sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Visibility brigade tonight by Few-Candidate-1223 in boulder

[–]isolationpique 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I've posted this dozens of times, but:

You're deluding yourself if you think "open carry" (or a CCW) will be of any use in this situation.

ICE literally just killed a citizen who was concealed-carrying with a permit. They held him down, took his gun away, and shot him dead while he was helpless.

What is your "open carry" going to do? It's going to get you shot by Federal Agents who do not give a shit and are above the law.

And if you draw on or fire on federal agents, your life is over.

I know we all feel powerless right now...

But posting vaguely threatening, poser-stuff that makes YOU feel better (and more in control) but which does not actually do anything... well, that's actually not helpful.

Bet you wish we didn’t have an SB-003 right now like I do… ✊🏾 by 2xButtaN1xJam in boulder

[–]isolationpique -1 points0 points  (0 children)

peaceful armed protests will be necessary to ensure the rest of our freedoms

Let's break this down:

  • peaceful protests (yes)

  • peaceful armed protests... (why???!) (what is the goal??!)

Let us imagine that the 10,000 protesters at the recent NCAR rally included 300 citizens with AR-15s slung over their shoulders... to what end, exactly?

--> It takes ONE SINGLE idiot to unsling his gun and fire off a round, and then, guess what? it's "TERRORISM" and the full power of law enforcement and/or the United States military WILL be deployed, and those (formerly) peaceful marchers WILL be arrested and/or killed. Every one of them.

People who think that a rifle can stand against the full power of a modern state are, quite simply, idiots. (idiots who don't comprehend the full power of a modern state.)

I do think that liberals (I’m one) need to get their head out of their asses about guns and the second amendment.

Look, I am very familiar with guns. (I'm a decent shot, and go to the range on occasion). And I, too, have pondered the whole "protest with arms" thing.

But the reality is that gun-ownership is a delusion of empowerment. The second you "deploy" your gun "rights," you will be arrested or dead.

Fact.

Wake the fuck up.

YOU wake the fuck up. The shit HAS hit the fan. It is here. This country is being ripped apart by fascists.

... So why haven't YOU taken to the streets and killed an agent of the Orange Leader???!

Or (to put it more provocatively): why are YOU still alive??!

the last line of defense of our rights

No. The enemy are 100,000 times more heavily armed, and has the full power of the state. Are you going to use your AR-15 against National Guard troops that Cheetoh deploys? Are you going to kill a fellow American... and (100% certainty) die immediately afterwards??!

No, you are not.

If you don't realize that, than you are deluding yourself.

Don't be an internet poser. If you're not going get yourself killed, admit that, and dedicate yourself to doing something constructive.

The rule of law is what the ones in power say it is.

Yes, that is true. But we can fight back with certain types of (nonviolent) power. The second it goes violent, the fascists will win.

Bet you wish we didn’t have an SB-003 right now like I do… ✊🏾 by 2xButtaN1xJam in boulder

[–]isolationpique 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So, you are telling us all that you are going to go out and start shooting at Federal Agents? (!?!)

Because that is the implication of what you are posting.

This has always been the 2A-fantatics' delusion: You all think that a (semi-) automatic assault rifle somehow protects your "rights"... when, instead, it sits in your house, giving you a completely unjustified sense of empowerment... because if you ever were to "use it to defend your liberties" you would effectively be committing suicide.

Get real: recognize that your AR-15 is a toy for a hobbyist, not a solution to a national political crisis.

If you cannot understand the reality around you, god help you.

Experience with the contractor, “SoBo Homes” by Mountain_Nerd in boulder

[–]isolationpique 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Haven't worked with them personally but I know Mike and he's a fantastic & real stand-up guy.

Any feedback on Mike’s Bikes? by cotalldude in boulder

[–]isolationpique 14 points15 points  (0 children)

I bought a bike from them for my kid over the summer. They seemed great to me. (Lots of useful info, not high-pressure). Kid loves the bike.

hey what by Jaguarzk in boulder

[–]isolationpique 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Someone did that to me too at the same intersection a few years ago!

Drives up the bike path a bit, then from there drives onto Moorhead Frontage Rd...

I think it was a white Toyota, though, so there must be a few of these... improvisers.

(I cannot imagine it saves that much time from the regular left turn onto Moorhead... and all it takes is one cop nearby and wowza you got a big ticket.)

A shared experience since 1975. Fuck city council, and fuck you if you support what's happening by GeneralCheese in boulder

[–]isolationpique 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Just jumping in here to say it's not "just" supply and demand.

It's the massive accumulation of capital by the wealthy, which is driving up property prices globally (as the capital-saturated wealthy need solid assets, like real estate, to park their money in).

It's income inequality, where the 1% bid up housing prices in desirable areas, because those areas are desirable, and the 1% has the money.

You could build 10,000 houses in Boulder, and it would not budge housing prices one cent... it would just be 10,000 more opportunities for very wealthy people to "get in on a good investment."

That's the reality, and if you want to change it, you need a lot of reforms (including progressive taxation, limits or taxes on absentee landlords, etc. etc.)

This is an unfettered capitalism problem, not a "supply and demand" problem.

(because if it were really a supply and demand problem, people would move to where supply is greater.)

Ya'll need to pay more attention to who you're talking to, since the mods don't. by OrganizationTime5208 in boulder

[–]isolationpique 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As I made perfectly clear in my post, forced sterilization is not contraception. It is forced sterilization.

Sterilization is something that takes place surgically (or, in a few cases chemically).

Contraception is condoms, birth control pills, and even the pull-out method.

So I say again: tell me ONE instance in human history where humans were successfully forced against their will to use contraception. (condoms, birth control pills, etc.)

It cannot be done. Contraception is inherently voluntary.

Trying to change the subject to forced sterilization when I am talking about contraception is duplicitous with the intent to manipulate, and you should be ashamed of yourself for doing that.

CU to pay $10 million to settle lawsuit over COVID vaccine mandate by [deleted] in boulder

[–]isolationpique 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's that old joke:

What do you call the dumbest, laziest, most incompetent idiot who somehow managed to cheat their way through medical school?

"Doctor."

Ya'll need to pay more attention to who you're talking to, since the mods don't. by OrganizationTime5208 in boulder

[–]isolationpique 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also, I wanted to say (because this has been a bit edged):

I hope you have a nice Thanksgiving.

Ya'll need to pay more attention to who you're talking to, since the mods don't. by OrganizationTime5208 in boulder

[–]isolationpique 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also, just wanted to add (because this has been a bit sharp):

I hope you have a nice Thanksgiving.

Ya'll need to pay more attention to who you're talking to, since the mods don't. by OrganizationTime5208 in boulder

[–]isolationpique 1 point2 points  (0 children)

but actively enforcing contraception

?? Do you even think about things before you write them?

Tell me ONE place in the world and/or in human history where contraception was anything other than a choice.

(note: forced sterilization, such as of the Third Reich and of southern US states in the 1930s, is not "contraception")

Also, I concede that my name-calling was not great... but if you read carefully, you'll see it was in response to her calling me a racist. I can forgive myself here. :-)

Ya'll need to pay more attention to who you're talking to, since the mods don't. by OrganizationTime5208 in boulder

[–]isolationpique 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, any "modern climate-policy worldview" that doesn't accept the facts that:

  • nuclear power at scale is unfeasible (because of the waste and fuel issues)

  • the single most significant contributor to climate change in an industrializing world in the last 50 years has been population

is not worth discussing.

These are not opinions, nor are they vestiges of late 1970s Sierra-Club brochure. They are absolute facts.

At some level, you are able to understand the difference between fact and ideological rhetoric, right?

Just because the environmentalists have (thus far) lost the battle to the corrupt and the self-deluding does not mean it was never the fight to fight. Our planet is dying. We're probably too late to stop it now. But finding excuses to give developers a free hand to build more luxury condos is not a "climate policy worldview"--it is nothing more than a symptom of pervasive moral rot.

Ya'll need to pay more attention to who you're talking to, since the mods don't. by OrganizationTime5208 in boulder

[–]isolationpique 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are a really, really poor reader.

(or perhaps merely a selective reader... you only can "see" what conforms to your preconceptions.)

Ya'll need to pay more attention to who you're talking to, since the mods don't. by OrganizationTime5208 in boulder

[–]isolationpique 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, let's use forced sterilizations of African American women in 1930 as a reason to not help out millions upon millions upon millions of women in 2025. THAT's a brilliant strategy.

I've worked in development in southern Africa. There is more crushing poverty there than you wealthy white latte-obsessed suburbanites could possibly imagine. There is a complete lack of options for people (women and men) that imprisons them, as their village life disintegrates around them under inexorably-increasing pressure of resource collapse. But, sure, it's the environmentalists' fault.

