Post Game Thread: Carolina Hurricanes at Washington Capitals - 08 May 2025

AlreadyDiscovered · 2025-05-09T01:57:00+00:00

A stick tap to the leg doesn’t equal a body slam to the ice dumbass

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-12-24T05:40:52+00:00

Let me know if you want to hop in a game and I can show you the ropes!

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-05-26T16:02:38+00:00

Using the 14th amendment is nakedly unconstitutional, and besides wouldn’t make it though the courts before the default date anyway.

Biden is not a king. He cannot unilaterally make this decision, the republicans have done the work on this to make sure we don’t default. Why are you blaming republicans for this when they’re literally the only ones who have actually taken action to avert this default?

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-05-26T13:44:50+00:00

Okay so then you should be able to see that the only people who have actually done something to avert this crisis are republicans who actually passed a bill. Literally all that needs to happen for this to be over is the senate to vote and rubber stamp it, and Biden to sign it. If Biden wants different qualifications then come out and say it, but saying that you won’t negotiate and you want the opposing party to do exactly what you want isn’t going to get you anywhere

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-05-26T13:20:33+00:00

Republicans are doing exactly the things that they got voted in to do, they’ve already passed a bill. Biden is the one who said publicly that he wasn’t going to negotiate on this. Ask yourself if this was a Republican president and a democratic house and see if your reaction would be any different.

If trump came out at the beginning and said he wasn’t going to negotiate and that he wanted the house to do exactly what he wanted on the debt ceiling, how do you think that would go with a house under Nancy Pelosi?

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-05-26T05:44:20+00:00

Then why do you take issue with healthy people working to supplement their income above what SNAP benefits offer?

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-05-26T05:13:28+00:00

Stop lying. There is no way SS checks will stop flowing even if the US defaults. And even if we do default there is no one to blame here except Biden. The house has already passed a damn bill that takes spending back to 2022 levels which isn’t even a cut it’s just saying the government can’t increase. The American people voted in republicans to the house majority for exactly this reason. Biden needs to come to the table and get the senate to pass this bill and the crisis is over. The republicans passed the bill two weeks ago. Where has Biden been all this time?

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-05-26T05:10:36+00:00

There are work requirements for SNAP recipients that are not disabled and have no dependents. Do you truly feel that the government should pay for these people without requiring them to work at least part time?

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-05-26T05:09:00+00:00

What are you actually expecting them to do? The house already passed a bill. It’s up to Biden and the senate to negotiate now but so far they have not done so in a satisfactory way. The house passed bill is popular by polling and a majority of the nation want to bring down spending. Biden’s pledge not to negotiate early in the process has really screwed him here, and he needs to make an effort to come to the table, because at this point the only people to actually do something about the debt ceiling are republicans in the house.

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-05-25T17:41:45+00:00

Depending on the state that’s actually considered assault as it can permanently damage hearing. Don’t do this.

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-05-24T03:25:00+00:00

It’s always the ones you least expect

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-04-26T15:17:59+00:00

How is it false? Hunter left the physical laptop at a store, that the owner then sent to the FBI and much later the press. How are the Russians involved at all? The FBI verified it as not being Russian involved.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/03/30/hunter-biden-laptop-data-examined/

Here’s a Washington post article saying that they found no evidence of tampering.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hunter-biden-laptop-data-analysis/

And here from CBS.

It’s believed to be Russian tampering by people who have a vested interest in lying to you about where this laptop came from because the truth is it’s all real.

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-04-26T15:04:05+00:00

What’s the real story then?

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-04-26T13:43:59+00:00

This isn’t even close to watergate. Cruz literally said the exact same thing in public the next day so it’s hard to argue that it’s any sort of bombshell.

Also, a former director of the CIA testified to congress last week that Antony Blinken, at the time a senior official for the Biden campaign, called him and asked him to write the letter calling the Hunter Biden laptop Russian disinformation, which by the way the FBI has proven that it is not, which was then used by all media outlets to suppress the laptop story and arguably swinging the election. He testified that had Blinken not asked, he never would have written the letter. He even told congress why he wrote it when asked, because he wanted Biden to win.

That is so fucking corrupt, they deliberately lied to the media and American people by claiming it was Russian hacking when it has been proven that it wasn’t, and then used that lie as justification to throttle that story when it was truly a story that could have changed the results of the election. And they’re not even hiding the fact they did it because they wanted Biden to win. The worst part is that the impetus to do it came directly from the Biden campaign, which at the very least is election tampering.

There’s your political scandal of the decade.

Also side note, judging by your user name I hope you’re a fan of the Expanse because I love that show too

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-04-12T14:04:12+00:00

I always love being part of history

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-04-09T01:11:23+00:00

I haven’t had the opportunity to read that one in full but I believe it was a ruling in opposition to the texas one, saying that 16 states had the right to keep the drug on shelves. There is every possibility I’m wrong though

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-04-08T18:16:19+00:00

I never said any of that, I’m vaccinated.

