerPulse: 100%
63
Posts: 62175
Joined: 2004
|
Lutz. As if I give a #### one way or another.
3
Mar 4, 2025, 9:43 AM
|
|
I'm not for it, but I'm more worried about my retirement accounts getting drained because someone doesn't understand economics.
One might think that Smoot Hawley act and its effects should be required reading for anyone who is running economic policy.
|
|
|
|
 |
TigerNet Champion [120848]
TigerPulse: 100%
65
Posts: 77521
Joined: 2003
|
Re: Lutz. As if I give a #### one way or another.
Mar 4, 2025, 2:51 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Ring of Honor [23663]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 15205
Joined: 1995
|
Only person having fun is Putin***
Mar 4, 2025, 9:57 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Ring of Honor [22004]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 17299
Joined: 1998
|
Or the Tranny vote was to say Hey look here while the economy starts to crumble***
Mar 4, 2025, 11:10 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Tiger Titan [48511]
TigerPulse: 100%
58
Posts: 43259
Joined: 1998
|
So that's the childish way to look at it
1
Mar 4, 2025, 11:17 AM
|
|
The adult way to look at it is to realize...
-Men in women's sports isn't that common. There are very few real cases. -These issues should be policed by statewide high school leagues, the NCAA, and other private leagues. -It's federal government overreach. This is a completely unnecessary waste of time. Let local governments and private organizations govern themselves.
There's always more to it than, "ERMEHGERD THE EVIL SIDE VOTED AGAINST THIS BILL11!!!"
|
|
|
|
 |
Clemson Icon [27791]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 48294
Joined: 2010
|
It's simple. Voting against restrictions is promoting it. It's a binary issue.
Mar 4, 2025, 11:25 AM
|
|
The "adult way to look at it" is there are men's sports and women's sports. You don't get to mix them.
|
|
|
|
 |
Ring of Honor [22004]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 17299
Joined: 1998
|
Ever play coed softball, volleyball, frisbee, dodgeball, bowling or pool?
1
Mar 4, 2025, 12:36 PM
|
|
It can be fun interacting with the other sex.
|
|
|
|
 |
Paw Master [16605]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 17984
Joined: 1999
|
These retorts fall a bit flat to me.
Mar 4, 2025, 2:00 PM
[ in reply to So that's the childish way to look at it ] |
|
The *frequency* of the occurrence isn't really material...I mean, I suppose it is if you think it shouldn't be up for a vote, but once it is in a vote, the principle of the issue is more pressing (especially as discussed here). You might say "There are only three guys competing in NCAA women's sports...I'm not putting any energy into crafting legislation banning it." Maybe. Although the women forced to play against them might think it a bit more pressing. None the less, you could make that argument. But once it's up for a vote, and you say "No, I vote against preventing men from competing in women's sports", then it has nothing to do with how common it is. It means you support men playing in women's sports.
Perhaps they should be governed by states, etc. I don't know. Is that the stance of the democrats that voted against banning it? It's a state's issue? Honestly, I'm not sure where the law is on that and I suspect most of us don't know. It's a convenient punt to de-legitimize a federal action. But truly, I don't know. I would be surprised if that was the argument, as Dems are not known to be big "states' rights" people.
Your third bullet is kind of a reframing of the first two.
I'll say this...Trump/Vance is a catastrophe in my opinion. ANYONE should be able to waltz in and win the next election against this administration (assuming we'll see JD in 2028). The way to NOT do that, is for the Democrats to take a firm stance that they support men competing in women's sports, or create a climate like Biden did about the border and get us RIGHT BACK to where we were, etc. In my opinion, the Dems must get away from this love of identity politics, far-left policies, "everything that Trump did was evil" mindset.
|
|
|
|
 |
Tiger Titan [48511]
TigerPulse: 100%
58
Posts: 43259
Joined: 1998
|
Re: These retorts fall a bit flat to me.
Mar 4, 2025, 2:17 PM
|
|
That's pretty much where the Dems were at: This is unnecessary federal interference. And it is.
It means you support men playing in women's sports.
Sorry, that's too ham-handed of an argument. How many times do we see BS snuck into bills, or other grandstanding bills, that are merely meant for this purpose? Can you blame either party for voting against a bill that's only meant to make the other side look stupid while really doing nothing upon its passage? That's all this is.
|
|
|
|
 |
Paw Master [16605]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 17984
Joined: 1999
|
Okay. This is just my opinion so no need to go back and forth on it but
Mar 4, 2025, 2:45 PM
|
|
if Democrats are saying that they voted against it because it's a overreach of the federal government, I think they are lying. I think the Dems do not have a track record of "protectors of states' rights" and if they allow this issue to stand, this is how I see it going in 2028:
Republican: They still think Bob should be playing against your daughter on the lacrosse field, bashing her into Tuesday and taking her scholarship. Democrat: It's not that we support men in women's sports...we just think it's not the role of the federal government to be involved. Republican: Really? Because here are 20 things that you all thought you SHOULD be involved in that are much more clearly NOT the role of the federal government...
But we'll see how it goes.
|
|
|
|
 |
All-Time Great [90433]
TigerPulse: 100%
63
Posts: 62175
Joined: 2004
|
|
|
|
 |
Paw Master [16605]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 17984
Joined: 1999
|
It doesn't have to be. I'm hoping Nikki runs again.
1
Mar 4, 2025, 2:39 PM
|
|
There are plenty of people that would be viable alternatives to the MAGA group in 2028 in the Republican party.
But there were plenty of people that were viable alternatives in 2024...and here we are.
|
|
|
|
 |
All-Time Great [90433]
TigerPulse: 100%
63
Posts: 62175
Joined: 2004
|
True, and that was my thought as well.
1
Mar 4, 2025, 2:45 PM
|
|
Maybe after how disastrous the next 4 years will be, MAGA will sit out the next one and actually elect someone with some character.
|
|
|
|
 |
Orange Phenom [14303]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 18683
Joined: 2000
|
I disagree, I think there has to be a national standard
Mar 4, 2025, 2:53 PM
[ in reply to So that's the childish way to look at it ] |
|
because sports are national.
Also, doesn't make sense for, say, the national governing body of swimming to ok, and the soccer body not to.
This is Title IX, protecting women's accessibility to participate in amateur sports with scholarships etc.
And Cata, you really think the NCAA gonna be able to do anything after the debacle of NIL?
|
|
|
|
 |
Paw Master [16605]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 17984
Joined: 1999
|
This is my point. "Oh, this is a federal overreach" from the party that
Mar 4, 2025, 3:10 PM
|
|
supported Title IX? The argument can't be made. "Federal overreach" when Ohio State plays Michigan? When Oklahoma plays Texas?
No. No I don't think so. They simply didn't want to upset their far left supporters. Which to me is crazy. The issue is an overall loser for them. And they can argue "what's the big deal? It's only a few men playing womens' sports" and the retort is "if it's just a few, then it's not the end of the world to ban it."
https://www.thecentersquare.com/national/article_b6537968-dff2-11ef-b274-9fbf7250bf7f.html
I dunno. I used to shake my head at these sorts of things and take freebie win for the Republicans. But now I'd like to have a viable non-leftist Democrat party as a foil.
|
|
|
|
 |
Tiger Titan [48511]
TigerPulse: 100%
58
Posts: 43259
Joined: 1998
|
Imagine if the Dems...
Mar 4, 2025, 3:50 PM
|
|
Introduced a law that said, "It should be a federal crime to bash in the head of a puppy!"
And the Pubs said, "Wait... but... it's already a crime. Local agencies deal with this. This is unnecessary."
And then the Dems said, "Yo, why do y'all hate puppies!?"
That's what happened here.
|
|
|
|
 |
Paw Master [16605]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 17984
Joined: 1999
|
But that's true. IT IS already a crime to
Mar 4, 2025, 4:41 PM
|
|
bash in the head of a puppy. Men beating the $^ out of women in a women's sport does not have a comparable law. AND it's different in that it impacts a competitive landscape that CLEARLY goes across state borders.
Just like Animal Cruelty, which has federal laws applied when needed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Welfare_Act_of_1966
I don't know...if you're saying this is YOUR opinion, that's cool. If you're saying that this is legitimately what the Democrat legislators believe, I'm just not going to buy it. It doesn't align with their inclination as representatives. Maybe a couple of them, but certainly not the majority of them.
|
|
|
|
 |
Tiger Titan [48511]
TigerPulse: 100%
58
Posts: 43259
Joined: 1998
|
No, I don't
Mar 4, 2025, 3:48 PM
[ in reply to I disagree, I think there has to be a national standard ] |
|
But asking the federal government to fix everything is just as stupid.
Besides, it can already be governed under current law. This was grandstanding gotcha legislation, and I can't fault any party for voting against it on principle.
|
|
|
|
Replies: 38
| visibility 3358
|
|
|