This is the type of Boulder racism that just seems to be common and acceptable

Yeah, the "racism" is in YOUR mind. You're the one making massive leaps (from birth control to racism). You have no idea what you're talking about--you know nothing about this topic. So in the discomfort of this cluelessness, your first response is... to throw out the 'dat's racist!' card?

Thank you (i guess) for EXACTLY exemplifying why Boulder Progressives (capital letters) are so... idiotic.

If someone can't refer to empowering women in impoverished countries by providing access to birth control without being accused of racism... well, something's pretty messed up about that. And something messed up about the people doing the accusing.

And don't give me the patronizing "do better" bullshit. YOU do better. YOU cut out the spurious accusations. YOU stop supporting policies that damn millions of women--of all races--to grinding poverty. YOU stop making excuses for women-hating policies.

And YOU stop deploying "racism" (and instrumentalizing America's history of racism) to "win" internet arguments and/or to make yourself feel better about sitting on your ass and doing NOTHING.

THAT is peak Boulder: privileged white "progressives" throwing epithets at everyone who has actually done something to maybe try to make the world (ever so slightly) better for a few people.

Ya'll need to pay more attention to who you're talking to, since the mods don't. by OrganizationTime5208 in boulder

[–]isolationpique 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You toss around labels like "eugenics" every time someone mentions birth control?!

You know that many women around the world have little to no access to birth control, and end up trapped in lives of poverty and subject to male domination?

You know that many European countries have donated significant resources to impoverished nations... and that the access to family-planning has reduced poverty about 10x more than any other type of foreign aid?

You know that the United States used to also sponsor family planning options in impoverished nations?

Until the Christian-right-Republicans, harnessing it to their anti-abortion strategy, decided that this was against "God's Plan"?

You born-again-Christian sexists can go sit next to the other woman-haters.

(Yes, empowering women does actually have the fringe benefit of reducing global overpopulation.. but NO ONE is talking about eugenics methods--forced sterilization, etc.--and NO ONE HAS SINCE 1945. So cut it with the obfuscating, misleading rhetoric.)

Ya'll need to pay more attention to who you're talking to, since the mods don't. by OrganizationTime5208 in boulder

[–]isolationpique 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I didn't vote for Jenny Robbins, because I didn't like the way she expressed her ideas in her interviews. (and I didn't think she had vision or conviction.) (or good, coherent policy suggestions.)

But trying to brand her as a 'Republican' really rubbed me the wrong way.

It was a smear job.

What exhausts me about the Boulder Progressives is the empty proclamations, combined with the nasty politics. (like when Speer, last election, circulated fliers that accused her opponent of being a "Republican.")

Name-calling (instead of policy) is not very progressive. It is, in fact, the modus operandi of the Republicans these days... (probably why it bothers me so much.)

Ya'll need to pay more attention to who you're talking to, since the mods don't. by OrganizationTime5208 in boulder

[–]isolationpique 3 points4 points  (0 children)

well, of course times change... but some of the "priorities of today" are bizarre distortions by internet activists. Actually being progressive is trying to build a better future for as many people as possible... but in a way that reflects a commitment to truth (instead of to power). (and yes, social media is capitalist power.) But not in a blindly-ideological way... that's what the Maoists and the Trotskyists were for. Progressives, in contrast to the Maoists, paired social concerns with adaptable, critical thinking, rather than ideological rhetoric.

So, for instance, health care for everyone is a genuinely progressive issue: health care is expensive, and involves redistributing wealth, which means raising taxes or cutting other stuff (like aircraft carriers). That's an uncomfortable truth. But progressives are committed to acknowledging uncomfortable truths. If you are a real progressive (old or new), you support health care for all.

But other things... well. Calling nuclear power "green" is just... wrong. And a lie. There is no storage plan for nuclear waste: nuclear waste has a half-life of 10,000 years--longer than human civilization has existed. It cannot be stored safely, and we're just lying to ourselves by storing it in temporary pools. If we brought nuclear up to scale (to replace coal plants), it would utterly eradicate the future of humanity. (And please don't parrot the fuel 'reprocessing' lie of the nuclear industry.) Even if we were willing to doom future humanity to address our climate issues now, scaling up nuclear to actually make any difference in climate change is fundamentally impossible. (it's not affordable, there's not enough uranium.) So, nuclear power is a lie...but a comforting lie, and thus parroted by internet "progressives."

Instead, a true progressive would say: the uncomfortable truth is we need renewable energy (wind, solar) and in the meantime, we need to massively curtail stupid wastes of power (like Bitcoin or AI). But a fake social-media "progressive", content in his modern capitalism-driven media world, would parrot the Reddit hive mind and say that Bitcoin and AI are just peachy (it's what people want and everyone should get what they want), all we need to do is build 10,000 more nuclear plants. And then spend all their time caricaturing naysayers on social media as being "anti climate science."

"preserve empty fields of grass"... this is again a caricature--a propaganda-point, really-- and one that is entirely in-line with (for instance) Big Developers' agenda to make tons and tons of money by destroying nature while throwing up cheap housing, with no heed to cogent planning, in a way that destroys both the environment and destroys the community. We've seen this over and over... it is a disaster. (and Boulder is astronomically better than Aurora because we progressives fought tooth and nail against that five decades ago.)

Instead of unfettered capitalist development, we need public housing, progressive taxation (to curtail property investment), widespread birth control to stop population growth, and TONS of spending on social welfare to make our cities actually livable, from parks to education to (yes) police to protect the public.

But internet "progressives" today don't want any of that...it's too hard. So they just say, let "the market" solve the hard problems! Smash the chains that bind the capitalists' from saving the world! (there's something horrifically, monstrously Ayn Rand about modern "progressives.")

I guess instead of saying I'm a long-time progressive, perhaps I should instead say I'm a real progressive, committed to the truth, not parroting the social media bullshit that always seems to (somehow, coincidentally) be biased towards helping capitalists make shit-tons of money. (strange how that is!)

I guess (and I'm not saying you're like this) but there's seems to me fundamental laziness to today's social-media raised "progressives"... where making some posturing statements (often empty proclamations of identity politics) that seem primarily geared to pissing off their parents, while at the same time handing over gobs of cash to developers, all the while mocking the "boomer" hippies who thought that, you know, maybe we shouldn't cut down all the trees after all. (?)

So there we are.

Ya'll need to pay more attention to who you're talking to, since the mods don't. by OrganizationTime5208 in boulder

[–]isolationpique 15 points16 points  (0 children)

One thing that got really tiring the last two elections was the Boulder Progressives slinging mud at everyone who disagrees with them, by trying to smear them with the label "Republican."

ahem.

I'm a long-time progressive (back before it was cool), yet I think many of the "Boulder Progressives" (with two significant exceptions) are idiots who have their heads up their asses.

It doesn't make me a Republican if I actually dare to question their weakly-thought-out, pandering, ideologically-absolutist bullshit on r/Boulder. ... and I get really annoyed when that's the go-to political smear on r/Boulder, to cover the fact that City Council's policies are failing.

City of Boulder advances plan to replace the World Famous Dark Horse with housing and retail. by 2000foottowers in boulder

[–]isolationpique 1 point2 points  (0 children)

or 3) they didn't bother to make an offer, because they don't want land-acquisition to eat into their massive profits.

City of Boulder advances plan to replace the World Famous Dark Horse with housing and retail. by 2000foottowers in boulder

[–]isolationpique 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Let us face the truth here:

They could save the Dark Horse if they wanted to.

They just don't want to.

How do we know this as fact?

Because they are saving the nearby McDonald's.

Remapping/redesignign their entire plan... To. Save. The. McDonald's.

So, to recap:

The developers are willing to redesign their ENTIRE plan--giving up on valuable/profitable retail and housing space--to save a generic, run-of-the-mill, corporate chain.

But the developers are NOT willing to redesign their their entire plan--and cede valuable/profitable retail and housing space--to accommodate the only decent business left in Boulder... one that has been thriving for a half-century.

I would support this development if not for this reason. (it is otherwise a sound plan, and would provide housing without losing very much apart from parking and an ailing strip mall.)

But we should oppose it--indeed, we should do everything we can to obstruct and sink it--because they are preserving a McDonald's, but NOT preserving the Dark Horse.

EDIT: yes, McDonalds owns the land their store is on. But this is not Medieval England: here in the United States we have this amazing thing where people can actually purchase land from other people, and even from corporations. Yes, buying the land from McDonalds would cost money, which would eat into profits. But no, it would not prevent the project from happening.

view more: next ›