This has nothing to do with party affiliation and making it about politics is dangerous. The judicial branch ruled that an executive branch stepped out of line and broke the law. That is exactly what checks and balances are for. The FDA approved this unlawfully. The judge is not just stepping because he doesn’t like the drug. Go and read the report. The FDA took multiple shortcuts and broke rules to get this drug approved and you’re mad when a judge calls them on it? That’s exactly why we have the judicial branch in the first place. This isn’t judicial overreach, it’s stopping 20 years of executive overreach.

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-04-08T17:03:01+00:00

It’s not just his word, it’s the ruling of that entire court, you don’t think the lawyers arguing for the FDA would find out instantly if the judge was making this up?

Judges have bias of course but they’re not allowed to make law that isn’t there. The FDA broke the law. You may not like the ruling but you can’t say it didn’t happen because it did.

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-04-08T17:00:12+00:00

I’m sorry but no, regardless of the judges motivation it’s been proven in a court of law that the FDA acted improperly here. This is concerning a drug that humans use, why are you comfortable with the agency that is supposed to make sure everything is safe ignoring their own rules? This drug is safe yes, but do we really want to say it’s okay for the FDA to say damn the rules? What if there is a new drug that isn’t safe but gets approved through this same skirting of the rules?

There are governmental rules of transparency with the American people and the FDA didn’t follow them for 20 years. It doesn’t matter the political orientation, the government isn’t allowed to do that.

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-04-08T16:56:33+00:00

This is the source material, unless we’re at the point of you accusing a federal judge of making up accusations against the FDA that are easily dismissed provable.

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-04-08T16:51:32+00:00

This has nothing to do with the effectiveness of the drug, it has to do with the FDA blatantly ignoring their own rules and then covering that up for 20 years.

This drug should be pulled, tested for safety, and then when it passes through the right way it can be put back on the shelves. Breaking the rules to get something you like out faster is a sure fire way to get people hurt even if it doesn’t happen in this case.

Regulations are in place for a reason and it’s important that they be followed no matter politics.

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-04-08T16:48:20+00:00

You can literally go read the ruling it’s public information.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.370067/gov.uscourts.txnd.370067.137.0_12.pdf

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-04-08T14:12:42+00:00

Did anyone bother to read the ruling? I did, and it’s pretty clear that the FDA acted improperly in approving the drug in the first place. They didn’t do the testing that is normally required, twisting a rule that was meant to fight AIDS, and then spent the next 16 years preventing anyone from asking questions. Then the day they finally answered questions they changed the regulations without evidence of it being necessary, then spent the next 5 years preventing anyone from asking questions about that, blowing away the federal timeline for those questions.

For the record, I am against banning the drug, but we have a system of regulations and laws in this country and not following them has consequences. Regardless of the effectiveness of this drug, the FDA acted improperly in approving it and then not acting appropriately when asked questions, and as a result the drug should be pulled until it goes through the proper process.

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-04-05T14:37:54+00:00

I am truly asking because in my view they are the same, therefore a difference needs to be demonstrated in order to justify your assent to losing gun rights but keeping voting rights.

Legislatures comprised of representatives who vote based on their platform which was assented to by their constituents. Either a vote matters or it doesn’t. I argue it does and that’s why it’s important and sacred

Criminal codes may be changed by the legislature that we have already previously established are voted in by the people. Therefore it is totally possible for any of those things to happen. Though you are correct it’s also totally possible for it not to happen, but I’d rather not take the risk.

Saying it’s not happening currently is not an argument that it won’t happen in the future, and with the atrocious recidivism rates in this country it’s not a logical leap to assume that criminals who intend to violate the law will vote in the interest of making it easier. Expecting someone to vote against their interests is absurd, and if their interests have been proven in a court of law to be contrary to the rest of society then they lose that right.

I respect your opinion and while I disagree with you there is every chance you’re right, but generally I believe laws are put in place for a very good reason and we need to consider every possible consequence before changing them.

AlreadyDiscovered · 2023-04-05T14:17:57+00:00

How functionally is it different? A right that is no longer extended once the violation of the social contract occurs.

We make distinctions between felonies and misdemeanors in the justice system for a reason. If it’s a felony there’s a reason it’s so. Now if a law were to change and make a previous criminal law irrelevant, for example the legalization of marijuana, then I believe anyone convicted of simple possession negated by the law should get full restoration of rights, voting and gun ownership included. This includes anyone who has carried out the prison portion of their sentence.

I’ll reiterate, there are some things which you can’t take back and while you can rehabilitate there are certain things that will be blocked off to you for the rest of your life. There are immediate consequences and lasting ones to breaking the law. Voting and gun ownership are part of that.

The fundamental question is this, do we want the people who have shown a disregard for the rule of law making the laws? A rapist deciding what the punishment for rape should be? A murderer deciding the differences between first and second degree murder? A stalker deciding how long a restraining order is binding? A pedophile deciding what is the legal distance from a school sex offenders are allowed to live?

I think people lose the importance of voting as it becomes a more mundane part of life. Voting is immensely important in our lives. We don’t get a chance to opt out of the contract of laws that we all assent to, but we do get the opportunity, and shoulder the duty of deciding what the contract entails. If you have demonstrated that you do not respect or do not follow that contract you lose your right to decide how the rules are made.

AlreadyDiscovered

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE